In August 2012, Nixeus launched the VUE27, a 27" WQHD (2560x1440) S-IPS LED monitor with a $430 price tag. However, the high demand led to a backlog and the monitor currently retails close to $500. The follow-up was a 30" WQXGA version priced at $700, the Nixeus VUE 30. As expected, the price has now increased to $890. By providing US-based service / warranty, they managed to win over quite a big segment of the market which was being served by eBay sellers based in Korea. However, with Monoprice getting into the game, the competition in this market has become hot. In order to counter the pricing pressure, Nixeus is introducing a new model, the NX-VUE27D. While the earlier models had a wide variety of input ports, Nixeus is making this one DisplayPort only. Fortunately, for the $450 pricing, a Mini-DisplayPort to DisplayPort cable as well as a DisplayPort cable are bundled.

The claimed features specifications of the NX-VUE27D are as below:

  • 27" IPS LED Backlight Display Monitor
  • 2560 x 1440 WQHD
  • Compatible with Thunderbolt and DisplayPort output devices
  • 16.7 million True Colors
  • 100% sRGB Color Gamut
  • VESA Mounts 3.937" x 3.937" (100mm x 100mm)
  • Height Adjustable Base Stand with Tilt, Swivel and 90° Pivot
  • Edge to Edge Plasma Infused Glass to reduce reflection
  • Thin Bezel Design
  • 2 Year Limited Warranty
  • Brightness: 380cd/m2
  • Native Contrast Ratio: 1000:1
  • Viewing Angles:178° horizontal/178° vertical
  • Refresh Rate: 60Hz
  • Response Time: 6ms (Gray to Gray)
  • Pixel Pitch:0.233mm
  • Input Port: DisplayPort
  • Power Consumption:72 watts
  • Accessories included: Mini-DisplayPort to DisplayPort cable (for compatibility with Mac, Macbooks, and Thunderbolt devices), DisplayPort cable, Quick Set-up guide and external power supply (North America)

The Nixeus NX-VUE27D is slated to ship on October 22, 2013, with pre-orders currently on at Amazon and Comp-U-Plus.

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • DarkXale - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link

    1440p monitors are usually used as (at the least) a dual 1280x1440 monitor setup. As most software and websites are designed for 1280 widths, the benefits of more width than that are very poor. 1920 pixel width is too narrow in many cases to run the equivalent without loosing elements.

    The difference is also pronounced with open PDF documents, which become much easier to read.
  • ShieTar - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link

    You are talking from a somewhat specific viewpoint here. I do know a couple of web-designers, and people in related fields of work, and I know most of them would fully agree with you.

    For engineering on the other hand, most people tend to always use the full monitor surface with their primary software, be it a CAD tool or a compiler IDE or just plain old Excel. 90% of the time, a 30" 1600p monitor won't even be wide enough to show everything you're working on in a readable magnification.

    A lot of times, we will stand around our monitors with 2-6 people anyways, thus we need to increase magnification even more for everybody to be able to see/read the details. Thus in my own experience, for any monitor below 50" in size, full HD works out just fine for our purpose. More would be appreciated, but it would never make the difference in our way of using the monitor in the manner which you describe.
  • DarkXale - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link

    Certainly, though such users in my experience tend to be less concerned about the aspect ratio. It's the surface area we need, and that's regardless of the ratio. Many engineering software still have sub windows, but I referred to them as fully individual windows.

    More monitors is the usual solution to solve the surface area problem, but 1920 width monitors often waste much more space than 2560 monitors (if you don't want a compromised experience), which was the intention of the post.
  • JPForums - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link

    More monitors is the usual solution to solve the surface area problem, but 1920 width monitors often waste much more space than 2560 monitors

    True, but I'd still prefer 2560x1600 rather than 2560x1440.

    Certainly, though such users in my experience tend to be less concerned about the aspect ratio.

    I'm an engineer who happens to be concerned with aspect ratio. True. it isn't quite as critical when displaying a schematic or CAD drawing, but when writing code in an IDE or using Excel, I find vertical space to be at a premium. Some of our dedicated software guys even go as far as rotating their monitors so that they can see more lines of code at ones. Even with a rotated screen, though, they still want more vertical (rotated horizontal) resolution as it can limit the length of the lines they write (or force word wrap which defeats the purpose of rotating).
  • CSMR - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link

    I wish more manufacturers would go DP only. Less electronics, less power, and a more efficient path resulting in lower latency.
  • FwFred - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link

    16:9 has been fine for me at home on a 2560x1440. At work I use two 24" 1900x1200 vertically, so I like vertical real estate.

    I would shop around before purchasing this Nixeus @ $450. I bought a Dell U2713HM refurb for ~$400. I couldn't tell the difference between a new monitor and this refurb. I'm only losing the 5 year warranty, but at the price I can afford to replace it in the unlikely event it fails.
  • jackstar7 - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link

    Completely agree. Glad someone was willing to put this out in the market. Hopefully it does well and serves as a signal to other makers that there is demand for Displayport.
  • sulu1977 - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link

    Personally, I'm eagerly waiting for the SWXQXATZGA monitor.

    (sorry, just had to say that):)
  • geok1ng - Friday, October 4, 2013 - link

    On Alibaba these things sell for USD 180-210, and the seller offers up to 3% replacements parts for the buyer.
    The real question is: can The Nixeus overclock?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now