Last week BenQ introduced its new display with QHD resolution that has an integrated USB 3.0 Type-C dock. Aside from the dock, the 27” monitor's big selling point is support for 100% sRGB. This goes in tandem with additional modes specifically aimed at CAD/CAM, Animation and Darkroom environments. The new display is among the first monitors with a USB-C connector as well as docking capabilities.

The manufacturer does not disclose too many details about the unit, but given that the monitor belongs to the PD-series from BenQ for designers and engineers, it is logical to expect it to use an IPS or a VA panel with 178° viewing angles and a 60 Hz refresh rate. Meanwhile, covering 100% sRGB should suggest that the display supports 1.07 billion colors (8-bit + FRC), which is enough for typical office and web design workloads. To further appeal to the target audience, the monitor features CAD/CAM, Animation, and Darkroom modes calibrated for particular types of applications, but BenQ does not disclose how this affects color accuracy.

BenQ Display with USB-C Dock
Panel 27" IPS or VA
Native Resolution 2560 × 1440
Maximum Refresh Rate 60 Hz (?)
Response Time unknown
Brightness unknown
Contrast unknown
Viewing Angles 178°/178° horizontal/vertical (?)
Inputs 1 × USB Type-C (DisplayPort alt mode)
DP 1.2
HDMI 1.4
USB Hub USB 3.0 hub
'multiple audio, video, network, and USB ports' 
Audio Integrated speakers, audio in/out ports

The integrated USB-C docking station uses the same cable as the display, and BenQ's press release states that the dock is designed to charge a laptop or a mobile device up to 61W (that is compatible with DisplayPort alternate mode for USB-C) as well as expand its I/O capabilities over USB 3.0. This includes, 'multiple audio, video, network, USB ports and integrated speakers'. At present, the list of devices supporting DP alt mode for USB-C includes the Apple MacBook, the Dell XPS 12/13/15, the HP Elite X2 1012, the HP EliteBook Folio G1, the Microsoft Lumia 950/950 XL, the LG G5, the HTC 10 M10h and so on. In addition to the USB-C input, the display is also equipped with DisplayPort and HDMI input connectors.

BenQ did not announce exact pricing or availability timeframe for its PD2710QC. Currently BenQ sells the PD2700Q display for $359, which is not too much for a 27” QHD IPS monitor. While a USB-C hub is clearly a premium feature, it remains to be seen how much more BenQ will charge for it.

Related Reading:

Source: BenQ

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • HilbertSpace - Thursday, January 26, 2017 - link

    I can't tell if you are being serious with these comments. Funny though either way, especially the ridiculousness of point 1.
  • BrokenCrayons - Thursday, January 26, 2017 - link

    I'm like British-levels of serious here.
  • ovigo - Thursday, January 26, 2017 - link

    Physicist here: Calling b*llshit on the light transmission lag. Remember: A foot light travel corresponds to a nanosecond, where both monitor lag and human response are in the millisecond regime, giving no noticable effect for the light travel until you literally sit miles (!) away from your monitor.
    Also note that the communication between the computers is at (maximum) light speed, meaning that it would be beneficial for e-sports player to sit physically closer to each other...
  • BrokenCrayons - Thursday, January 26, 2017 - link

    First of all, I have a heap of qualifications so let's not flaunt expertise in the matter because I don't want to have to start touting the depth of my experience in the matter of physical science. I went to night school, online school, bricks-and-mortar school, and mother-of-flippin'-pearl preschool pal! I'm like the embodiment of the United States public and private and everything in between educational system! And anyway, we MBA sorts manage physicists on a daily basis so don't think you can have the audacity to question the grand rule of our iron fists! (And yes, I know about oxidization too and how iron rusts so I lather those babies in oil and polish them every single night!)

    Second of all, light travel time between the monitor and the eye is the one place where we haven't addressed latency. Untold money has been invested in reducing input lag and increasing monitor and GPU response time, but little has been done to address light travel latency. I'm sure there are warp field and vacuum chamber technologies (think Star Trek and Elon Musk's Hyperloop) that we will someday leverage to drive light above the petty light speed barrier, but right now the only reliable solution is the low tech approach of hunching down and pulling the chair closer or purchasing a VR headset.

    In the future, I could see a vacuum chamber monitor setup that attaches to the face of a player and then pumps out all the air between the face and the monitor to improve light flow (with a plastic shield over the eyes to prevent the Total Recall effect...that'd be gross) and then a warp nacelle or even a particle accelerator tube behind the monitor to give those photons the oomph they need to go even faster, but we're probably a good 2-5 years out form such a technology or more if you physicists keep wasting your time posting on AT and don't ever get back to physi-sizing like you should be. What am I paying you people to do again? Certainly not this!
  • Small Bison - Thursday, January 26, 2017 - link

    Do you have any relatives and/or clones that you can convince to join the site and comment on articles?
  • BrokenCrayons - Thursday, January 26, 2017 - link

    Bison, I'm sad to say that I've tried cloning myself a couple of times and I seem to always end up with much smaller, less developed versions of me. They end up being really labor-intensive, cry frequently, and emit copious quantities of unpleasant smelling waste products. I have to admit that I don't understand what I'm doing wrong during the cloning process. Night school didn't cover it at all! I may need to consult an alchemist. I think transmutation is a viable option.
  • ddriver - Thursday, January 26, 2017 - link

    Comparing light to something like the hype-r-loop is laughable and a loud statement about you lack of competence in the field of physics. The problem for a fast train is air friction, which becomes tremendous as the speed increases. Light has no friction with the air and the speed of light is only like 60 miles per second slower in air than it is in vacuum. So your ingenious idea of strapping vacuum chambers to people's heads will result in a whooping 0.0003% improvement.

    At a typical viewing distance for a large display, the "latency" of light traveling through air would be like 200 picoseconds at most. Moving to vacuum would decrease that to 199.04 - hardly an improvement that merits vacuum tubes. Besides, it would be much easier to simply put displays closed to the eyes, and also tremendously "more beneficial", at least at the particular scale.

    Then again, even at top notch gaming hardware your hardware won't be able to get below 30 milliseconds, so there is already miles of progress to be made there before one even gets to the point of splitting hairs by worrying about them slow photos.

    Lets for the sake of not lowering my view of mankind assume your post was just a poor joke :D
  • BrokenCrayons - Thursday, January 26, 2017 - link

    I'm not bothered by your dim view of humanity OR your inability to understand what is clearly a simple matter of photonic acceleration and air molecule removal! I've spent extensive time immersed in science to the point where I can confidently quote the great MC Hawking when I tell you, "My power is my mass times the speed of light squared!" and that "I have a PhD in Pain and a Masters in disaster!"

    (NSFW warning)

    I'm like a superluminal jet of amazing ideas, saturating the galactic core in the brilliant leftovers of interstellar indigestables and just because you disagree with the idea of reducing latency because you can't afford a vacuum channel between your face doesn't mean you can Debbie Downer the inevitable tide of the next computer gaming revolution. This will be a revolution more significant than the first US Robotics Sportster 2400 baud external modem. This will be a revolution more significant than the Iomega Rev Drive. I'd even go as far as saying it'll be more significant than Sega Game Gear AND the Dreamcast combined.

    Those e-sports professional athletes are you there playing their hearts out in Atlanta (yeah, I saw how you decried their noble careers in your other post which is clearly born of seething, hateful envy) with their faces so close to their monitors that the oils from their skins are actually leaping across the gap between the two. And while they're paying their hearts out with sweat pouring from their hairy underarms and billions of epidermal cells shredding from their very fingers as they hammer mouse buttons and keyboards alike, you're sitting there in the posh comfort of your apartment or mobile home talking down to them. You're talking down to the world's heroes and idols as if they don't deserve particle accelerators and vacuum chambers! The next travesty you'll throw out is how you think they shouldn't have energy drinks or Mountain Dew. The nerve of some people.
  • ddriver - Thursday, January 26, 2017 - link

    I used to be a world ranking FPS gamer back in my youthful days, never broke a sweat. It really helps being healthy and fit rather than a lump of toxic fat that would sweat doing anything, including idling ;)

    But well, back then games rewarded reflexes, precision and tactical thinking, not amount of time from your finite life wasted. Back then gamers were cool dudes, not lifeless losers.
  • BrokenCrayons - Friday, January 27, 2017 - link

    I don't think playing video games has become less respectable in recent years. In fact, I think the opposite is true as the hobby has become more mainstream than ever before. It means that "back in the day" when you were supposedly a "world ranking FPS gamer" its more likely that a larger segment of the population considered you a lifeless loser than would consider someone playing professionally now. That is if any bit of your self-promotion is the slightest bit true and, since this is the Internet, I think we all know where that line of thinking ultimately leads.

    Anyway, I personally prefer games where its simply a matter of making the occasional small investment of a couple hundred hundred dollars or so to purchase the best equipment, consumables, and vanity items that make it difficult or impossible to be harmed by players that are unwilling to make a similar expenditure. Those sorts of games automatically stratify players and make it easy to pick out who's worth interacting with and who'll simply be stomped into the proverbial dirt on the way to claiming the leaderboard. Microtransaction games have really made online gaming interesting and amusing because its not necessary to waste time with reflexes or "precision and tactical thinking." I do enough of that silliness at work so when I'm at home, I should, like anyone else, be able to reap the rewards of my social class by rocking the best gear in the game.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now