ASUS' VA278Q: 27-inch 2560 x 1440 IPS Display Due Out This Year
by Anand Lal Shimpi on January 9, 2012 6:32 PM EST- Posted in
- Trade Shows
- Displays
- Asus
- CES
- CES 2012
ASUS just showed me their first 27-inch 2560 x 1440 IPS panel (pictured above). Pricing and availability are both unknowns although I am hearing 2H 2012 may be likely for the display. There are VGA, DL-DVI, DP and HDMI inputs of course. The panel can be rotated 90 degrees as well.
We'll keep you posted as ASUS finalizes details on the VA278Q.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
46 Comments
View All Comments
piroroadkill - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
Disagree for PC use.tumbleweed - Monday, January 9, 2012 - link
ARE there even any 16:9 30" monitors? All of the ones I know of are 2560x1600 (16:10). The 27" ones are, however, 16:9. *sigh*Exodite - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
Why settle for 16*10?4*3, or 5*4 like I'm using currently, is even better.
dcollins - Friday, January 13, 2012 - link
Just get over it. 16:10 is dead and 16:9 is the standard that everyone is using. Try moving your windows task bar to the left or right of the screen: it helps a lot when you get used to it.Grizzlebee - Monday, January 9, 2012 - link
Do people really think they would include a version of hdmi that isn't capable of 2560 x 1440? What good would that be?palladium - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
The HDMI on Dell U2711 can only do 1920 by 1200. It is still a great monitor, but it just means that you can only get 2560 with DP and DL-DVIB3an - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
Both my Dell and HP 30" monitors have HDMI but neither can do 2560x1600. Only 1080p with HDMI.Fuck HDMI though, DisplayPort is the way to go and with many AMD cards they come with atleast two DP's.
Haydon - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
Yes they would. See my long post above as to why. No 2560x1600 or 2560x1440 monitor has ever been sold that can do 60 Hz progressive over HDMI despite all of them in the last few years being sold with HDMI ports.chris1317 - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
I have to agree with the posters. 16x9 was only a cash saving exercise with spin placed on the announcement to make it look like the manufacturers were doing you a favour.I really do not see the advantage of less pixels on a screen
DanNeely - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
At a minimum if all displays go 16;9 I could be mollified by a 32/33" 2844x1600 monitor. Same 100DPI and vertical resolution as the pair of 1200x1600 panels I use as flanking displays with my current 30" monitor.