Monitors / Comparison

ASUS ROG Swift PG279QM vs Huawei MateView GT 27 2026 Ultra HD Edition

Monitor · ASUS

ASUS ROG Swift PG279QM

27″ · 2560×1440 · 240 Hz · IPS
GEAR SCORE 83.0 / 100Very good
Refresh rate86
Resolution80
Panel80
Response time90
VS
Monitor · Huawei

Huawei MateView GT 27 2026 Ultra HD Edition

27″ · 3840×2160 · 160 Hz · IPS · 2026
GEAR SCORE 83.0 / 100Very good
Refresh rate67
Resolution100
Panel80
Recency100
Verdict

ASUS ROG Swift PG279QM and Huawei MateView GT 27 2026 Ultra HD Edition are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 83 and 83.

  • Resolution: Huawei MateView GT 27 2026 Ultra HD Edition leads (3840×2160 vs 2560×1440).
  • Refresh rate: ASUS ROG Swift PG279QM leads (240 Hz vs 160 Hz).
Pick this

ASUS ROG Swift PG279QM

If you care most about refresh rate.

Pick this

Huawei MateView GT 27 2026 Ultra HD Edition

If you care most about resolution.

Spec-by-spec comparison

ASUS ROG Swift PG279QMHuawei MateView GT 27 2026 Ultra HD Edition
83Gear score83
27″Screen size27″
2560×1440Resolution3840×2160
240 HzRefresh rate160 Hz
IPSPanelIPS
1 msResponse time—
—Release year2026
≈ $540Estimated price—

The gear score is computed from specifications only (e.g. for a mouse: weight, sensor, polling rate, connection and release year). It isn’t a lab test and doesn’t measure personal preferences like shape or grip.

Free · no install

Which one adds more to your setup?

The scanner finds your graphics card, CPU, RAM, monitor, mouse and keyboard in under a minute. You get a score out of 100, estimated FPS in games, a bottleneck check and upgrade tips made for you.

FAQ

Is ASUS ROG Swift PG279QM or Huawei MateView GT 27 2026 Ultra HD Edition better?

ASUS ROG Swift PG279QM and Huawei MateView GT 27 2026 Ultra HD Edition are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 83 and 83. Resolution: Huawei MateView GT 27 2026 Ultra HD Edition leads (3840×2160 vs 2560×1440). Refresh rate: ASUS ROG Swift PG279QM leads (240 Hz vs 160 Hz).

Which has the higher refresh rate?

Refresh rate: ASUS ROG Swift PG279QM leads (240 Hz vs 160 Hz).