Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Asus Announces a 4K Gaming Monitor, the PQ321

By - Source: TechPowerUp | B 49 comments

Asus will be showing off a new 4K gaming monitor at Computex 2013, but before then, it has already been announced and given us a sneak-peek at its specifications.

Asus has introduced the PQ321, a 4K gaming monitor. Yes, that's right -- this monitor will have a 3840 x 2160 resolution. That's a multiple of four times the amount of pixels found on a FullHD screen. The screen will have an aspect ratio of 16:9 and be built on a diagonal of 31.5 inches.

The screen will make use of the new IGZO technology (Indium Gallium Zinc Oxide). This allows the panels to house much smaller transistors, which allows for the much smaller pixels needed for the 4K resolution. The screen also has viewing angles of 176 degrees, an 8 ms response time and a brightness of 350cd/m². While the screen itself is not the thinnest screen on the market, in its class, it is the thinnest 4K UHD monitor to date, measuring only 35 mm thick at the thickest point. The screen's stand also allows the screen to tilt, swivel, and adjust in height. The stand can also be removed, and the PQ321 can then be wall-mounted using the VESA mount.

Connectivity will be achieved by a DisplayPort; the US version will feature two HDMI ports for PiP (Picture-by-Picture) support. The unit also has built-in 2 watt stereo speakers.

The company gave no word on pricing yet, but the PQ321 will be demoed at Computex 2013, June 4 through June 8, 2013. Asus also indicated that there will be a 39" version on demo.

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 19 Hide
    hibbiejibbie3 , June 1, 2013 12:25 PM
    @southernshark: The writer is saying that it is the thinnest in its class, but not the thinnest out of all screens on the market.
  • 11 Hide
    potatobabe , June 1, 2013 12:21 PM
    YES YES YES!
  • 10 Hide
    omgangrybees , June 1, 2013 12:25 PM
    "So it actually is the thinnest screen in it's class.......... Some of these "tech" writers need to take a class on logic."
    You need to take a class in reading comprehension. The writer is saying that it is the thinnest 4k monitor, but is not the thinnest overall monitor on the market.
Other Comments
    Display all 49 comments.
  • 11 Hide
    potatobabe , June 1, 2013 12:21 PM
    YES YES YES!
  • 19 Hide
    hibbiejibbie3 , June 1, 2013 12:25 PM
    @southernshark: The writer is saying that it is the thinnest in its class, but not the thinnest out of all screens on the market.
  • 10 Hide
    omgangrybees , June 1, 2013 12:25 PM
    "So it actually is the thinnest screen in it's class.......... Some of these "tech" writers need to take a class on logic."
    You need to take a class in reading comprehension. The writer is saying that it is the thinnest 4k monitor, but is not the thinnest overall monitor on the market.
  • 0 Hide
    omgangrybees , June 1, 2013 12:25 PM
    "So it actually is the thinnest screen in it's class.......... Some of these "tech" writers need to take a class on logic."
    You need to take a class in reading comprehension. The writer is saying that it is the thinnest 4k monitor, but is not the thinnest overall monitor on the market.
  • 1 Hide
    ko888 , June 1, 2013 12:33 PM
    It looks like a re-badged Sharp PN-K321 that was rumored to be priced at around $5500.
  • 8 Hide
    slomo4sho , June 1, 2013 12:46 PM
    Its going to be a few more years before these displays become worthwhile for the average consumer. Gotta invest $1-2K on the GPU just to run at this resolution :( 
  • 2 Hide
    mauller07 , June 1, 2013 1:08 PM
    bigmack says its too small, i say its too big.
    i would love a 4k 24 inch monitor, anything larger on a normal desk and you need to turn your head too much.
  • -9 Hide
    hakesterman , June 1, 2013 1:19 PM
    Well if it's under $ 600.00 and it's a 1 MS display so i can get at least 100FPS then i may have to upgrade. IF not i have no intentions of getting it.
  • 0 Hide
    vmem , June 1, 2013 1:20 PM
    Quote:
    bigmack says its too small, i say its too big.
    i would love a 4k 24 inch monitor, anything larger on a normal desk and you need to turn your head too much.


    Then I'll say it's just right :p 

    IMO though, I do think 30-32 inch is an appropriate size for 4K. anything smaller and you can't really appreciate the heightened pixel density, and anything larger, such as 39 inch, would never fit in any office/work setting. if I'm $5-6k for a monitor, it's gonna be used both for work and play lol
  • 0 Hide
    halcyon , June 1, 2013 1:47 PM
    Wow...just wow. As expected from a company like Asus.
  • 1 Hide
    vmem , June 1, 2013 1:56 PM
    Quote:
    I am just sad to see it aimed at the "professional" crowd... that means super expensive since it will be designed likely to have perfect/near-perfect color reproduction.

    I would LOVE to see someone make a gaming/general use panel above 1080/1200p and nobody has done it yet.


    I think it's a matter of budget, since few gamer has a big enough wallet to buy a 4K monitor even for $2-2.5K. and those who do have the budget tend to have gotten into some sort of professional work anyway. going from gaming to making games/3D content or creative graphic design is rather common
  • 7 Hide
    bobbybamf12 , June 1, 2013 2:42 PM
    Imagine the gpu you will need to run this thing on decent settings...
  • 5 Hide
    chumly , June 1, 2013 3:16 PM
    Ok, Niels, you use the word "gaming" quite a bit to describe this monitor. You've pulled this word completely from your ass. There is no mention of gaming anywhere on the original article from techpowerup.
    It's not a gaming monitor. It's just a monitor. A monitor that runs 3840 x 2160 resolution. Nothing "gaming" about it at all. If anything, the connectivity and features would suggest that this is a multi-media monitor: PiP, built in speakers, multiple points of connectivity via HDMI/Displayport.
    Also, an 8ms response time would be something most gamers would shy away from (especially shooters).
    You basically copy everything on their article and add in the word gaming (which you've pulled from your ass).
    Good job.
  • 3 Hide
    edogawa , June 1, 2013 3:20 PM
    Quote:
    Imagine the gpu you will need to run this thing on decent settings...


    Don't worry, by the time graphics cards can easily run 4k resolution the monitors themselves will be much cheaper. Probably be a couple years before they become mainstream and cheaper.
  • 0 Hide
    SlitWeaver , June 1, 2013 3:26 PM
    @hakesterman Just to give you some perspective, it takes the human body/brain about 80ms just to realize anything. If you're poked by a friend on the arm, you don't even have a clue for, on average, about 80ms. So, really, 8ms isn't that slow. :p 
    More info here: http://tinyurl.com/4yxn5qw (wanted to keep the link short).
  • 0 Hide
    vmem , June 1, 2013 3:35 PM
    Quote:
    @hakesterman Just to give you some perspective, it takes the human body/brain about 80ms just to realize anything. If you're poked by a friend on the arm, you don't even have a clue for, on average, about 80ms. So, really, 8ms isn't that slow. :p 
    More info here: http://tinyurl.com/4yxn5qw (wanted to keep the link short).


    that's mostly based on cognitive understanding. however, with enough training, hardcore FPS players develop something similar to a reflex reaction. in short, the player will "point and click" on anything that looks like an enemy before their brain actually registers what happened XD

    of course, personally I don't have anywhere near that kind of training, and to me, 8ms, great color and contrast, and 4K res would be the perfect monitor for casual games, movies, and work
  • 0 Hide
    SlitWeaver , June 1, 2013 3:50 PM
    Quote:
    that's mostly based on cognitive understanding. however, with enough training, hardcore FPS players develop something similar to a reflex reaction. in short, the player will "point and click" on anything that looks like an enemy before their brain actually registers what happened XD

    of course, personally I don't have anywhere near that kind of training, and to me, 8ms, great color and contrast, and 4K res would be the perfect monitor for casual games, movies, and work

    You can develop fast reflexes (playing 200 hours of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 has sort of made me "twitchy" with my fingers when I see things move lol) but it still takes the brain ~80ms to process anything. It would take even longer than that 80ms for you to register it as something you recognize. I stopped playing hardcore (BFBC2 again) because I kept shooting my teammates because I shot anything that moved all the time ahaha
  • 1 Hide
    SlitWeaver , June 1, 2013 4:08 PM
    Quote:
    Dun worry guys the human eye can't see more than 24fps anyways so its k

    Lol you should probably put some "sarcasm" tags so someone doesn't think think you're serious... xP
Display more comments