LG site reveals 27” FreeSync monitor with 4K IPS panel

There's a new variable-refresh monitor in town—or halfway around the world, anyway. LG's Australian site lists the 27MU67, a 27-incher with all the right buzzwords attached. The display has an IPS panel with a 4K resolution, and it's also infused with AMD's FreeSync tech.

Although the full specifications are missing from the product page, the bullet points reveal a few choice details. The display boasts 10-bit color and 99% sRGB coverage, according to LG. And, as one might expect, the resolution is 3840×2160 rather than a "full" 4K.

Input is split between dual HDMI ports, one DisplayPort, and one Mini DP. A four-way split-screen mode can show images from all those inputs at once. The stand is fully adjustable, but there doesn't appear to be an integrated USB hub onboard.

Crucially, the product page lacks information on the range of supported refresh rates. Given what we know about other 4K FreeSync displays, don't expect a peak frequency over 60Hz.

I can't find a press release formally introducing the 27MU67, but LG pegs the price at $799 AUD, which works out to $619 USD. That seems about right given the price differences between other LG displays. The firm's 34" ultra-wide FreeSync monitor is listed at $849 in Australia and $650 in the U.S. Thanks to TFT Central for the tip.

Comments closed
    • anotherengineer
    • 5 years ago

    hmmmmm

    -IPS
    -probably 8-bit+frc for interpolated 10-bit
    -freesync
    -27″ size
    -4k rez
    -$650 US

    And yet
    [url<]http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=210-ADKB[/url<] -2560x1440 -$700 US reg -27" With that lower resolution shouldn't the price be lower than $650?? or [url<]http://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-48-class-47-6-diag--led-1080p-smart-hdtv-black/4380065.p?id=1219627840186&skuId=4380065[/url<] maybe only 1080, but it has network and small processor for the internet for about the same price as a 27" monitor, but the TV has probably 4 times the materials. I think there is something funny going on with monitor prices, but maybe I am just imagining things??

      • Airmantharp
      • 5 years ago

      That’s a Dell Ultrasharp you linked- you pay for those, and generally speaking, they’re worth it for professional use.

      And note that the LG panel will likely end up in a Dell at some point; but with better specs and out of the box calibration, for a few bucks more :D.

      • Pwnstar
      • 5 years ago

      Probably supply and demand.

    • Kretschmer
    • 5 years ago

    I’d happily settle downgrade to 1440P if it would give me 100+ Hz. 4K has too many drawbacks at this resolution, and refresh rate is a real killer app.

      • Topinio
      • 5 years ago

      Yeah, I hear you: I settled for a aspiration downgrade to QHD/1440p @ 100+ Hz after trying to hold out for UHD/2160p. VRR is so so game-changing that I dropped to QHD — which my 290X can drive at 60+ FPS on ultra in most games — and pulled the trigger on the BenQ XL2730Z and haven’t regretted it.

      Without getting into silly money and back into multi-GPU faff again, UHD VRR at even up to 60 FPS is out of range. Maybe I’ll reconsider when there’s a single GPU that can power UHD @ 100 FPS at properly shiny in-game settings, and a VRR UHD screen with a VRR range that goes north of 100 Hz. (Not going to happen any time soon ๐Ÿ™ )

    • auxy
    • 5 years ago

    Meh. It’s way too big! Get it down to 24″ and we might be talking. (*ยดโˆ€๏ฝ€*)

    That said, even as a Radeon owner, I’m still more interested in G-SYNC monitors for that sweet, sweet ULMB action. (ยดฮต๏ฝ€ )

    • auxy
    • 5 years ago

    (double post, do not reply!)

      • Pwnstar
      • 5 years ago

      Why not?

    • Tristan
    • 5 years ago

    Hope they fixed blur with FreeSync. Without overdrive, FreeSync is useless.

      • Topinio
      • 5 years ago

      Tried it?

      (Do, it’s really good, [i<]so[/i<] not useless. Best new thing since I went to a CRT that did 1600x1200 @ 72 Hz)

    • Vergil
    • 5 years ago

    Anybody know when we’ll get to see the first QD-Vision monitors on the market?

    • CampinCarl
    • 5 years ago

    Well, it ticks all the right boxes. But, is it going to be like the other monitors that have been promised for December…and then February…and then March…and now it is May and they are nowhere to be found?

    It does me no good if I can’t buy it, dangit!

    • moose17145
    • 5 years ago

    If this monitor were 1440 and a slightly higher refresh (even just 75 -90hz max) i would be all over this. As it stands right now though I dont have a system that would push 3840×2160 at drcent enough frame rates (freesync or not)

    Otherwise I love the wide gamut, 10bit, ips, freesync, etc. This is very close to the monitor i have been looking for. If i had a system capable of pushing 4k id probably get this. But i doubt my lone 290 will be able to drive this display properly, and another system overhaul is at least a year ahead of me still.

    • dymelos
    • 5 years ago

    What is the point in having such a small 4k screen? I don’t understand why more 30+ inch screens aren’t coming out. 4k at 27 inches is hardly noticeable over 1440p but the graphics hardware to power that is huge comparatively. Not to mention windows scaling is horrible, the only people I can see really interested in this is someone who built a Hackintosh. With each day I use my 40 inch ub8000 LG 4k tv for a monitor the more I’m glad I didn’t pass on the deal Fry’s had on it back on Black Friday last year.

      • jts888
      • 5 years ago

      I’m on a 49″ LG UF7600 now and loving it as well, with a modest but comfortable ppi of ~91.

      TVs with UHD@60Hz are nice, but you have to watch out seriously for issues like chroma support, PWM backlighting, and input latency. Do you use your UB8000 at 30Hz/4:4:4 or 60Hz/4:2:2? 60Hz/4:4:4 was the only reason I waited until this April to make the jump.

        • dymelos
        • 5 years ago

        I use mine at 60hz, I have been pretty happy with it for the most part. Every once and awhile I will get a flicker but thankfully its very rare and its never a distraction whenever I play a game or video off of youtube. Not sure what causes it I have tried it on each of the different inputs and it will happen with them. Thanks for pointing me in the direction of the screen you purchased jts, I did not know about it until now. Just sucks that the 43 inch is double what I paid for mine, (mine was 425 on sale brand new in box). I might pull the trigger on it and put the 40 inch as a spare tv in another room.

      • PrincipalSkinner
      • 5 years ago

      4K is trendy and Freesync is still young. I’d be quite content with 1440p with freesync, IPS and 60+Hz.
      Quite a shame Asus MG279Q turned out to be a failure.

      • Deanjo
      • 5 years ago

      [quote<]4k at 27 inches is hardly noticeable over 1440p[/quote<] I would have to disagree while looking at 27" Cinema display @ 1440p hooked up to the MBP and comparing it to the Retina. It's VERY noticeable difference.

      • Juba
      • 5 years ago

      I’m waiting for 24″ 4K 120Hz monitor, Disagree on no difference, just look at your phone even with such a small display you can see the difference with higher res.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 5 years ago

      I suspect monitor makers have figured out that the price point at which most users will bite, regardless of feature set or whatever, is $500-700 as long as the monitor appears to be “high end” and has the resolution most are expecting at the time (ie., 1080p for a while, then 1440p, and now 2160p).

      Now if you’re a monitor panel maker and most of your monitor maker customers want to make monitors for that price point, then you can either deliver less 30″ panels or more 27″ panels using the same amount of materials. If you go with the 27″ panel, you can deliver more and charge a tiny bit less, which will lead to an even slightly less overall cost. Or you can push the price point a smidgen higher for a 30″ display, which translates into a MUCH higher cost when monitor makers make the device.

      Plus, those same companies know that much greater than, say, 32″ panels for monitors are unwieldy and hard to sell, so there’s no room for a “high end halo product,” right? So why do that?

      If they deliver 27″ as the new norm, then they’ve left room for a solid 5 inches of improvement for that high end halo product to step in and net them a huge premium.

      No matter how you slice it, these companies have absolutely no reason to want to sell you a 30-ish inch 4K for anything close to the customary price point at which most customers buy a new monitor $500-700, which is why then 27″ monitors rule the roost and why, to answer your question, they are sold at all.

      Price point dictates everything. Price point of panels, price point of production, and price point set by the manufacturer. In the end, though, it’s the minimum of what users will pay that sets the standard by which all other things are decided.

      Cue The Lion King’s sound track and “The Circle of Liiiiife…”

      • alphadogg
      • 5 years ago

      Multi-monitor anyone? I prefer multiple mediums to one big monitor.

        • Airmantharp
        • 5 years ago

        I prefer no bezels.

      • jihadjoe
      • 5 years ago

      They’re using the higher resolution to increase PPI, not just to provide more screen real estate.

      I agree the bigger problem here is Windows and old apps that were designed for 96ppi.

    • JAMF
    • 5 years ago

    That Bezel!!! It’s not going to grace many Eyefinity setup. ๐Ÿ™

      • Airmantharp
      • 5 years ago

      I’m waiting for the 34″ 21:9 versions that (mostly) obviate the need for surround.

        • Tumbleweed
        • 5 years ago

        Is anyone even making a 5040×2160 panel yet?

          • Airmantharp
          • 5 years ago

          Haven’t seen one; 1440p is the most I’ve seen on the 21:9 monitors, and it’s the least I’m willing to accept, so I’m okay with that. That, and I have no real need for 4k-grade resolutions aside from ‘moar iz betta!’ rants and raves.

          For me, it’s mostly a side-grade too- I’m at 2560×1600, so the upgrade gets me less vertical resolution, but gains me about one more megapixel in total resolution with the extra width. The real upgrades of course would be G-Sync and the curved panel for better peripheral vision.

          • JustAnEngineer
          • 5 years ago

          Would 5120×2880 work for you?
          [url<]http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/category.aspx?c=us&category_id=6481&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&~ck=anav&nf=4723~0~20101899&navla=4723~0~20101899[/url<]

            • Airmantharp
            • 5 years ago

            There is that!

            (too much for me though ๐Ÿ˜‰ )

    • PrincipalSkinner
    • 5 years ago

    The predicament of purchasing a monitor is perpetually protracting.
    edit:
    Perhaps preordering a monitor is my profound priority.

      • Neutronbeam
      • 5 years ago

      Predictably perfectly pronounced!

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 5 years ago

      Purportedly.

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 5 years ago

    At this point, I expect when a monitor doesn’t list its refresh rate, I know it’s MAXIMUM, but I still don’t know how low the Freesync monitor will go. With Freesync, MINIMUM supported is as important as MAXIMUM. Alas, monitor makers haven’t caught up with this fact yet.

      • jts888
      • 5 years ago

      In theory, FreeSync could make minimum rates irrelevant as well by just pushing duplicate frames over the wire the same way G-sync does internally. It’s rather confusing why they have not done this already, but they may have assumed that worst-case 7-8 ms frame delays don’t mean much when frame spacing is already below the 25-35 ms low-fps floor range.

    • jts888
    • 5 years ago

    Geoff, are you guys hearing any murmurings about DisplayPort 1.3 stuff yet?
    I’ve been hoping that the R9 300 series release in a few weeks would at least bring support from the GPU side for UHD@120Hz + Adaptive-sync.

    Plenty of panels and t-cons in the TV market are already internally UHD@120Hz, and it would be fantastic if we could finally start seeing whole-chain support on the PC.

    • Jakubgt
    • 5 years ago

    I’m still waiting on the Samsung U32E850R monitor that was announced a while back. Right now we have no 30″+ 4K IPS freesync monitors on the market.

    • Vergil
    • 5 years ago

    Sweet, would’ve been sweeter if the panel were an OLED. And the price is just perfect for such a beauty.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This