Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Asus Intros PB287Q True 4K/UHD Monitor

By - Source: Asus | B 21 comments

On Monday, Asus launched the PB287Q, a 28-inch display designed with prosumers and gamers in mind. The panel offers a 3840 x 2160 resolution at 60 Hz, and is available now in Taiwan, Asia Pacific, European and North American markets with a starting price of $799 USD.

According to the company, the new white light emitting diode (WLED) display packs a pixel density of 157 pixels per inch (PPI). Additional hardware features include 1.07 billion colors, a brightness of 330cd/m², a 100,000,000:1 Asus Smart Contrast Ratio (ASCR), and a 1ms gray-to-gray (GTG) fast response time.

"There is also Picture-in-Picture (PiP) and Picture-by-Picture (PbP) support, with users being able to switch between video sources easily. PiP mode lets users display content from a second input source in a window placed in one corner of the display, while PbP mode splits the screen down the middle," states the PR.

The new display includes the new SplendidPlus Video Intelligence Technology that optimizes videos and images by enhancing color brightness, contrast, and sharpness. Users can switch between different modes including Reading, Darkroom, Scenery, Standard, Theater, sRGB, Game, and Night View. Also included is the company's EyeCare Technology, which adopts Flicker-free technology and uses DC adjustment backlighting to reduce onscreen flicker.

This new display also packs the company's VividPixel technology that enhances image outlines and reduces noise bars. There's also the QuickFit Virtual Scale that allows users to preview actual-size photos and documents on screen prior to printing.

"The PB287Q features a slim, ergonomic design with a full range of swivel, tilt, pivot and height adjustments to provide the user with an ideal viewing position. The PB287Q is also VESA mount compatible for wall or stand mounting," states the PR.

The list of inputs and outputs include DisplayPort 1.2, one HDMI 1.4 port, one HDMI 1.4 port that supports MHL, 3.5 mm audio input and 3.5 mm audio output. The panel can pivot 90 degrees, tilt 20 degrees to -5 degrees, and swivel 60 degrees. The viewing angles are 170 degrees (H) / 160 degrees (V).

Discuss
Add your comment Display all 21 comments.
  • 0 Hide
    ragenalien , April 30, 2014 2:19 PM
    Looks like the same panel used in the samsung U28D590D. 60hz TN with 8 bit color expanded to 10 with some kind of demon magic.
  • 0 Hide
    icrf , April 30, 2014 2:52 PM
    HDMI 1.4, not 2.0, so only 30 Hz there. The only way to get 60 Hz is over DisplayPort, and even then, only using MST, which isn't exactly ideal, as consistency can be finicky.

    I know, no video cards output HDMI 2.0, either, but something has to be first, right?
  • 0 Hide
    firefoxx04 , April 30, 2014 3:04 PM
    Nxic reviewed this over a week ago at least. . . .
  • 0 Hide
    firefoxx04 , April 30, 2014 3:04 PM
    Ncix reviewed this over a week ago at least. . . .
  • 0 Hide
    knowom , April 30, 2014 3:18 PM
    I wouldn't pay $400's for it let alone $800 marginally more resolution space than 2x1080p displays which can be had for $100's-$150 routinely now.

    It's real world value worth is more like $200-$300's if comparing objectively especially taken into account it's certainly cheaper to mass produce a fair amount of less of both glass and plastic involved.
  • 0 Hide
    David Dewis , April 30, 2014 3:35 PM
    Quote:
    I wouldn't pay $400's for it let alone $800 marginally more resolution space than 2x1080p displays which can be had for $100's-$150 routinely now.

    It's real world value worth is more like $200-$300's if comparing objectively especially taken into account it's certainly cheaper to mass produce a fair amount of less of both glass and plastic involved.


    I wouldn't say that 4x the resolution of 1080p is marginal. That is what it is. 3840 x 2160. My samsung u28d590d is due for delivery tomorrow and I intend to run it with my r9 290 which will be xfired withing the next month or two. It cost me £480, only slightly more than the cost of a decent 1440p monitor in the UK.
  • 0 Hide
    blaint , April 30, 2014 4:39 PM
    Quote:
    HDMI 1.4, not 2.0, so only 30 Hz there. The only way to get 60 Hz is over DisplayPort, and even then, only using MST, which isn't exactly ideal, as consistency can be finicky.

    I know, no video cards output HDMI 2.0, either, but something has to be first, right?


    Yeah, at this point I am starting to feel like video card companies are playing a game of chicken with the display manufacturers. I understand a fair amount of R&D and product design goes into each respective release, but let's face it, HDMI 2.0 wasn't just sprung on us a couple weeks ago. It's been in the works for quite a while now, and the consortium finalized it many months ago.

    To some excuse I will forgive the card companies, The length of time between their major chip refreshes is longer (relatively speaking), but even they only get a minor pass since the math on 4K bandwidth requirements didn't require the Rosetta Stone to interpret.

    It isn't exactly an industry secret that 1.4 does not have the bandwidth to support the specs they are touting (4K@60) so the fact that they to waltzed right passed 2.0 and settled is frankly baffling to me. It is utterly beside the point that there are no 2.0 video cards out yet. There WILL be soon enough, and when there finally are, THIS panel will not be on my list of candidates.

    Nice waste of resources, Asus.
  • 2 Hide
    David Dewis , April 30, 2014 5:18 PM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    HDMI 1.4, not 2.0, so only 30 Hz there. The only way to get 60 Hz is over DisplayPort, and even then, only using MST, which isn't exactly ideal, as consistency can be finicky.

    I know, no video cards output HDMI 2.0, either, but something has to be first, right?


    Yeah, at this point I am starting to feel like video card companies are playing a game of chicken with the display manufacturers. I understand a fair amount of R&D and product design goes into each respective release, but let's face it, HDMI 2.0 wasn't just sprung on us a couple weeks ago. It's been in the works for quite a while now, and the consortium finalized it many months ago.

    To some excuse I will forgive the card companies, The length of time between their major chip refreshes is longer (relatively speaking), but even they only get a minor pass since the math on 4K bandwidth requirements didn't require the Rosetta Stone to interpret.

    It isn't exactly an industry secret that 1.4 does not have the bandwidth to support the specs they are touting (4K@60) so the fact that they to waltzed right passed 2.0 and settled is frankly baffling to me. It is utterly beside the point that there are no 2.0 video cards out yet. There WILL be soon enough, and when there finally are, THIS panel will not be on my list of candidates.

    Nice waste of resources, Asus.


    I guess GPU manufactures are happy to rely on display port at this time instead of adding hdmi2.0. Most enthusiasts have a monitor that supports DP as will most 4k displays. Why add a new tech which could bump up price if it's not really required by the market just yet.
  • -6 Hide
    CaMiX , April 30, 2014 5:39 PM
    No Gsync?
  • 1 Hide
    lancelot123 , April 30, 2014 6:02 PM
    I'm happy with the pixel density of my current monitor, 24" 1200p. This makes a 28" 4K too small in my opinion. I would love to see a cheap 48" 4K monitor.
  • -1 Hide
    blaint , April 30, 2014 8:10 PM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Quote:
    HDMI 1.4, not 2.0, so only 30 Hz there. The only way to get 60 Hz is over DisplayPort, and even then, only using MST, which isn't exactly ideal, as consistency can be finicky.

    I know, no video cards output HDMI 2.0, either, but something has to be first, right?


    Yeah, at this point I am starting to feel like video card companies are playing a game of chicken with the display manufacturers. I understand a fair amount of R&D and product design goes into each respective release, but let's face it, HDMI 2.0 wasn't just sprung on us a couple weeks ago. It's been in the works for quite a while now, and the consortium finalized it many months ago.

    To some excuse I will forgive the card companies, The length of time between their major chip refreshes is longer (relatively speaking), but even they only get a minor pass since the math on 4K bandwidth requirements didn't require the Rosetta Stone to interpret.

    It isn't exactly an industry secret that 1.4 does not have the bandwidth to support the specs they are touting (4K@60) so the fact that they to waltzed right passed 2.0 and settled is frankly baffling to me. It is utterly beside the point that there are no 2.0 video cards out yet. There WILL be soon enough, and when there finally are, THIS panel will not be on my list of candidates.

    Nice waste of resources, Asus.


    I guess GPU manufactures are happy to rely on display port at this time instead of adding hdmi2.0. Most enthusiasts have a monitor that supports DP as will most 4k displays. Why add a new tech which could bump up price if it's not really required by the market just yet.

    And by all counts, DP is a barely passable solution at best. Honestly, I don't care if they bump the price, so long as it works without any of the screwy quirks present with the current offering.

    All they are doing is hurting themselves by not pushing the tech forward. I am not about to drop a couple grand for a decent 4K setup when it isn't truly decent and without bugs. I scaled back from a pair of 780ti cards to a single one because 2 would have been overkill. And I won't buy a 4k display until I have the cards to drive it with the quality I want.

    And yes, more GSync please.
  • 3 Hide
    mrmez , April 30, 2014 11:12 PM
    Quote:
    I wouldn't pay $400's for it let alone $800 marginally more resolution space than 2x1080p displays which can be had for $100's-$150 routinely now.

    It's real world value worth is more like $200-$300's if comparing objectively especially taken into account it's certainly cheaper to mass produce a fair amount of less of both glass and plastic involved.



    What an idiot.

    Firstly, doubling the x and y pixels results in 4x the pixels. Not double. You'd have to cram 4 1080 monitors into one.

    Secondly, ever heard of diminishing returns? Especially on new tech.

    Lastly, i don't know where you are getting your prices, but in Aus I can get a rubbish BenQ 1080 27" for a little under $300, so I'm not sure on what planet I could get a bigger screen with 4x the pixels for the same price or less.
  • 7 Hide
    JOSHSKORN , April 30, 2014 11:54 PM
    "Gamers" don't have 60Hz in mind. More like 120Hz.
  • 1 Hide
    nikolajj , May 1, 2014 12:55 AM
    When will we see a 4K, 1ms, 120/140hz monitor? I would love that! This looks nice tho.
  • 1 Hide
    sea monkey , May 1, 2014 8:31 AM
    Any display touting 'True 4K' should have 4,000 lines of horizontal resolution.
  • 1 Hide
    David Dewis , May 1, 2014 8:55 AM
    Quote:
    Any display touting 'True 4K' should have 4,000 lines of horizontal resolution.


    These monitors technically fall under the UHD brand, which most of the industry are accepting as 4k. Only a couple of movie studios are using the actual 4000pixels horizontal standard which seems like a waste considering most monitor and tv manufactures are supporting the UHD standard so very few people will ever see the extra 200 or so lines.
  • 1 Hide
    jasonelmore , May 1, 2014 3:11 PM
    Quote:
    Quote:

    What an idiot.

    Firstly, doubling the x and y pixels results in 4x the pixels. Not double. You'd have to cram 4 1080 monitors into one.

    Secondly, ever heard of diminishing returns? Especially on new tech.

    Lastly, i don't know where you are getting your prices, but in Aus I can get a rubbish BenQ 1080 27" for a little under $300, so I'm not sure on what planet I could get a bigger screen with 4x the pixels for the same price or less.


    It's 4X the Pixels' NOT 4X the resolution. lrn2square
  • -2 Hide
    f-14 , May 1, 2014 6:42 PM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Any display touting 'True 4K' should have 4,000 lines of horizontal resolution.


    These monitors technically fall under the UHD brand, which most of the industry are accepting as 4k. Only a couple of movie studios are using the actual 4000pixels horizontal standard which seems like a waste considering most monitor and tv manufactures are supporting the UHD standard so very few people will ever see the extra 200 or so lines.

    i don't call 3800 something "4K" . not in my pay check, especially before taxes. nobody calls their 3.8 GHZ cpu "4K" either. there is a price tag affixed to those labels for a reason one of which HDMI is NEVER going to fulfill...other wise graphics cards would still be on AGP #X
  • -1 Hide
    f-14 , May 1, 2014 6:42 PM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Any display touting 'True 4K' should have 4,000 lines of horizontal resolution.


    These monitors technically fall under the UHD brand, which most of the industry are accepting as 4k. Only a couple of movie studios are using the actual 4000pixels horizontal standard which seems like a waste considering most monitor and tv manufactures are supporting the UHD standard so very few people will ever see the extra 200 or so lines.

    i don't call 3800 something "4K" . not in my pay check, especially before taxes. nobody calls their 3.8 GHZ cpu "4K" either. there is a price tag affixed to those labels for a reason one of which HDMI is NEVER going to fulfill...other wise graphics cards would still be on AGP #X
  • -1 Hide
    mrmez , May 1, 2014 8:30 PM
    Quote:
    "Gamers" don't have 60Hz in mind. More like 120Hz.


    According to Tom's GFX bench, the only single card capable of playing BF4 at 1080 above 120fps is the AMD R295x2.
    In addition to a kilowatt power supply, I'm not too sure how many gamers have ~$1,500 to spend on a single GFX card.

    Games like Thief and Hitman can't even crack 100fps with that card, so I'm not sure how much use a 120Hz monitor will be.
Display more comments
React To This Article