LG 27MU67 27-in Ultra HD Gaming Screen and FreeSync
Click here to post a comment for LG 27MU67 27-in Ultra HD Gaming Screen and FreeSync on our message forum
Fox2232
Interesting, but they should provide all details as LG site states even less than article.
At what resolution it can go to 144Hz. Or, is that external 144Hz refresh via freesync and then butchered to 60hz refresh of that screen?
What are freesync refresh rate ranges at each resolution. What is screen capable of? (since they state motion240 which seems internal capability to go to 240Hz)
Does it have FPR for passive 3D?
XenthorX
I'm still in doubt towards freesync technology as the few review i had was quite negative compared to G-Sync. 🙁
IchimA
Typo , : " UltraHD 3840 x 21600 resolution "
Megabiv
Well it is "Ultra" HD 🤓
kanej2007
Great spec monitor, however the looks, design and huge bezels look like $hit...
Humanoid_1
Good questions Fox2232.
On the bright hopefuly side of things this screen almost sounds like the One I've been waiting for. Nice price too!
- works out to about £403
Will be Really good if it can really do 144Hz too etc etc.
Fox2232
^ Yes, for 4k PC monitor that price is very good.
alanm
Anything below 30" is too small for UHD imo.
Humanoid_1
aria.co.uk actually have a Samsung U28D590DS 28" 4K 60Hz 1ms Gaming monitor on sale atm for only £307 inc. VAT. But is is still a TN tech screen.
Was almost about to shell out for one. But Must Resist. I Really do want to get something with more than a stifling 60Hz max refresh.
...oh, and am rather curous to see LG's upcoming OLED range of monitors of which they are going to ramp up production on later this year 😉
designerexpert
I agree 100% I have a screen capable of 4k, but it is a 40" screen, however I do not use it because it only does 30hz at 4k. Anything smaller than 30" is not worth the 4K unless you have it standing right in-front of your face i think.
Humanoid_1
Well indeed, But the 1st Display Port 1.3 screens are meant to have debued in about March this year. Though I have not honestly been following too closely as kinda busy these last few months. Perhaps this one also has 1.3? and can indeed support 4K in glorious 3D or just plain decent refresh rates 🙂
(The new Display Port 1.3 standard was approved September 15, 2014)
Obviously we all may need a new GFx card(s) to run such screens to their potential, like AMD's new cards coming out next month ~_^
MBTP
If its the same panel of my Dell P2715Q i recomend you guys to hold on because i have a strange inconsistency on the screen, some yellowish areas and very dark edges. The anounced 6ms on rapid mode obviously is much more slower than that because i have ghosting playing any plataform game, very distracting...
xIcarus
Having an 1080p screen on my phone, I can see the difference from 720p. The difference from 1080p to 4k is even greater. I'm sure it's extremely noticeable.
Of course it depends on the distance from the screen, as you've pointed out. We hold our phones very close, but when gaming I believe most of us stay under 1 meter away from the screen. Which is quite close.
Denial
People keep bringing the whole 4K, is it worth debate thing up. Read the anandtech article on eyesight. The human eye can detect a misalignment of 2 parallel lines up to 800+ PPD @ 10 inches. That's like 8K resolution on a 5 inch phone. Obviously there is a trade off and diminishing returns as you approach that. But if you can't see the difference between 4K and 1080 @ 24 inches+ @ 3'/1 meter you're blind -- seriously, time to see an eye doctor, because I have 20/20 vision and I definitely see the difference. Like it's extremely noticeably different, especially in terms aliasing.
And honestly performance wise it's like a generation off. A Titan X/980 Ti will be able to play most modern games out max graphics at 50+ fps -- with G-Sync/Freesync it's a non-issue. Hell even now, turn down a few useless settings and 60+ fps easily achievable, even with a regular 980.
I think it's crazy the number of people against 4K on a forum about 3D gaming/graphics. It's like backwards.
Humanoid_1
and of course with DX12 CrossFire or SLI are meant to work much better running as one big GPU with such benefits as your 2x cards 4GB each VRAM now is seen as 8GB that can be used due to running split frame rendering.
(also such talk as being able to mix AMD and NVidia cards in the same system O.o )
Am thinking if reviews pan out I will be going dual GFx card for the 1st time since my sweet Voodoo 2 days !!!
Fun Times ^^
Fox2232
You will not want to use AMD+nVidia card for rendering at same time. Because each company has different AF filtering, different AA methods, Different Z-clear optimizations, Different RGB profiles (I always had hard time with nVidia to get neutral color).
Anf if nVidia wanted, they could have boosted their sales by allowing their card for PhysX and AMD's for rendering, but that required fully working driver.
Humanoid_1
hehehee I was wondering how well in truth they may play with their differences.
I imagine DX12 can force them to Run together even if they don't really play nice with each other.
Anyways I have a good feeling about CrossFire this time around. AMD are going to Need it to work reliably seeing as their HBM will max out at 4GB and 4K will want more than 4GB of memory ideally. Coming here in the for of 2x hopefully not Crazy priced cards to run a good 4K screen for me 🙂
Ven0m
I can't see any info about 144Hz. It just looks like 4k 60Hz screen with freesync.
I hope it works with 30fps+, but the threshold may be greater, like 40 or more. We'll see when it's released.
Human eye can do something like temporal supersampling usually when the frame rate is 42+. It depends on image and person. Anyway you want 4x fps at minimum. Such screen might be interesting even when gaming at just fullHD, as you might read text at full resolution when not gaming.
When affordable 4k-capable cards are released, there's an option to switch. And I hope that G-Sync vs FreeSync war will be over by then.
