Wednesday, August 5th 2020

ASUS Announces World's First HDMI 2.1 Certified Gaming Monitors

ASUS Republic of Gamers (ROG) announced that its upcoming 43-inch gaming monitor is the first monitor to receive HDMI 2.1 certification, passing all compatibility and validation tests conducted by leading Allion Labs, Inc - an international company specializing in product testing.

The new ROG monitor is compatible with next-generation consoles, with HDMI 2.1 giving it a full bandwidth of up to 48 Gbps to support 4K UHD (3840 x 2160) visuals at variable refresh rates of up to 120 Hz. Auto Low Latency also enables the game console to control the processing mode of the display, prioritizing low latency or processing quality depending on the content. Allion Labs subjected the monitor to stringent Fixed Rate Link (FRL) tests, including FRL Electrical, FRL Pixel Decoding and FRL Protocol tests, to ensure full compatibility with upcoming HDMI 2.1 devices.
"ROG is the first partner to provide a HDMI 2.1 gaming monitor for certification. As a leading test lab in the world, it's our mission to assure products or services before they are launched. We are thrilled to be part of the success of ROG and this groundbreaking gaming monitor," said Brian Shih, Vice President of Logo & HW Validation Consulting at Allion Labs.

With the impending arrival of next-generation gaming consoles later this year, ROG has an entire series of HDMI 2.1 gaming monitors for the holiday season. These monitors are available in 27-, 32- and 43-inch models.

As one of the world's leading gaming monitor brands, ROG constantly pushes boundaries to provide gamers with the most advanced display technologies for breathtaking gaming visuals. ROG was the first in the world to offer gamers the ROG Swift PG258Q 240 Hz gaming monitor, ROG Swift PG43UQ 4K 144 Hz Digital Stream Compression (DSC) gaming monitor and ROG Swift 360 Hz gaming monitor.
Source: VideoCardz
Add your own comment

23 Comments on ASUS Announces World's First HDMI 2.1 Certified Gaming Monitors

#1
Chomiq
Probably the same VA panel as their last 43" model.
Posted on Reply
#2
InVasMani
These all suppose to be 4K or we going to see some resolution and refresh rate variation between the different panels sizes and HDMI 2.1 spec?
Posted on Reply
#3
Jomale
The GPU has to be strong, 4k@120hz
Posted on Reply
#4
Chomiq
Jomale
The GPU has to be strong, 4k@120hz
4k 120 mode was announced for next Halo on Series X.
Posted on Reply
#5
Legacy-ZA
How cute, but does it have DP 2.0?
Posted on Reply
#6
kinjx11
let me guess the pricing, 2x the price of LG models ?!!
Posted on Reply
#7
tomc100
Legacy-ZA
How cute, but does it have DP 2.0?
Yeah, why hdmi 2.1 before DP 2.0? Also, do you need a special hdmi cable to take advantage of either?
Posted on Reply
#8
Kohl Baas
tomc100
Yeah, why hdmi 2.1 before DP 2.0? Also, do you need a special hdmi cable to take advantage of either?
Well, one thing I can say for sure: You'll need no HDMI cable of any kind to take advantage of DP2.0. :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#9
Chomiq
tomc100
Yeah, why hdmi 2.1 before DP 2.0?
Because you can sell them to people that want to buy next gen consoles.
Posted on Reply
#10
Ravenmaster
As long as they don't use smudgy VA panels, their next line of monitors should do well.
Posted on Reply
#12
Bruno Vieira
32'' 4K120 is my working/gaming target, gpus will get there with time. I can always lower the render resolution.
Posted on Reply
#13
tomc100
Chomiq
Because you can sell them to people that want to buy next gen consoles.
It looks like you can only take advantage of hdmi 2.1 with new consoles since there are no gpu that have hdmi 2.1 ports.
Posted on Reply
#14
Bruno Vieira
tomc100
It looks like you can only take advantage of hdmi 2.1 with new consoles since there are no gpu that have hdmi 2.1 ports.
New gpus with hdmi 2.1 will be available before the new consoles are.
Posted on Reply
#15
Valantar
About time! That 32" looks like exactly what I've been looking for. I'm obviously expecting HDR support - anything else would be downright silly. Hopefully pricing is reasonable, but ... this is Asus ROG, so likely not. They do currently have a 43" 4k144Hz FS2 HDR one that's hovering around $1000, so here's hoping, I guess.

HDMI 2.1 is coming to consoles, and I'll eat my shorts if it isn't also on the upcoming GPUs from both camps. Considering that AMD's renoir APUs support it (and B550 motherboards), it would be lunacy if their upcoming dGPUs were any worse.

So, Asus, when you flesh out the specs for these, please make them match or exceed this for the 32": 120Hz, ULMB Sync, HDR600 (including wide gamut support and decent calibration), at least two HDMI 2.1 ports, at least one DP + one USB-C with DP alt mode, a decent USB hub, VESA 100mm mount, and preferably an integrated power supply. And less than $1000, okay? Pretty please? I would ask for no RGB and a minimalist design, but I'm not an idiot.
Posted on Reply
#16
simlife
Chomiq
4k 120 mode was announced for next Halo on Series X.
did they? i thought they announced 120 but didn't actually say at 4k at the same time. likely it will like some ps4 games have you choose frames or resolution
Posted on Reply
#17
InVasMani
Bruno Vieira
32'' 4K120 is my working/gaming target, gpus will get there with time. I can always lower the render resolution.
You may as well buy a lower resolution display with a higher refresh rate at that point is the only issue with that.
Posted on Reply
#18
Legacy-ZA
Chomiq
Because you can sell them to people that want to buy next gen consoles.
Why not both? Both camps would be happy.
Posted on Reply
#19
Valantar
InVasMani
You may as well buy a lower resolution display with a higher refresh rate at that point is the only issue with that.
While that is a decent approach in theory, it doesn't actually work out - at least not in my case. I use my PC both for work and gaming. I currently have a 27" 1440p monitor at 100% scaling, and going lower DPI (for example 32" 1440p) is entirely out of the question as it would be terrible for work. I also want a bigger monitor for gaming. And while my main gaming rig is my PC, I also game on consoles. I have considered getting a ~32" 1080p high refresh rate monitor for gaming alone, but none of those have good featuresets (good HDR, etc.), and it would be a serious limitation for the upcoming consoles - not primarily due to the lower resolution, but mainly due to the lack of HDMI 2.1 making a lot of good features incompatible with the monitor. Ultrawides have been considered, but again, those don't work with consoles (and not that many PC games either). And the truth of the matter is that properly upscaled 1440p on a 4k display at a suitable viewing distance is only marginally less sharp than native 1440p on a same size display at the same viewing distance. So a native 4k120 HDMI 2.1 display does represent the best overall option as it's great for productivity, while allowing for a larger size and gaming at high refresh rates as long as one isn't tied down to needing to render at 100% resolution. Heck, set your PC GPU to Integer Scaling and run your games at 1080p and you won't lose any sharpness over a native 1080p display of the same size either (though upscaled 1440p is likely to look better due to the increased detail).

So after a few years of consideration, I've landed on a large-ish (~32") 16:9 HDMI 2.1 monitor being the only viable option, as it represents the solution with (by far!) the least number of compromises.
Posted on Reply
#20
InVasMani
I'll probably end up getting something like the VIOTEK GNV27DB or something similar in specs and price range. I think it's a good bang for buck option. I still really want to hold out for HDMI 2.1 spec should be worth the wait.
Posted on Reply
#21
Bruno Vieira
InVasMani
You may as well buy a lower resolution display with a higher refresh rate at that point is the only issue with that.
I'm really used to work with 4k displays, 1440p is too small, cant fit enough and I think 28 is kinda big to 1440p at this point. Ultrawide does not benefit me and 2 monitors take 2 much space
Posted on Reply
#22
simlife
Chomiq
4k 120 mode was announced for next Halo on Series X.
together?.. no single player probly 4k 60 with dynamic rez ... no open world game in the world is even close to 4k 120... the new 700 dollar 3080 card cant do 4k 60 ultra in many games.. the base x box starwars game is 720 and 30 fps..
Posted on Reply
#23
Valantar
simlife
together?.. no single player probly 4k 60 with dynamic rez ... no open world game in the world is even close to 4k 120... the new 700 dollar 3080 card cant do 4k 60 ultra in many games.. the base x box starwars game is 720 and 30 fps..
The base Xbox One also has a 1.4tflop GPU (that performs worse per tflop than RDNA). So that comparison is kind of silly. (Also, "starwars game"? Which one? Battlefront? 2? Jedi Fallen Order?) Also, note that you said that the 3080 can't do 4k60 ultra in many games (though the TPU review's average fps of 97.2 at 4k begs to differ). Consoles don't run games at Ultra settings, as Ultra settings are typically way more expensive than what they are worth in terms of actually perceptible quality increases vs. performance cost. Turn those settings down to High, and you're likely to see 4k120 consistently across nearly any title for the 3080. Add in some dynamic resolution scaling and/or VRS, and 4k120 for an XSX title certainly isn't impossible - though I personally think it'll be more like 4k >60 <120, variable frame rate, VSYNC/ enabled unless you have a FreeSync/HDMI 2.1 Adaptive Sync display. It obviously also depends on what type of visual style and quality/framerate balance the developers are aiming for. I'm definitely not saying I think Halo Infinite will run at a steady 4k120, but your reasoning is pretty flawed here.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment