Asus ROG Swift PG43UQ 4K 144Hz HDMI 2.1 monitor launched

[HEXUS]

43-incher is aimed at 4K fast refresh FreeSync / G-Sync gamers on PC and next gen console.

Read more.

[Kushan]

I think there's some confusion here - the PG43UQ is a HDMI 2.0 monitor, not 2.1. I think the press release from Asus isn't clear that there's another monitor similar to the PG43UQ with HDMI2.1 support coming, or is this an update to the PG43UQ? The linked blog post on the PG43UQ specifically only talks HDMI 2.0.

[syristix]

Might be a tad cynical here but is this not a tv that's been rebranded as a monitor. As for the price it will be ludicrous. Not a big LG fan but their 48" CX model will prob cost the same as the 43" Asus by the time it gets here and be just as immersive

[mtyson]

I think there's some confusion here - the PG43UQ is a HDMI 2.0 monitor, not 2.1. I think the press release from Asus isn't clear that there's another monitor similar to the PG43UQ with HDMI2.1 support coming, or is this an update to the PG43UQ? The linked blog post on the PG43UQ specifically only talks HDMI 2.0.

Yes, two press releases of similar 43-inch Asus ROG 4K fast refresh gaming monitors on the same day mangled my brain... All should be clearer now, story updated/segmented.

[quantasm]

My previous 2 monitors were both Asus and both failed the year after warranty ended. I think Asus build quality is on a downward trend across many of it's products these days.

[SUPERDUKE]

On paper, the perfect monitor until our dream is ruined with a ridiculous price tag.

[DevDrake]

Great the monitors like that starts to appear, seems a viable monitor for me soon will be produced

[Tunnah]

The 43" Acer Predator CG437KP has been around a while, I've wanted one for months but that price tag has been painful. Even though this has a similar tag I hope more large screens come out with these specs and drive down the prices. If one ends up at the £1000 point I'd get one in a heartbeat

[richto]

Launched? I got my PG43UQ from Scan back in June.

[AGTDenton]

Is there much point in HDMI any more? If DP is taking over with Thunderbolt with a much nicer connector and which won't require a licence soon, whats the point of continuing with HDMI?
Most high end monitors have forced you to use DP in the last couple of years to get the most out of it and all the computers we've bought for the office this year have lacked HDMI entirely. So I can't really see the purpose of its future. I could well see TVs adopting Thunderbolt in future, afterall they're practically a computer now anyway and if you need old equipment to work converters or just 2 different ended cables are widely available.

[BigBANGerZ]

32" is the interesting one imho but ultimately pointless if it is 'ROG comedy pricing' for 99.99% of gamers. Acer are apparently brining out a more competitive model very soon which should start to set the benchmark, with Philips doing something early 2021.

43" sounds nice and for simmers it could genuinely work but that size is just too large for desktop use you'd need a dining table sized desk.

48" is a TV sorry but it is, great for consoles near on useless for PC gaming unless you have some niche case.

[richto]

I think there's some confusion here - the PG43UQ is a HDMI 2.0 monitor, not 2.1. I think the press release from Asus isn't clear that there's another monitor similar to the PG43UQ with HDMI2.1 support coming, or is this an update to the PG43UQ? The linked blog post on the PG43UQ specifically only talks HDMI 2.0.

Advertised as HDMI 2.0 for now but it already supports various HDMI 2.1 features such as DSC so I would be surprised if it isnt eventually certified as HDMI 2.1. Especially with the Xbox Series X out this year. (And to a lesser extent the PS5 but that wont seriously support 4K 120Hz gaming as it has far more limited CPU and GPU).

[richto]

43" sounds nice and for simmers it could genuinely work but that size is just too large for desktop use you'd need a dining table sized desk.

Actually 43" is the perfect size for a normal size small desk and chair with the top of the monitor being at about eye level when sitting up.

[BigBANGerZ]

43" sounds nice and for simmers it could genuinely work but that size is just too large for desktop use you'd need a dining table sized desk.

Actually 43" is the perfect size for a normal size small desk and chair with the top of the monitor being at about eye level when sitting up.

Its not about eye level its about gaming, you run a fast pace fps game on a 43" 16:9 screen at arm's length (which is a decent depth of a desk) and it won't be pleasant cos your peripheral vision will cause you to turn your head away from the centre which causes eyestrain, neck fatigue and creates nausea in some.

[richto]

You dont sit at arms length, you sit in a decent gaming chair slightly further than that and you dont need to move your head at all. I play in 24:9 on it for FPS. Its got acres of space and resolution for playing however you want.

[Ivanhoe123]

On paper, the perfect monitor until our dream is ruined with a ridiculous price tag.

Exactly, there's no way I'd spend that much on a monitor. As good as it is, I think it's poor value for money.