Incoming MSI QD-OLED Gaming Monitors Receive Permanent Price Cuts

[T0@st]

MSI is preparing to launch its MPG 321URX QD-OLED monitor this month—we first spotted this model during an official expansion of the company's QD-OLED gaming monitor lineup—utilizing Samsung Display Gen 3 panels. The announcement outlined an initial MSRP of $1199 for MSI's MPG 321URX gaming monitor, although a time-limited special introductory offer of $949 was later advertised. ASUS Republic of Gamers (ROG) released its Swift OLED PG32UCDM gaming monitor (in USA and UK markets) late last week—competing at a $1299 price point with MSI's 321URX model. The two companies are attempting to outdo each other—earlier this month MSI pledged a 3-year warranty on its OLED panel products, semi-forcing ASUS into matching that generous offer—they previously advertised a two-year period for ROG Swift OLED monitors.

Monitors Unboxed has investigated alleged permanent MSI MSRP price cuts—affecting the MPG 321URX, as well the 49-inch 491CQP and 27-inch 271QRX QD-OLED models. The manufacturer appears prepped to undercut its competition to the tune of $350 (MPG 321URX vs. PG32UCDM): "I've gotten a second update from MSI regarding the MSRP of their QD-OLEDs. They have decided to change their mind and offer their previously lowered pricing permanently, instead of just as an introductory price. That means the official MSRPs of their products are as follows (read more after the jump)." At the time of writing, MSI's MPG 321URX QD-OLED is available to pre-order at a few North American and UK e-tailers, although a couple of listings state the item is "coming soon," or due in stock by early April.




According to a Monitors Unboxed comment, the revised prices are:

• MSI MPG 321URX QD-OLED 32" at US$949.99
• MSI MPG 271QRX QD-OLED 27" at US$799.99
• MSI MPG 491CQP QD-OLED 49" at US$1099.99

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Denver]

It's strange that an OLED TV (larger) costs less than a 32" monitor.

 

[Vayra86]

It's strange that an OLED TV (larger) costs less than a 32" monitor.

They oughta make an oled monitor with an Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, TikTok, Disney, HBO and Instagram button on the front, then it'd be same price

 

[R0H1T]

It's strange that an OLED TV (larger) costs less than a 32" monitor.

Not strange at all, they're at times sold at a loss as well. They recoup money with their preloaded "apps" or built in adware!

 

[Denver]

They oughta make an oled monitor with an Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, TikTok, Disney, HBO and Instagram button on the front, then it'd be same price

Please send the idea to the manufacturers. If they can adjust the prices to be more reasonable, I don't foresee any issues.

 

[Vayra86]

Please send the idea to the manufacturers. If they can adjust the prices to be more reasonable, I don't foresee any issues.

Next year we'll be looking at a copy of this news post. Like an exact copy. 'Inflation' canceled our savings

 

[Metroid]

The only one to get is the MEG version with DP 2.1 but that one will cost a lot more for it, I'm sure of it.

 

[Baba]

It's strange that an OLED TV (larger) costs less than a 32" monitor.

Panels are not the same. Samsung OLED TVs just got bumped from 120Hz to 144Hz. These Samsung panel based monitors are at 240Hz.
Add KVM switch and DisplayPort.

Very competitive price. Inferior LG WOLED 42" C3/4 panel is the same price. More real estate but it could be too much for some. I already have a 32" so I know it will work for my setup. I'll be getting this once some reviews are out and confirm all is well.

 

[Upgrayedd]

The only one to get is the MEG version with DP 2.1 but that one will cost a lot more for it, I'm sure of it.

The lack of DP 2.1 made these instanty outdated. Totally uninterested.

They seem like console first displays to me. Like they're not meant for PC but they'll work with PC.

 

[Baba]

The only one to get is the MEG version with DP 2.1 but that one will cost a lot more for it, I'm sure of it.

That's a totally different monitor. https://www.msi.com/Monitor/MEG-342C-QD-OLED

Both ports can handle 240Hz. If DP1.4 bothers you still why not use HDMI instead?

Display Port: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)
HDMI™ 2.1: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)
Type C(DP alt.): 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz) and 90W PD charging

 

[Metroid]

That's a totally different monitor. https://www.msi.com/Monitor/MEG-342C-QD-OLED

Both ports can handle 240Hz. If DP1.4 bothers you still why not use HDMI instead?

Display Port: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)
HDMI™ 2.1: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)
Type C(DP alt.): 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz) and 90W PD charging

It's not lossless. They will tell you the compressed image looks lossless, technical people will never fall for the BS.

 

[kapone32]

Well, what were the prices before? Those are still high.

 

[Veseleil]

Considering that any decent 32" UHD IPS is not much cheaper, it's not bad, though it's still a dream away from my budget.

 

[mechtech]

too bad that 27" wasn't 4k....................

 

[konga]

It's not lossless. They will tell you the compressed image looks lossless, technical people will never fall for the BS.

It's "visually lossless," as in extremely difficult to tell the difference, even for experienced users looking at compressed and uncompressed images side by side. I have actually used DSC monitors side by side with non-DSC monitors for a few years now, and not once have I been able to tell a difference. I'd consider DSC safe for visual production work, even. Don't let that aspect be what scares you away. The only valid reason to avoid DSC is if you like using DLDSR, because Nvidia drivers don't support DLDSR over DSC currently.

 

[Upgrayedd]

That's a totally different monitor. https://www.msi.com/Monitor/MEG-342C-QD-OLED

Both ports can handle 240Hz. If DP1.4 bothers you still why not use HDMI instead?

Display Port: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)
HDMI™ 2.1: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)
Type C(DP alt.): 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz) and 90W PD charging

lol that's a good one because neither one of them can do that without a crutch. That's why it seems like it's a console display more than anything.

I had way too many problems setting up one of the new 240Hz 1440p LG displays via HDMI 2.1. I ended up having to use a 3rd party tool and delete some stuff related to LG's implementation of HDMI and its metadata. I did like LFC+G-Sync though, that was pretty cool once I got the display working.

But with Display port you just don't have those problems when connected to a PC. DP 2.1 is also much faster than HDMI 2.1
HDMI 2.1 is good for like 4K 150Hz 10-bit uncompressed.
DP 1.4a is like 95Hz
DP 2.1 is like 265Hz

 

[Chaitanya]

They oughta make an oled monitor with an Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, TikTok, Disney, HBO and Instagram button on the front, then it'd be same price

Samsung is already charging extra for "smart" monitors.

 

[trsttte]

Samsung is already charging extra for "smart" monitors.

LG as well.

 

[Keivz]

It's "visually lossless," as in extremely difficult to tell the difference, even for experienced users looking at compressed and uncompressed images side by side. I have actually used DSC monitors side by side with non-DSC monitors for a few years now, and not once have I been able to tell a difference. I'd consider DSC safe for visual production work, even. Don't let that aspect be what scares you away. The only valid reason to avoid DSC is if you like using DLDSR, because Nvidia drivers don't support DLDSR over DSC currently.

You can absolutely use dldsr with DSC—to a point. I use it all the time with my 4k144hz monitor (10 bit hdr). I’ve only run into trouble at higher levels of dsc (eg 4k160hz) or with multi monitors (still useable to a degree).

 

[sephiroth117]

In Europe the 32 inch is 1400EUR still…

that US/EU delta for those specific monitors is absolutely bonkers, they won’t have my money, I’ll wait for asus/gigabyte/hp to release their own version of that panel in EU

 

[trsttte]

In Europe the 32 inch is 1400EUR still…

that US/EU delta for those specific monitors is absolutely bonkers, they won’t have my money, I’ll wait for asus/gigabyte/hp to release their own version of that panel in EU

US prices don't include taxes, Europe ones do. But you're right about waiting for the same price reduction the US market got to apply to Europe

 

[Baba]

• 32" Asus PG32UCDM QD-OLED – $1,299.00
  
  
• 27" MSI 271QPX QD-OLED – $749.99
• 27" MSI 271QRX QD-OLED – $799.99 (with USB ports)
  
  
• 32" MSI 321UPX QD-OLED – $899.99
• 32" MSI 321URX QD-OLED – $949.99 (with USB ports)
  
  
• 34" MSI 341CQP QD-OLED – $899.99
  
  
• 49" MSI 491CQP QD-OLED – $1,099.99

Here are the prices so far. Could save $50 if you don't need USB-A ports on your monitor.

Here is all that's coming out.

27"	LG 27GS95QE	WOLED	1440p	16:9 flat	240Hz
32"	LG 32GS95UE	WOLED	4K	16:9 flat	240/480Hz
34"	LG 34GS95QE	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
39"	LG 39GS95QE	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
45"	LG 45GS95QE	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
45"	LG 45GS96QB	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
27"	Asus PG27AQDP	WOLED	1440p	16:9 flat	480Hz	BFI
32"	Asus PG32UCDM	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz	Dolby Vision
32"	Asus PG32UCDP	WOLED	4K	16:9 flat	240/480Hz	BFI
39"	Asus PG39WCDM	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz	BFI
27"	Samsung G6	QD-OLED	1440p	16:9 flat	360Hz
32"	Samsung G8	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz
49"	Samsung G9	QD-OLED	1440p	32:9 curved	240Hz
27"	Dell Alienware AW2725DF	QD-OLED	1440p	16:9 flat	360Hz
32"	Dell Alienware AW3225QF	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 curved	240Hz
27"	Gigabyte FO27Q3	QD-OLED	1440p		360Hz
32"	Gigabyte FO32U2P	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz	DisplayPort 2.1
32"	Gigabyte FO32U2	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz
34"	Gigabyte MO34WQC2	QD-OLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
27"	MSI 271QPX	QD-OLED	1440p	16:9 flat	360Hz
32"	MSI 321UPX	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz
34"	MSI 341CQP	QD-OLED	1440p	21:9 curved	175Hz
49"	MSI 491CQP	QD-OLED	1440p	32:9 curved	144Hz
34"	Acer X34X	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
39"	Acer X39	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
27"	ASRock PGO27QFS2A	WOLED	1440p	16:9 curved	240Hz
27"	ASRock PGO270W2A	QD-OLED	1440p	16:9	360Hz
34"	ASRock PGO34QRT2A	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
32"	HP Transcend	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz

lol that's a good one because neither one of them can do that without a crutch. That's why it seems like it's a console display more than anything.

I had way too many problems setting up one of the new 240Hz 1440p LG displays via HDMI 2.1. I ended up having to use a 3rd party tool and delete some stuff related to LG's implementation of HDMI and its metadata. I did like LFC+G-Sync though, that was pretty cool once I got the display working.

But with Display port you just don't have those problems when connected to a PC. DP 2.1 is also much faster than HDMI 2.1
HDMI 2.1 is good for like 4K 150Hz 10-bit uncompressed.
DP 1.4a is like 95Hz
DP 2.1 is like 265Hz

Honestly, will you be able to tell over 144hz at 4k that it's compressed? I doubt I'll have a fast enough video card to go over 144hz anyway. Currently gaming on 4k60hz LED and can't wait to go OLED. There is one monitor with DP2.1 and UHBR 20 support on the list if you really want it. No price info yet.

32"

Gigabyte FO32U2P

QD-OLED

4K

16:9 flat

240Hz

DisplayPort 2.1

 

[Upgrayedd]

• 32" Asus PG32UCDM QD-OLED – $1,299.00
  
  
• 27" MSI 271QPX QD-OLED – $749.99
• 27" MSI 271QRX QD-OLED – $799.99 (with USB ports)
  
  
• 32" MSI 321UPX QD-OLED – $899.99
• 32" MSI 321URX QD-OLED – $949.99 (with USB ports)
  
  
• 34" MSI 341CQP QD-OLED – $899.99
  
  
• 49" MSI 491CQP QD-OLED – $1,099.99

Here are the prices so far. Could save $50 if you don't need USB-A ports on your monitor.

Here is all that's coming out.

27"	LG 27GS95QE	WOLED	1440p	16:9 flat	240Hz
32"	LG 32GS95UE	WOLED	4K	16:9 flat	240/480Hz
34"	LG 34GS95QE	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
39"	LG 39GS95QE	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
45"	LG 45GS95QE	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
45"	LG 45GS96QB	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
27"	Asus PG27AQDP	WOLED	1440p	16:9 flat	480Hz	BFI
32"	Asus PG32UCDM	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz	Dolby Vision
32"	Asus PG32UCDP	WOLED	4K	16:9 flat	240/480Hz	BFI
39"	Asus PG39WCDM	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz	BFI
27"	Samsung G6	QD-OLED	1440p	16:9 flat	360Hz
32"	Samsung G8	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz
49"	Samsung G9	QD-OLED	1440p	32:9 curved	240Hz
27"	Dell Alienware AW2725DF	QD-OLED	1440p	16:9 flat	360Hz
32"	Dell Alienware AW3225QF	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 curved	240Hz
27"	Gigabyte FO27Q3	QD-OLED	1440p		360Hz
32"	Gigabyte FO32U2P	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz	DisplayPort 2.1
32"	Gigabyte FO32U2	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz
34"	Gigabyte MO34WQC2	QD-OLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
27"	MSI 271QPX	QD-OLED	1440p	16:9 flat	360Hz
32"	MSI 321UPX	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz
34"	MSI 341CQP	QD-OLED	1440p	21:9 curved	175Hz
49"	MSI 491CQP	QD-OLED	1440p	32:9 curved	144Hz
34"	Acer X34X	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
39"	Acer X39	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
27"	ASRock PGO27QFS2A	WOLED	1440p	16:9 curved	240Hz
27"	ASRock PGO270W2A	QD-OLED	1440p	16:9	360Hz
34"	ASRock PGO34QRT2A	WOLED	1440p	21:9 curved	240Hz
32"	HP Transcend	QD-OLED	4K	16:9 flat	240Hz

Honestly, will you be able to tell over 144hz at 4k that it's compressed? I doubt I'll have a fast enough video card to go over 144hz anyway. Currently gaming on 4k60hz LED and can't wait to go OLED. There is one monitor with DP2.1 and UHBR 20 support on the list if you really want it. No price info yet.

32"

Gigabyte FO32U2P

QD-OLED

4K

16:9 flat

240Hz

DisplayPort 2.1

nothing interests me currently.
Gonna have to be DP 2.1 with actual Gsync hardware for 4K 240 OLED. So probably an alienware around the release of GTA6 on PC.

There's plenty of competitive titles you can run over 144fps at 4K. Can I tell the difference? I don't know I don't really wanna find out. Hardware costs too much leave stuff on the table like that.

I would imagine it gets worse the higher your fps but I don't know exactly how dsc behaves. Compressing your data stream in half has to be noticeable somewhere.

 

[trsttte]

Here are the prices so far. Could save $50 if you don't need USB-A ports on your monitor.

Saving some bucks is always nice but you're making a big mistake buying one of these monitors without USB-A ports, no USB-A also means no user upgradable firmware and that's a no go with something as new as this.

Gonna have to be DP 2.1 with actual Gsync hardware

That doesn't exist, nvidia didn't even update the gsync modules to hdmi 2.1, I wouldn't bet on them launching a version with DP 2.1 any time soon, probably not ever and that's not a terrible thing. The hole concept was about cornering the market with an expensive add on only they control, it has some small advantages but I rather see it die than allowing nvidia to gatekeep another technology.

 

[Baba]

Saving some bucks is always nice but you're making a big mistake buying one of these monitors without USB-A ports, no USB-A also means no user upgradable firmware and that's a no go with something as new as this.



That doesn't exist, nvidia didn't even update the gsync modules to hdmi 2.1, I wouldn't bet on them launching a version with DP 2.1 any time soon, probably not ever and that's not a terrible thing. The hole concept was about cornering the market with an expensive add on only they control, it has some small advantages but I rather see it die than allowing nvidia to gatekeep another technology.

Valid point. I see some early issues in reviews that will require a firmware update in the future. I wonder why you can't use USB-C for firmware updates.

nothing interests me currently.
Gonna have to be DP 2.1 with actual Gsync hardware for 4K 240 OLED. So probably an alienware around the release of GTA6 on PC.

There's plenty of competitive titles you can run over 144fps at 4K. Can I tell the difference? I don't know I don't really wanna find out. Hardware costs too much leave stuff on the table like that.

I would imagine it gets worse the higher your fps but I don't know exactly how dsc behaves. Compressing your data stream in half has to be noticeable somewhere.

Watchout for Alienware. The Dell calls the HDMI ports "2.1" on the AW2725DF but they only have 2.0 bandwidth (18Gbps). The maximum refresh rate at 1440p is only 144Hz.

​