Acer Predator X27 4K G-SYNC HDR Monitor listed on Newegg

Subject: General Tech | May 18, 2018 - 12:02 PM |
Tagged: Predator X27, PG27UQ, hdr, g-sync, asus, acer, 4k, 144hz

Thanks to a listing that appeared on Newegg this morning, we seem to finally have an idea of what pricing will be like for the long-awaited 27" 4K HDR G-Sync displays in the US region.

View Full Size

For the amount of $2,000, you can now preorder the Acer Predator X27 monitor from Newegg, with a scheduled release date of June 1, 2018.

While $2,000 is a lot for a display, this pricing doesn't come as a surprise. After several rumors and leaked pricing from other territories, it became apparent that this would be a costly product.

Originally announced at CES 2017, G-SYNC HDR displays have been delayed several times, with the latest word being that they will be available by the end of the month

We still have no word on pricing of the ASUS PG27UQ with the same specifications as the Predator X27, but I would expect it to be very similar if not nearly identical.

Source: Newegg

Video News

May 18, 2018 | 12:10 PM - Posted by hoxlund

I'd like to know what would run a game @4k 144fps

depending on the game of course but, what dual 1080tis like maybe 100fps?

watch, you need dual titan v

May 18, 2018 | 12:14 PM - Posted by Ken Addison

You aren't going to be running AAA titles at 4K 144Hz today with modern hardware, but displays are usually an investment that stays around for many years.

By supporting the higher refresh rate, your monitor has an upgrade path alongside future GPUs.

May 18, 2018 | 01:28 PM - Posted by psuedonymous

You can run AAA games at those resolutions and refresh rates, you just have to tolerate the e-peen shrinkage of not pushing every graphical settings slider to 'EXTREME' all the time.

May 18, 2018 | 01:56 PM - Posted by Jason8484 (not verified)

Exactly- which is why this monitor is a great investment. Great for consoles and future consoles as well. Only thing thats not ideal is the size is a bit small- not too small for 4k- but 32 inches is ideal. Then again, those monitors will even be more expensive. That being said, even playing games at 1440p on this would look great probably- given the advanced image quality compared to most gsync monitors.

May 18, 2018 | 04:24 PM - Posted by Anony mouse (not verified)

Since when did consoles start using DisplayPort ? That's the only port that uses G-Sync.

You can get a better deal on 4k HDR TV for 2,000 with better zoning and color display. Heck for 2,000 your into OLED 50-55 pricing.

May 22, 2018 | 10:31 AM - Posted by othertomperson (not verified)

27" is about right for 4K as far as desktop PC use goes. On a PC you sit so close to the screen that this size largely, although not entirely, eliminates the need for AA. It's the AA used in benchmarks which gives the impression that 4K is out of reach for current gen hardware. 5K or even 6K at 27" would be ideal, but obviously meaningless for consoles which generally expect you to sit away from them anyway.

I was playing at 4K on dual 970s a few years ago, and currently use dual 1080s. Dual 1080s are good for 60-90 fps 4K, but not much more. It's hardly a low end thing, but it's not monstrously demanding. When a cheaper gaming equivalent to the Titan V is released it'll be amazing here, especially if it supports SLI.

May 18, 2018 | 12:47 PM - Posted by Jabbadap

Titan V does not have multi gpu support. Quadro GV100 maybe with nvlink bridge... But that won't be the problem anyway, it has gsync. So if card/s can keep it in adaptive sync range of 30-144FPS(preferable 40-144 FPS), it's all good to go. And higher refresh rate panels have usually lower input lag.

May 18, 2018 | 04:09 PM - Posted by NewAPIsMaybeButNvidiaMayNotLikeThat (not verified)

Wait but what about those New Graphics APIs(DX12 and Vulkan) don't they support Explicit Milti-GPU Adaptor?

And will Nvidia's GPUs allow for that API managed Miulti-GPU adaptor in any games. CF/SLI are supposed to be legacy with the games making use of DX12 and Vulkan and all that new sorts of Graphics API ability. Or will Nvidia put the Kibosh on that.

What about any Dual Vega dies on a single PCIe card sort of thing from AMD and that's how AMD Usually ups its game against Nvidia onec AMD's Professional Vega 20 die production leaves AMD with enough non performant dies to create some lower binned variants that AMD can sell to gamers. Vega 20 may be for the Pro Markets but any Vega 20 dies that do not make the grade can be binned down for gaming once the reject bins are full.

Two Grand and just how much of that price is G-Sync related.

May 19, 2018 | 05:39 AM - Posted by Jabbadap

To my knowledge there is _one_ dx12 game that support explicit multi-gpu adapter(ashes of the singularity). List of DX12/vulkan games are very short anyways. Even today most new AAA games are dx11 games, which is quite sad I know.

May 19, 2018 | 09:15 AM - Posted by Godrilla

100 fps is still better than current 60 hz. Although I would prefer 100 hz monitor at a cost savings lol.

May 18, 2018 | 01:38 PM - Posted by BleedingEdgeYes...

Should be Asus.
"pricing of the Acer PG27UQ"

May 18, 2018 | 01:55 PM - Posted by Ken Addison

Fixed. Thanks!

May 18, 2018 | 01:48 PM - Posted by hoxlund

very excited to see the progression happening though, my Korean 40" 4k screen might need an upgrade soon, or a partner in crime

May 18, 2018 | 06:33 PM - Posted by pdjblum

how does this make sense at $2000 when you get this for $600 on most days:

yeah, it is not 4k and the brightness is not as high, but the colors and response time are awesome

May 19, 2018 | 09:05 AM - Posted by Godrilla

Let's compare it to similar brightness monitors which go up to $1000, let's add gsync another few hundred dollars, add 1st 144hz 4k monitor on the market premium another few hundred dollars to that. The demand is higher for this than the Samsung as well.

May 18, 2018 | 08:48 PM - Posted by Shane

Expensive but if only it was at least 32 inches, Would probably bite the bullet and get one.
No way I am buying another 4k panel at that size, Already have a first gen Samsung 28inch 4k 60hz and it's packed in box under my bed for the past 2 years.
Too small for 4k, Prefer using my 27 inch ASUS ROG Swift 1440p 165hz.
Had a nightmare with scaling issues back on win 8.1, Even worse with 3rd party apps in 4k, A few games also had text way too small.
Really do need a minimum of 32 inches in my opinion, 40 is ideal scaling wise but just too damn big for most peoples desks.

May 22, 2018 | 10:36 AM - Posted by othertomperson (not verified)

You really may as well go back to 1440p when you're at 40", it's the same dpi. You lose all benefit of even having 4K in the first place, beyond physical size. 27" is perfect for 4K precisely because of the difficulty in noticing each individual pixel -- you get less aliasing and greater texture detail visible. The scaling thing hasn't been an issue for years either.

May 19, 2018 | 08:49 AM - Posted by Anonymousyvi786rt67f68fvvujvu (not verified)

Needs to be 32" MINIMUM.

May 19, 2018 | 09:09 AM - Posted by Godrilla

There is a 3440x1440p @ 200hz va panel in the pipe at 32 inches with HDR.
Although I would prefer 120hz ips one with lower price tag over all these with HDR.

May 19, 2018 | 09:00 AM - Posted by Godrilla

Based on specs the sweet spot for these monitors is 100 hz for 4:4:4 color and that's how I would run it. Anything higher you would lose quality 2 fold 120 to 144 hz turns to 4:2:2 color and you would have to lower in game quality to achieve anything close to these frequencies.
I'm running 3440*1440 at 100 hz playing crysis 3 multiplayer currently from my experience 100 hz is still competitive I'm getting 1st or second place most matches.

May 19, 2018 | 02:36 PM - Posted by Anony (not verified)

They can call it "HDR" all they like, but you need good contrast for an actual HDR experience, and IPS isn't going to deliver that

May 22, 2018 | 12:49 PM - Posted by Rocky1234 (not verified)

Nice monitor but these monitors are way to over priced I think they need to pull the prices in a bit and come back down to earth. I guess as long as there are people willing to stupidly pay these high prices manufactures will keep over charging for the tech.Anyone that replies with oh but look at what you get for the price or hey if you want to have the latest and greatest tech then you pay the price will pretty much confirm what I stated about stupidly over paying for the tech. Here is a hint stop buying at the over charged prices and these manufactures will be forced to lower the prices.

May 22, 2018 | 09:13 PM - Posted by RH92 (not verified)

A M E N !!!

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.