Razer is pretty well known for its gaming peripherals, as well as its gaming focused notebook lineup, so today’s announcement of a new gaming monitor from the company makes a lot of sense. It offers some excellent features for gamers, as well as the premium touch that Razer does so well.

The 27-inch display features a 2560x1440 resolution for the IPS panel, and offers a 144 Hz refresh rate. For gaming, response rate is also critical, and the Razer Raptor offers a 7 ms typical response, which can be reduced to 4 ms with Overdrive, and 1 ms with Motion Blur reduction. It features AMD Radeon FreeSync, which just got a lot more useful with NVIDIA’s announcement to finally support it, and coupled with the 144 Hz refresh rate, should offer incredibly smooth gaming under a wide variety of scenarios.

Razer CES 2019
  Razer Raptor
Display Size 27-inch
Panel Type IPS
Resolution 2560x1440
Refresh Rate 144 Hz with FreeSync
Response time 7ms typical
4ms Overdrive
1ms with Motion Blur Reduction
Contrast Ratio 1000:1
Brightness 420 nits
Color Gamut 95% P3-D65
Connectivity 1 x HDMI 2.0
1 x DisplayPort 1.4
1 x USB Type-C with power delivery
2 x USB 3.0
Availability Later 2019
Price $699.99

The display covers 95% of the P3-D65 gamut and offers a 1000:1 contrast ratio. Razer states that they will offer pre-programmed color profiles in the monitor itself, which is good news for users and hopefully will include a sRGB mode. The display features a picture-in-picture mode as well.

Razer has always offered a unique, premium design, and the Razer Raptor definitely follows in those footsteps. The display bezels are just 2.3 mm, and the base of the unit is made from forged aluminum. The backplate is a blend of fabric and metal, and the monitor offers some very unique cable management, with five CNC milled channels to house the five included Razer green cables. As a Razer product, it also of course supports the Razer Chroma lighting, with LED strips to illuminate the base customizable through their software.

There’s all of the expected connectivity as well, with USB-C, HDMI, and DisplayPort, with the USB-C also providing power delivery, and two USB 3.1 Type-A ports for peripherals.

Razer is expecting the Raptor to be available later this year, with an estimated MSRP of $699.99.

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Adam-James - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link

    As someone who bought the first monitor of this class (the ROG Swift), 1440p at 144Hz in 2019 is almost aggressively uninteresting to me. 2560x1440 isn't an acceptable resolution for a computer monitor, of any size, at this point. A small tablet, sure. But at 27" even 2160p is starting to look too pixel-ey.
  • Inteli - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link

    Maybe I have low standards, but I find 24" 1080p to be acceptable, and 27" 1440p is a higher pixel density than that. I don't know how close you're sitting that 2160p at 27" is on the verge of unacceptable.
  • milkywayer - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link

    I've been using a 1440p dual monitor setup for almost 3 years now and while its OK for general web browsing, I do miss the sharp, milky fluid text on a 4K XPS laptop I once experienced and I'd love to have a 4k level of detail for gaming in general for my next monitor.

    I think it doesn't really make sense to bring in more 1440p monitors to the market when there are 4K phones and 13inch 4k laptops on the market. Soon 1440p will be the 768p laptop equivalent that you see on super cheap laptops. Bring in 4K and 5K screens. If there are 4K HDTVs going for 300-600$, why not bring the same resolution to desktop screens now!
  • PaulMack - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link

    It makes sense to bring an appropriate resolution for the market. I'm on a 5.5" 1920*1080, 441ppi Pixel 2, and don't see the point in quartering the size of the pixels, so a 4K phone is not a selling point to me. Also, using "but the highest resolution on a handheld device is X" isn't a reason to put that resolution on a monitor. I view my phone from 20cm, my desktop screen from 80-100cm, and my TV from 250-300cm. I think the pixel should be equivalent sized for the increase in screen size and distance.

    My desktop is currently a pair of 27" 2560x1440 (and an 22" HD in portrait mode) and, while I do love it, I'm tempted by 4K or higher. I would, however, likely buy 30-32".
  • Lastof9 - Saturday, May 4, 2019 - link

    A 4K monitor with a 144 hertz refresh rate would be really hard on your computer unless you had a really powerful system i.e. i9 9900K and RTX 2080Ti as an example. And the PPI on a 27" 4K screen would be higher than a 27" 2560x1440 screen so it would also be more complicated to fit more pixels onto the same size screen. 4K TVs are big, computer monitors are small so your comparison of TVs to computer monitors is also flawed.
  • pancakes - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link

    uhh ok buddy, mind sharing how much you paid for whatever PC you have that is running games at above 1440p and 144hz? You're either a troll or out of touch with reality lol
  • imaheadcase - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link

    How about %99 of all games outside a few select FPS games? Anything else you want to know you can find in computers for Dummies.
  • cwolf78 - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link

    You condescending remark doesn't make it any more true.
  • cwolf78 - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link

    Your condescending remark doesn't make it any more true.
  • pancakes - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link

    FPS games aren't inherently more demanding than other games, but keep talking like you know what you're talking about you should be fine.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now