Overclock.net banner

Upcoming HDR monitors

55K views 306 replies 66 participants last post by  JackCY 
#1 ·
Let's try to recap here all the HDR monitors that will be launched from now on.



Asus PG27UQ
  • 27 inch
  • 4K
  • 144Hz
  • HDR10
  • IPS DCI-P3 color space
  • GSYNC
  • FALD
  • idiot price approximately $2000



Acer-Predator-XB272
  • 27 inch
  • 4K
  • 144Hz
  • HDR10
  • IPS DCI-P3 color space
  • GSYNC
  • FALD
  • 4ms response time
  • Nvidia's ULMB
  • Tobii eye-tracking
  • idiot price approximately $2000
will it be a clone of the Asus?



LG 32UD99
  • 32 inch
  • 4K
  • 60Hz
  • HDR10
  • IPS DCI-P3 color space
    Price will be around $1000



Dell S2718D
  • 27 inch
  • 2560x1440
  • 60Hz
  • HDR10
  • IPS SRGB color space
    Price will be around $700



Samsung CHG70
  • 27 inch / 31.5 inch
  • 2560x1440
  • 144Hz
  • HDR10
  • FreeSync 2
  • Quantum Dot VA 125% sRGB

Samsung CHG75
  • 27 inch / 31.5 inch
  • 2560x1440
  • 144Hz
  • HDR10
  • G-SYNC
  • Quantum Dot VA 125% sRGB
please posts other monitors in this format, I will update the first thread as reference.
 
See less See more
5
  • Rep+
Reactions: Aeru
#2 ·
Wow! I was just about the buy a new 32" BenQ IPS monitor for $800 right now on newegg.

I had no idea LG was releasing a new 32" 4k monitor. Holy crap nice! I think I might get the LG 32UD99.
 
#3 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motley01 View Post

Wow! I was just about the buy a new 32" BenQ IPS monitor for $800 right now on newegg.

I had no idea LG was releasing a new 32" 4k monitor. Holy crap nice! I think I might get the LG 32UD99.
this is the meaning of this thread, compare those monitors and buy the best for our needs.
I like the Asus but it has an idiot price so I will choose some other quality monitors with less bells and whistles
 
#4 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by sblantipodi View Post

this is the meaning of this thread, compare those monitors and buy the best for our needs.
I like the Asus but it has an idiot price so I will choose some other quality monitors with less bells and whistles
YES! There's NO WAY in hell I would pay $2000 for a 27" monitor, thats just nuts. But $1000 for a 32" is more reasonable, given that is around the same price as current 32" 4k monitors.
 
#5 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motley01 View Post

YES! There's NO WAY in hell I would pay $2000 for a 27" monitor, thats just nuts. But $1000 for a 32" is more reasonable, given that is around the same price as current 32" 4k monitors.
I know that Samsung is releasing some normal priced HDR monitor, imho it should worth to wait even the samsung one.
 
#6 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motley01 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sblantipodi View Post

this is the meaning of this thread, compare those monitors and buy the best for our needs.
I like the Asus but it has an idiot price so I will choose some other quality monitors with less bells and whistles
YES! There's NO WAY in hell I would pay $2000 for a 27" monitor, thats just nuts. But $1000 for a 32" is more reasonable, given that is around the same price as current 32" 4k monitors.
Yeah. I understand a gamer/low volume markup, but its just ridiculous when you get a 40" HDR TV for like $600.

I'll be watching this thread, thanks.
 
#8 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallsignVega View Post

Not sure what an "idiot price" is. Especially for a monitor that has technical features WAY beyond the others.
144Hz at 4K is something that pretty no one will use,
FALD does not worth 1000€ more.
 
#10 ·
There's also the BenQ SW320, somewhat similar to the LG, it has even been reviewed already here.
Also the Asus PA32U, with 1000nit FALD.
Those monitors listed can understand and process the HDR signal, but they often lack the required brightness/color gamut/panel bitdepth.
The Dell seem very basic in their HDR support, then LG, BenQ and I guess Samsung somewhere in the middle and the FALD trio on top - so far the only ones to fully support the requirements of the HDR10 standard.
 
#11 ·
The Asus PG27UQ looks like the perfect monitor specs I'v been looking for. But if they are estimating $2000 price, I'm not going to go for that. I'd even accept a 1440p version for $1000 as long as it had all the other same specs.
 
#12 ·
I think you need to make a few updates or omit this monitor entirely:

Dell S2718D

-I believe this will NOT be true HDR and just "supports it". There are a lot of key words used in many of the publications such as "HDR-like," "HDR-replication," "HDR-emulation" etc.etc. If you look at the specs of the monitor it doesn't come anywhere close to HDR requirements. (400 nits of brightness, a 1000:1 contrast ratio, and 6ms response time. It also covers 99 percent of the sRGB color gamut, and offers a 178-degree wide viewing angle)

-This is the only monitor that is GLOSSY from all the others listed (which is a huge plus for me).
 
#14 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallsignVega View Post

Not sure what an "idiot price" is. Especially for a monitor that has technical features WAY beyond the others.
Well,

1. It's "GAMING" so it is already overpriced and only for people that have too much money. It's ACER/ASUS so 300 USD for "gaming" brand to add also.
2. It's only 27'". for 4K is waay too small.
3. It's IPS from AUO so again BLB all over the place, dead/stuck pixels, generally QC mess- add to point 1- overpriced again. Besides I read that IPS is worst you can pair with HDR (apart from TN).
4. Market - 0,5% of gamers who can throw away 2k USD for monitor.
5. Nobody will be able to use 144 fps in 4K on max settings. I don't think VOLTA TITAN SLI will be able to. No to mention that SLI support is getting worse and worse.
6. At this price point it's better to just pull the trigger for OLED 55-65" TV unless you are FPS pro-gamer and have much better HDR and picture quality.
7. The amount of returns will be even higher than previous 1440p 27 144Hz monitors from Asus and Acer. If people were THAT PICKY for 800USD, imagine how much they will be picky when it comes to quality of 2k USD monitor.

Of course above points are not for people for whom throwing away 2k USD is nothing. It's Idiotic price point from the view of normal or even good-earning enthusiast gamer.

For example I could buy myself one of those but I could never justify to myself paying that much for AUO overpriced panel. I still remember sending back 6-7 monitors from Asus and Acer till I got perfect XB271HU. For 2K I would not accept anything other than perfect screen. Which leads us to OLED again with this price.

Also- most gamers don't even yet went to 1440p, 4K 60Fps even. 144Hz 4K is just for what?
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leopardi View Post



Samsung CHG70
  • 27 inch / 31.5 inch
  • 2560x1440
  • 144Hz
  • HDR10
  • FreeSync 2
  • Quantum Dot VA 125% sRGB



Samsung CHG75
  • 27 inch / 31.5 inch
  • 2560x1440
  • 144Hz
  • HDR10
  • G-SYNC
  • Quantum Dot VA 125% sRGB
Thank you, adding to first post
 
#16 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by sblantipodi View Post

Samsung CHG70
  • 27 inch / 31.5 inch
  • 2560x1440
  • 144Hz
  • HDR10
  • FreeSync 2
  • Quantum Dot VA 125% sRGB



Samsung CHG75
  • 27 inch / 31.5 inch
  • 2560x1440
  • 144Hz
  • HDR10
  • G-SYNC
  • Quantum Dot VA 125% sRGB
Now this is something you can max out
smile.gif
Super interested! Any release ETA for those?

I would love those specs for UW, but 27" 1440p is perfect anyway. 31,5 might be too much, but still interested!
 
#17 ·
I just registered to the forum and made a bookmark of this thread. I've got a relatively high end FALD tv but with its primary use as a tv for movies and my wife I am hoping that hdr monitors catch on at decent prices. It's still tough to justify when 43 to 50" tvs can be had for under 1K$ but we'll see what the next few months bring for monitor prices and also what the new 2017 smaller sets (43" or so) have for nits and price value.
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by sblantipodi View Post

144Hz at 4K is something that pretty no one will use,
FALD does not worth 1000€ more.
I'll disagree on both points. I surely would use 4K 144 Hz.

FALD isn't the only reason it is $2000. You aren't going to find a 144 Hz 4K Display G-Sync even without FALD for $1000 for MANY years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny89 View Post

Well,

1. It's "GAMING" so it is already overpriced and only for people that have too much money. It's ACER/ASUS so 300 USD for "gaming" brand to add also.
2. It's only 27'". for 4K is waay too small.
3. It's IPS from AUO so again BLB all over the place, dead/stuck pixels, generally QC mess- add to point 1- overpriced again. Besides I read that IPS is worst you can pair with HDR (apart from TN).
4. Market - 0,5% of gamers who can throw away 2k USD for monitor.
5. Nobody will be able to use 144 fps in 4K on max settings. I don't think VOLTA TITAN SLI will be able to. No to mention that SLI support is getting worse and worse.
6. At this price point it's better to just pull the trigger for OLED 55-65" TV unless you are FPS pro-gamer and have much better HDR and picture quality.
7. The amount of returns will be even higher than previous 1440p 27 144Hz monitors from Asus and Acer. If people were THAT PICKY for 800USD, imagine how much they will be picky when it comes to quality of 2k USD monitor.

Of course above points are not for people for whom throwing away 2k USD is nothing. It's Idiotic price point from the view of normal or even good-earning enthusiast gamer.

For example I could buy myself one of those but I could never justify to myself paying that much for AUO overpriced panel. I still remember sending back 6-7 monitors from Asus and Acer till I got perfect XB271HU. For 2K I would not accept anything other than perfect screen. Which leads us to OLED again with this price.

Also- most gamers don't even yet went to 1440p, 4K 60Fps even. 144Hz 4K is just for what?
1. Not really sure what level of money equals "too much".
2. I would have preferred 30", but 27" isn't horrible.
3. None of these statements apply without testing the monitor. None of these items were noted on the demo display. FALD virtually eliminates BLB.
4. Random numbers, but it doesn't mean the monitor won't sell enough to make a profit for the companies. Besides, "0.5" of gamers is tens of thousands of people.
5. Who says you need to always run 144 FPS at 4K at max settings? That is what G-Sync is for. Not to mention "max settings" a lot of the time is completely over-rated.
6. OLED is superior, but it is only packaged at 60 Hz and minimum 55". Too large for a lot of users.
7. Just speculation.
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallsignVega View Post

I'll disagree on both points. I surely would use 4K 144 Hz.

FALD isn't the only reason it is $2000. You aren't going to find a 144 Hz 4K Display G-Sync even without FALD for $1000 for MANY years.
If 2K USD for monitor is not too much for you and buying GPUs to max those specs then as I said- you are rich person so all those points does not apply to you
smile.gif
. I was talking from average person perspective.

I would still prefer OLED but as you said, there are no smaller OLEDS than 55 right now. I would take 45 or 48 inch OLED TV over that gaming LCDs any day and call it a day. OLED quality is worth all gaming features. UNLESS you play competetive, which I don't.

On the other hand Samsung CHG75 is absolutely great. 31,5 inch, 2K, all other great features, VA and you can have fun with 1080Ti on it.

We have now 4K monitors with HDR, Sync etc. We have from Samsung 2K monitors with HDR, Sync etc.


WHERE ARE ULTRAWIDES WITH THOSE SPECS?
mad.gif
frown.gif
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny89 View Post

If 2K USD for monitor is not too much for you and buying GPUs to max those specs then as I said- you are rich person so all those points does not apply to you
smile.gif
. I was talking from average person perspective.

I would still prefer OLED but as you said, there are no smaller OLEDS than 55 right now. I would take 45 or 48 inch OLED TV over that gaming LCDs any day and call it a day. OLED quality is worth all gaming features. UNLESS you play competetive, which I don't.

On the other hand Samsung CHG75 is absolutely great. 31,5 inch, 2K, all other great features, VA and you can have fun with 1080Ti on it.

We have now 4K monitors with HDR, Sync etc. We have from Samsung 2K monitors with HDR, Sync etc.


WHERE ARE ULTRAWIDES WITH THOSE SPECS?
mad.gif
frown.gif
That's what I'm waiting for. I want a 144hz 1440p HDR freesync ultrawide to replace my 144hz triple monitors.
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny89 View Post

If 2K USD for monitor is not too much for you and buying GPUs to max those specs then as I said- you are rich person so all those points does not apply to you
smile.gif
. I was talking from average person perspective.

I would still prefer OLED but as you said, there are no smaller OLEDS than 55 right now. I would take 45 or 48 inch OLED TV over that gaming LCDs any day and call it a day. OLED quality is worth all gaming features. UNLESS you play competetive, which I don't.

On the other hand Samsung CHG75 is absolutely great. 31,5 inch, 2K, all other great features, VA and you can have fun with 1080Ti on it.

We have now 4K monitors with HDR, Sync etc. We have from Samsung 2K monitors with HDR, Sync etc.

WHERE ARE ULTRAWIDES WITH THOSE SPECS?[/B]
mad.gif
frown.gif
What about 1000 nit ?
I think Samsung CHG70 & CHG75 and SHG50 don't need 1000 nit such as upcoming Asus PG27UQ and Acer XB272-HDR because VA has higher contrast and perfect blacks than IPS in Asus PG27UQ and Acer XB272-HDR . So the difference between them (VA and IPS ) is the main reason to hit 1000 nit or higher or lower .
Sometimes increasing the dose of the drug lead to death not healing .

Another Point , Samsung knows that 2k required more than 4k nowadays , So they will release their 2k gaming monitors with HDR and freesync / G-sync this year In order to satisfy the desire of many players and make their 4k gaming monitors by 2018 for rich players .

If u want to run 144hz at 4k with single GPU , u need to wait another 3 years to run current games . At this time you will see new games which need GPUS more strongly than current so u need to wait another 3 years .
very briefly , in my opinion if u need best gaming experience whether RPG or FPS , stay with 2k HDR 144hz freesync / G-sync instead of 4k at 144hz .
I prefer running 2k 144hz smoothly For 4 years to come with current single GPUS instead of running 4k 144hz with difficulty and I need to change my GPU every year or go with sli .
 
#23 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryLobster View Post

I've gotta be blind or HDR implementation in it's current form sucks because I really don't care for HDR when using my KS8000 so I can't imagine how worth while it would be on a tiny 27 inch screen with your face pressed up against it.
Are you talking about games or movies? Because games need to implement HDR support first (movies too? I don't watch much movies in home). So Far only Horizon on PS4 and ME:A on PC have HDR implemented as far as I know (I might be wrong).

Does HDR work automatically in all movies?
 
#24 ·
This guy must be blind. I think HDR on 55" HDTVs look great on 4k movies. It gives everything that "color pop".

Now I also want it on my PC gaming!
 
#25 ·
I've used my KS8000 with every HDR capable game on PC like RE7, Shadow Warrior 2, etc. 4:2:0/12-Bit to display it correctly. My PS4 Pro HDR experience has also been lackluster with FFXV and The Last of Us/Uncharted 4.

Even with movies, the only thing I've watched that actually mattered was Life of Pi.

Really underwhelming overall and many times I prefer the SDR experience better. Don't think HDR matters enough yet to really consider it a priority. Only reason I got a KS8000 was because it had the least DSE of any TV I tried.

The guy above is the definition of a bestbuy shopper. Whatever has "color pop" wins.
 
#26 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryLobster View Post

I've used my KS8000 with every HDR capable game on PC like RE7, Shadow Warrior 2, etc. 4:2:0/12-Bit to display it correctly. My PS4 Pro HDR experience has also been lackluster with FFXV and The Last of Us/Uncharted 4.

Even with movies, the only thing I've watched that actually mattered was Life of Pi.

Really underwhelming overall and many times I prefer the SDR experience better. Don't think HDR matters enough yet to really consider it a priority. Only reason I got a KS8000 was because it had the least DSE of any TV I tried.

The guy above is the definition of a bestbuy shopper. Whatever has "color pop" wins.
Yup thats me!

Let me guess, your the guy when watching movies, whenever a non believable scene happens you say "oh that car really can't explode into flames like that just from crashing".
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top