ASUS Computex 2016: 27-inch 4K IPS 144Hz Gaming Monitor

ASUS 4K 144Hz gaming monitorASUS revealed some interesting displays at Computex 2016, including a 180Hz monitor, a 240Hz monitor (first of its kind ever) and we have also gotten information about a 4K 144Hz gaming monitor with IPS panel, which is also the first of its kind. There’s not much information out yet regarding this particular monitor, but we’ll make sure to update this post once we receive information from ASUS or other reliable sources. This monitor is apparently the world’s first 144Hz 4K monitor. The size of the display is 27-inches.

What we do know about this monitor is that it has an amazing maximum native resolution of 3840 x 2160, also known as 4K, 2160p, Ultra HD or just UHD. This will put some heavy weight on your graphics card as it requires a lot of computational power to render such high-quality graphics at a high frame rate. With the release of the upcoming AMD R490X and NVIDIA GTX 1080, you can most likely get higher frame rates than 60 frames per second in high-end games at UHD resolution and therefore take advantage of this monitor. Whether or not you can reach 144FPS is up for debate.

The maximum supported refresh rate for this 27-inch 4K 144Hz IPS gaming monitor is 144Hz at 4K resolution, so you can enjoy a smooth and stunning gameplay even with amazing visuals if your graphics card (or cards) have enough power. The panel type is IPS, meaning that the UHD visuals will be even more stunning with great color quality and viewing angles. The panel itself is from AU Optronics (AUO) and according to ASUS’ down description, the screen will deliver stunning photo-realistic visuals.

We have not yet received information about Adaptive-Sync support yet, so we can’t say for sure if this monitor supports G-SYNC or FreeSync, or perhaps none of them. It is also uncertain whether or not the monitor will join the ASUS Republic of Gamers (ROG) brand.

The monitor stand itself has full ergonomic features including tilt, height, swivel and pivot adjustment options. As previously mentioned, we will update this article as soon as ASUS reveals more information about this prototype gaming monitor.

ASUS 144Hz 4K Monitor
Buy online on Amazon
Screen Size27"
Resolution3840 x 2160
Panel TypeIPS
Aspect Ratio16:9
Refresh Rate144Hz
Response Time4ms (unconfirmed)
Adaptive SyncUnknown
  • Tyrann

    30″ for 4k minimum. 27″ is the sweet spot for 1440p just like 24″ is the sweet spot for 1080p.

  • boe_d

    Too small but otherwise the specs are nice.

  • Rian Holayter

    Would prefer 30″ but would take 27″ 4K 144hz over 1440p of the same any day. I can still see pixels at 27″ 1440p

  • sebastianer

    I hope it has FreeSync! I won’t upgrade my 970 before having an UHD monitor with variable refresh rate, and I was planning to switch to AMD after many years using Nvidia.

    I think the best gaming investment you can do is a variable refresh rate monitor, you no longed need to worry about stuttering, just set up the game properties to work something near your monitor’s refresh rate and good to go.

  • John Handcock


  • wargamer1969

    27 inches wat too small for 4k. WI’ll wait for the 4k 40 inch versions to.hit soon after.

  • Solariis

    You’ll be paying at least twice the price of an already expensive monitor for it too. This one even at 27″ will likely already be $1000+ considering it’s brand new technology at that resolution & refresh rate.

  • tophat1234

    A 240hz monitor is absolutely useless. ITs almsot impossible to tell the difference between 120fps and 140 fps and they think 240 fps is goign to look different? No wonder we dont have 4k ips 144hz already, they are wasting their time with useless stuff.

  • lozandier

    Don’t speak in absolutes people said the same things about content over 60FPS; we all know that was a bunch of nonsense, right?

  • lozandier

    It will likely be sold with FreeSync & GSync variants with the GSync one (as always) having the highest refresh rates.

    Nvidia’s variable refresh rate is better, but it does lead to a higher cost. That’s fine for such an item.

  • lozandier

    I wish there will be an ultra-wide variant. That’s monitor nirvana.

  • sebastianer

    Yup. But I’m ok with [LFC-100hz] for 4K. Maybe 120 for 1080p.

  • doxiMAN_MAN

    When will the 4k 144hz screen come out? I WANNA BUY IT YA HEAR ME?!?!?!

  • lozandier

    You shouldn’t in 2016-2017, IMO; Displayport 1.3+ is more than enough for that.

    That said, you would want to have more weighted on OLED & HDR.

  • Tyrann

    Probably next year. It takes them like 6 months to get it out after announcement.

  • xostrowx1991

    You gotta remember that 4K is a MUCH larger jump in resolution compared to 1440p than 1440p is to 1080p. 1440p resolution is only 66% larger than 1080p pixel-wise; whereas 4K is DOUBLE the size of 1440p (1440p is 33% larger vertically and 33% larger Horizontally compared to 1080p, adding up to 66% larger. 4K is 50% larger than 1440p both vertically and horizontally, which adds up to 100% larger.)

    So this also means that the sweet spot screen size is ALSO a larger difference going to 4K than it is moving from 1080p to 1440p. The 66% resolution hike of 1440p makes the “sweet spot” increase by 3 inches, from 24″ to 27″. So a 100% resolution hike would mean 40% more screen increase.

    So: 3″ x 1.4 = A (A = sweet spot size for 4K)

    3″ x 1.4 = 4.2 inches.

    So we add 4.2 inches to 27 inches and we get 31.2 inches; so 32″ is the sweet spot for 4K. Which is exactly why Acer made the XB321HK the way it is, which is a 32 inch 4K G-Sync IPS 60hz 4ms etc.. panel. Basically the exact same thing as the infamous Acer XB271HU but moving to 60hz, 4K, and 32″.

    I could die happy is ASUS/Acer etc.. could make a monitor that has:

    30-32 inch
    IPS panel

    They’ve already made some 1080p/1440p curved 30″ monitors that aren’t ultra-wides (normal 16:9) so it might be coming soon now that we have DP1.3 out

  • Lucas

    don’t forget ultra-wide. and instead of ips, make that oled. Oled>all. Scratch that, make that a QD-OLED. This has to happen (but god it will take a while)

  • Lucas

    they need to drop the little game of QD vs OLED already. QD-OLED already exists in labs. IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN. PRAISE THE ALMIGHTY 31.2” 21:9 4K 144HZ QD-OLED DISPLAY!!!

  • Lucas

    For anyone wondering about the resolution race, highest achieved res for any display is 10k, by chinese manufacturer BOE. Also, if anyone’s wondering where the resolution race will end, it’s 27k. According to the Clarkvision Photography’s research, the resolution equivalent to the detail in the human eye is 576 mega pixels. And according to wikipedia (don’t know if that information is true, if not then just consider the 576mp), the human eye aspect ratio is 4:3.075. So I put that in a megapixel-and-aspect-ratio-to-resolution caculator and got 27373 x 21043. So whatever the final display technology is, it will have that resolution. So, decades (or less, who knows) from now, you’ll be putting your 27k 1000+hz contact-lenses-screen on your eyes XD

  • ShaneMcGrath

    Agree totally.
    I would pay a pretty penny for a 32inch 4k IPS 100hz+ G sync 4ms(no curve for me though).
    I own one of the first affordable 4k monitors to hit the market a while back Samsung 28 inch 4k 60hz TN, Great panel for the price but I can tell any of you now 4k desktop monitors need to be over 30 inches otherwise you need a magnifying glass to read text, Scaling isn’t perfect in many programs and games.
    40 inches is around the size where you don’t need scaling at all but that is just too big for most peoples desktop pc’s, 32 is ideal in my opinion.
    Ended up going back to 1440p 27 inch ROG IPS 165hz as I can’t stand 60hz, Just to used to high hz monitors that anything lower just seems to give me eyestrain and headaches.
    Mind you the 4k on the Samsung is stunning in terms of picture quality and colours even for a TN panel, Has better colours than My ROG IPS to be honest, Just need them to get over 4k 60hz barrier with new display port now here.

  • ShaneMcGrath

    I can tell the difference on desktop dragging an open folder around, Can’t in games though.
    Can even tell the difference between 144hz and 165hz on my IPS ROG, Dragging mouse with open folder around desktop seems like it doesn’t even have a refresh rate at all it’s so smooth on overclocked 165hz.
    Agree on your 240hz point though, Rather they focus on 4k above 60hz.

  • FynntheHuman

    I’m using a 32″ 1440p currently and would defiantly prefer a 40″ at 4k. A 40″ 4k display has perfect 100% text scaling with windows. Combine that with 120+hz display and it would be bliss. I would settle for a 32″ 1440p with 144hz though.

  • ☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭


  • El Zick


  • gigu

    Asus release it please! I wait…..

  • Andrew B

    that 576MP is based on 120 degrees of vision, though. If we were further or closer, that number would change

  • Andrew B

    that arguement has been used for decades. ‘no one can tell the different between beta max and dvd!” “no one can tell the difference with anything beyond 24hz” “No one can tell the difference between insert x and y”

    I can tell a difference between a car passing at 120mph and 240mph so pretty sure I for one will be able to notice the difference between 120hz and 240hz.

  • alex

    you’ve got a source for that “qd-oled” business?

  • tophat1234

    seein a car drive at 120 mph and 240 mph in real life has absoluitely nothing to do with movement on a monitor at 120 hz and 240 hz….

  • Andrew B

    It’s called an analogy.

  • Roman Traistari

    Really? What kind of eagle eyes do you have? 😀 1440p on 27″ seems quite small to me and I’d prefer a 32″ 1440p any day. I can’t even think of 4K on anything smaller than 42″

  • Roman Traistari

    Make it 34″ and it’s purrrfict

  • Rian Holayter

    Roughly 20/10 I believe with my glasses- my job is detecting small visual details though so I am trained to pick up on these things, likely why the pixels on the 27″ 1440p are still noticeable to me.

  • Darryn Frost

    Um, 4K is double 1080P, not double 1440p

  • xostrowx1991

    lol, no. sorry. 1080p is 1920 x 1080 which = 2,073,600 pixels (that’s just a bit over 2 million pixels. grab a calculator and do the math, 1,920 multiplied by 1,080). 4K is 3840 x 2160 which = 8,294,400 (roughly 8.3 million pixels) 8.3 million divided by 2.073 million = 4 Exactly 4, because it’s four times more pixels.

  • Darryn Frost

    I am still right. It has no relationship to 1440p – 4k is twice as wide and twice as tall as 1080p. Yes, that’s four times the pixels, but my point was the relationship was to 1080p, not 1440.

  • xostrowx1991

    No. You are not right. 4K and 1080p are RESOLUTIONS, therefore pixels is all that matters here. And what you aren’t realizing is that you have to MULTIPLY the 100% extra width and 100% extra height, not ADD them together.

    Think of it this way, if i have a monitor that is 20 inches tall and 20 inches wide, you would have 400 square inches of space. But if you had a monitor that was 40 inches wide and 40 inches tall (which is “only twice as wide and twice as tall) you STILL have 1,600 square inches of space! Which is FOUR times more than 400 square inches, this is because you are dealing with two dimensions here; for every extra inch of height you gain you get one more inch of height but you ALSO get TWENTY more inches of width as well on the 20″ x 20” panel.

    Ntot sure why this isn’t ob to you but whatever. Point is, when discussing resolution you have to deal in pixels, and the FACTS are: 4K “IS” 2.25x larger than 1440p, and 4K “IS” four times larger than 1080p. Period.

  • Darryn Frost

    You can’t read very well, can you? I even said it was four times the pixels.

  • xostrowx1991

    And you can’t think very well lmao. You clearly are stating 4K is double 1080p which IS NOT TRUE. END OF STORY. Jeez, some people lol.

  • Darryn Frost

    You are a moron – I clearly said it was “Twice as wide and twice as high, which is four times the pixels”.

    Please tell me how that is wrong. Is 4k not 2x the width and 2x the height and 4x the pixels of 1080p and not 2x 1440p?

    You did not say 4k was more than double 1440p, you said it WAS double 1440p. Which is clearly wrong.

  • boniek

    I would prefer 24 inch 4k monitor due to PPI density. PPI density is really important to picture quality. I don’t know why people would want 30 freaking inches on a monitor – it is so uncomfortable, your gaze would constantly jump because you can’t see whole screen at the same time.

  • boniek

    Spotting individual pixels may be tough but small PPI artifacts such as aliasing is easily seen.

  • Roman Traistari

    I don’t know why, but I like when objects look just a little pixelated, that way they appear more clear to me. That’s why I turn off AA in absolutely all games. Also I’m not sure I know what PPI aliasing looks like.

  • DrinkingTech.Com

    Right now, there’s a 30″ 4K Panel out that is OLED and has 0.1ms response time, along with 120Hz (DP 1.3). It’s going for $5,000

  • 🐇 PΔltØ_4K 🐇

    Khá?! xD

  • White Lotus

    This is very true. proffesional gamers especially professional fps gamers prefer smaller monitors for this very reason