As someone who bought the first monitor of this class (the ROG Swift), 1440p at 144Hz in 2019 is almost aggressively uninteresting to me. 2560x1440 isn't an acceptable resolution for a computer monitor, of any size, at this point. A small tablet, sure. But at 27" even 2160p is starting to look too pixel-ey.
Maybe I have low standards, but I find 24" 1080p to be acceptable, and 27" 1440p is a higher pixel density than that. I don't know how close you're sitting that 2160p at 27" is on the verge of unacceptable.
I've been using a 1440p dual monitor setup for almost 3 years now and while its OK for general web browsing, I do miss the sharp, milky fluid text on a 4K XPS laptop I once experienced and I'd love to have a 4k level of detail for gaming in general for my next monitor.
I think it doesn't really make sense to bring in more 1440p monitors to the market when there are 4K phones and 13inch 4k laptops on the market. Soon 1440p will be the 768p laptop equivalent that you see on super cheap laptops. Bring in 4K and 5K screens. If there are 4K HDTVs going for 300-600$, why not bring the same resolution to desktop screens now!
It makes sense to bring an appropriate resolution for the market. I'm on a 5.5" 1920*1080, 441ppi Pixel 2, and don't see the point in quartering the size of the pixels, so a 4K phone is not a selling point to me. Also, using "but the highest resolution on a handheld device is X" isn't a reason to put that resolution on a monitor. I view my phone from 20cm, my desktop screen from 80-100cm, and my TV from 250-300cm. I think the pixel should be equivalent sized for the increase in screen size and distance.
My desktop is currently a pair of 27" 2560x1440 (and an 22" HD in portrait mode) and, while I do love it, I'm tempted by 4K or higher. I would, however, likely buy 30-32".
A 4K monitor with a 144 hertz refresh rate would be really hard on your computer unless you had a really powerful system i.e. i9 9900K and RTX 2080Ti as an example. And the PPI on a 27" 4K screen would be higher than a 27" 2560x1440 screen so it would also be more complicated to fit more pixels onto the same size screen. 4K TVs are big, computer monitors are small so your comparison of TVs to computer monitors is also flawed.
uhh ok buddy, mind sharing how much you paid for whatever PC you have that is running games at above 1440p and 144hz? You're either a troll or out of touch with reality lol
maybe for you, but for a competitive gamer, this is overly aggressive (pushing 1440p @ 144Hz requires a lot more GPU power than 1080p, I would rather have 1080p@240Hz), and also disappointing that there isn't a G-Sync option (especially now that nVidia is going to allow for having G-Sync available alongside FreeSync)
Well, with nVidia apparently joining the freesync bandwagon.. I mean, implementing the gSync compatible moniker through an arduous and complex market.. I mean,, engineering effort, I guess that the GSync monitors are actually going the way of hte dodo. Good riddance.
Completely agree. I spent some time with LG 27" 5k monitor at Apple store last night, and the text looked significantly sharper than on my Dell P2715Q.
Interesting point about effects of the coating on text sharpness. Though the glossiness of LG monitors was not noticeable (at least not in the Apple store).
That's a lot of money for 1440p144, even if it is IPS. When you can pick up very similar monitors for nearly $300 less, I don't see much point in getting this.
The only thing I notice as standing out is the color space coverage. So I suppose for the handful of people out there that need DCI P3 coverage and want a 144Hz refresh rate, this exists.
And secondly, have you got some axe to grind because some of us did rather well out of crypto-mining, and well, maybe you missed it / or were too late?
BTC is still way up on its 3yr overall price. I bet you bought Jan 2017....
I'm genuinely interested in your (likely) skewed point of view.
Chill bro. He's obviously referring to Razer bundling cryptocoin mining "option" in its devices' software for people to exchange mining for them for store credits.
Razer has a well deserved reputation for seeing its customers as company properties. I am still shocked to know that in order for my Razer mouse's driver to install I need to register with personal email so the software can always dial home with my personal info. For a freaking mouse.
The promo shots with the rainbow around the base make it look kinda gay... I mean, that's probably part of the audience, too. :-D
You're paying in part for the brand, there will be cheaper versions around. But the specs aren't bad, and I'd strongly consider it for, say, a Navi build (4K would probably be pushing it). One question which I'd like to be answered before purchase is exactly what the Freesync ranges are.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
35 Comments
Back to Article
Adam-James - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
As someone who bought the first monitor of this class (the ROG Swift), 1440p at 144Hz in 2019 is almost aggressively uninteresting to me. 2560x1440 isn't an acceptable resolution for a computer monitor, of any size, at this point. A small tablet, sure. But at 27" even 2160p is starting to look too pixel-ey.Inteli - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
Maybe I have low standards, but I find 24" 1080p to be acceptable, and 27" 1440p is a higher pixel density than that. I don't know how close you're sitting that 2160p at 27" is on the verge of unacceptable.milkywayer - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
I've been using a 1440p dual monitor setup for almost 3 years now and while its OK for general web browsing, I do miss the sharp, milky fluid text on a 4K XPS laptop I once experienced and I'd love to have a 4k level of detail for gaming in general for my next monitor.I think it doesn't really make sense to bring in more 1440p monitors to the market when there are 4K phones and 13inch 4k laptops on the market. Soon 1440p will be the 768p laptop equivalent that you see on super cheap laptops. Bring in 4K and 5K screens. If there are 4K HDTVs going for 300-600$, why not bring the same resolution to desktop screens now!
PaulMack - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
It makes sense to bring an appropriate resolution for the market. I'm on a 5.5" 1920*1080, 441ppi Pixel 2, and don't see the point in quartering the size of the pixels, so a 4K phone is not a selling point to me. Also, using "but the highest resolution on a handheld device is X" isn't a reason to put that resolution on a monitor. I view my phone from 20cm, my desktop screen from 80-100cm, and my TV from 250-300cm. I think the pixel should be equivalent sized for the increase in screen size and distance.My desktop is currently a pair of 27" 2560x1440 (and an 22" HD in portrait mode) and, while I do love it, I'm tempted by 4K or higher. I would, however, likely buy 30-32".
Lastof9 - Saturday, May 4, 2019 - link
A 4K monitor with a 144 hertz refresh rate would be really hard on your computer unless you had a really powerful system i.e. i9 9900K and RTX 2080Ti as an example. And the PPI on a 27" 4K screen would be higher than a 27" 2560x1440 screen so it would also be more complicated to fit more pixels onto the same size screen. 4K TVs are big, computer monitors are small so your comparison of TVs to computer monitors is also flawed.pancakes - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
uhh ok buddy, mind sharing how much you paid for whatever PC you have that is running games at above 1440p and 144hz? You're either a troll or out of touch with reality lolimaheadcase - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
How about %99 of all games outside a few select FPS games? Anything else you want to know you can find in computers for Dummies.cwolf78 - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
You condescending remark doesn't make it any more true.cwolf78 - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
Your condescending remark doesn't make it any more true.pancakes - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
FPS games aren't inherently more demanding than other games, but keep talking like you know what you're talking about you should be fine.abrowne1993 - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
If 4K at 27" is "too pixel-ey" for you then you should probably sit further from the screen.Devo2007 - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
.... Or lower DPI scaling. There's no way that 4k on a 27" display would be "pixel-ey"Pyrostemplar - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
I don't envy your PC or monitor, but I do envy your eyesight... :)bunnyfubbles - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
maybe for you, but for a competitive gamer, this is overly aggressive (pushing 1440p @ 144Hz requires a lot more GPU power than 1080p, I would rather have 1080p@240Hz), and also disappointing that there isn't a G-Sync option (especially now that nVidia is going to allow for having G-Sync available alongside FreeSync)Pyrostemplar - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
Well, with nVidia apparently joining the freesync bandwagon.. I mean, implementing the gSync compatible moniker through an arduous and complex market.. I mean,, engineering effort, I guess that the GSync monitors are actually going the way of hte dodo. Good riddance.p1esk - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
Completely agree. I spent some time with LG 27" 5k monitor at Apple store last night, and the text looked significantly sharper than on my Dell P2715Q.Beaver M. - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
Thats mostly because they are glossy. Your monitor isnt.p1esk - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
Interesting point about effects of the coating on text sharpness. Though the glossiness of LG monitors was not noticeable (at least not in the Apple store).TheWereCat - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
I must be blind then because I find no issues with 31.5" 1440pManch - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
" almost aggressively uninteresting" ... stupid phrase of the day winner!!! LOLmilkod2001 - Thursday, January 10, 2019 - link
Good point. 1440p is old news. Im still on one of them. Can they do something more 2019ish like 32''4k, 120Hz?Inteli - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
That's a lot of money for 1440p144, even if it is IPS. When you can pick up very similar monitors for nearly $300 less, I don't see much point in getting this.The only thing I notice as standing out is the color space coverage. So I suppose for the handful of people out there that need DCI P3 coverage and want a 144Hz refresh rate, this exists.
Beaver M. - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
Razor always charges extra for crappy quality.This is an Innolux panel. AKA even worse quality than the already terrible AUO panels.
boozed - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
Do the monitors mine ponzicoins too?Notmyusualid - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
Wow, OK, firstly - relevance?And secondly, have you got some axe to grind because some of us did rather well out of crypto-mining, and well, maybe you missed it / or were too late?
BTC is still way up on its 3yr overall price. I bet you bought Jan 2017....
I'm genuinely interested in your (likely) skewed point of view.
wr3zzz - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
Chill bro. He's obviously referring to Razer bundling cryptocoin mining "option" in its devices' software for people to exchange mining for them for store credits.Razer has a well deserved reputation for seeing its customers as company properties. I am still shocked to know that in order for my Razer mouse's driver to install I need to register with personal email so the software can always dial home with my personal info. For a freaking mouse.
GreenReaper - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
The promo shots with the rainbow around the base make it look kinda gay...I mean, that's probably part of the audience, too. :-D
You're paying in part for the brand, there will be cheaper versions around. But the specs aren't bad, and I'd strongly consider it for, say, a Navi build (4K would probably be pushing it). One question which I'd like to be answered before purchase is exactly what the Freesync ranges are.
jordanclock - Thursday, January 10, 2019 - link
You say it "look[s] kinda gay" just because it has a rainbow RGB pattern?C'mon. We're past that kind of childish shit.
nerd1 - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
Any serious gamer will use monitor arm... which makes the display stand thing completely meaningless.meacupla - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
I don't see any VESA mount holes...DanNeely - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
Of course not. Your standard VESA mount doesn't have built in Frag Harder Disco Lights making it totally inappropriate to use with a Razer panel.jordanclock - Thursday, January 10, 2019 - link
I'm not sure it's supposed to be separated from the stand, but if it does, you can be sure Razer will have a $399 RGB VESA adapter!Gunbuster - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
No trust in Razer, you look at them sideways and get banned from their social media for life.Beaver M. - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link
Well, they have to hide how epicly low the quality of their products are.yashsani49563 - Thursday, January 10, 2019 - link
Good information thanks alot for sharing