ASUS ROG SWIFT PG65

Armenius

Armenius

Extremely [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
42,054
ASUS has just become the first to reveal their Big Fucking Gaming Display after NVIDIA's announcement. Called the PG65, ASUS confirms their panel will have 1000 nit peak brightness and "full" DCI-P3 color space coverage. Availability is listed as "later this year." It will be shown on the show floor at CES starting today.

https://rog.asus.com/articles/gamin...display-bfgd-120hz-gsync-65-inch-4k-with-hdr/

upload_2018-1-9_10-59-15.png
 
Product page is up. This display uses direct-lit HDR according to the overview instead of a FALD like the smaller PG27UQ. FALD uses square zones with each corner having a backlight, while direct-lit uses a single backlight for each square. I was confused about the terms earlier on.

http://hexus.net/tech/news/monitors/119912-asus-lists-rog-swift-pg65-nvidia-bfgd-monitor/

I expect these BFGD will be in the $5,500 USD range.

Bumping this thread since some people can't use the search function...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this
direct lit? So how many zones? their 27" have pathetic 384...
And why does it have to look so ugly lol.

Anyway - LG oled TV's are way cheaper than this will be so I fail to see a point...
 
HiCZoK said:
direct lit? So how many zones? their 27" have pathetic 384...
And why does it have to look so ugly lol.

Anyway - LG oled TV's are way cheaper than this will be so I fail to see a point...
Click to expand...
They said 384 at CES. I mean, 384 FALD zones isn't really pathetic. It's better than any TV that I know of, especially for a screen size of only 27". The best TV that comes to mind is 320 zones at twice the size.

But a 16 zone 4x4 FALD is this:
upload_2018-7-10_12-11-43.png


While a 16 zone 4x4 direct-lit array is this:
upload_2018-7-10_12-12-25.png


It may have been too expensive to do a FALD on a 65" and reach their target market price.
 
Armenius said:
They said 384 at CES. I mean, 384 FALD zones isn't really pathetic. It's better than any TV that I know of, especially for a screen size of only 27".
Click to expand...

While it does indeed have the highest density FALD based on screen size, screen size actually isn't too relevant. Generally speaking, entertainment displays are viewed at a distance such that the screen fills as much of your field of view as possible without getting too far into peripheral vision and requiring you to turn your head to see things clearly on the edges. So in fact, the benefit of each zone is pretty much fixed relative to the visible image size. It's just that on a TV you sit further away, and on a computer display you sit closer. A lot of people tend to sit even further away than THX/SMPTE recommended distances though, and the further you sit the perceptually smaller each zone is and the less you can distinguish issues like haloing etc.

There are TVs with 500+ zones, the Sony Z9D(best LCD TV that exists) has 648, the Samsung Q9FN has 480. The older 70 inch Sharp Elites had 600+ too. The big downside of TV FALDs(and well, every single FALD other than the X27/PG27UQ one) is latency -- they're pretty slow at adjusting their brightness. Nvidia did an excellent job of making the PG27UQ FALD respond much faster than any TV FALD.

Still not OLED though, which has 10x better response time in both luminance and color than any LCD!
 
Armenius said:
Product page is up. This display uses direct-lit HDR according to the overview instead of a FALD like the smaller PG27UQ. FALD uses square zones with each corner having a backlight, while direct-lit uses a single backlight for each square. I was confused about the terms earlier on.

http://hexus.net/tech/news/monitors/119912-asus-lists-rog-swift-pg65-nvidia-bfgd-monitor/

I expect these BFGD will be in the $5,500 USD range.

Bumping this thread since some people can't use the search function...
Click to expand...

First they say 120hz+ then they say up to 120hz. So which is it? I thought it would be overclockable to 144hz like the 27 inch.

I was thinking about getting one but I don't think I will if it's over $3000. And I wouldn't be surprised if it's $5k. It's just too hard to justify it for me when OLED is cheaper.
 
Does this have VESA support? It's hard to tell from the picture.
The stand doesn't look adjustable at all.
It seems like the best way to use a bfgd would be wall mounted or sitting on a separate surface than your keyboard and mouse. Similar to a regular tv use I suppose.
 
No OLED panel? $5500, absolutely not. $3999 is close but facing strong competition because this monitor might be the best big gaming display of it all but the one who buys it will not get the best one for other uses (movies, tv shows, sports) because that field belongs to OLED panels.
 
I'm gonna say $3,499.....which is still a hard pass

And wait an see what the C9 OLEDs bring
 
These are going to bomb hard. It's a solution looking for a problem. Anyone with the cash to burn on something like this is just going to get a superior OLED display.

Why don't these fucks release something that's actually useful, like a fucking 31.5" 4k G-Sync @ 100hz+? You know, something people actually want?

These shitty companies get everything wrong. The monitor's either too small (27"), too big (65"), 60hz, doesn't have variable refresh, etc. Pick whichever combo you want. They ALL get it wrong. Is it seriously going to be fucking 2019 before there's a single modern display on the market that doesn't suck cock in some way? I've had it with this shit industry.
 
Personally, I'm excited, but if they are going to price them as a top-tier, premium product, they need to BE top tier, premium products. I would expect to see greater than the 'industry standard' 384 zone backlight, or even a proper OLED panel.

I don't think I've seen a single OLED with over 60Hz refresh rate...
 
KazeoHin said:
l.I don't think I've seen a single OLED with over 60Hz refresh rate...
Click to expand...

All 2018 LG OLEDs are 120hz native. Just limited by HDMI 2.0, and there's no way Nvidia is going to make an OLED gaming TV(and I mean.. this is a TV) because the whining about burn-in would be endless.
 
Sancus said:
All 2018 LG OLEDs are 120hz native. Just limited by HDMI 2.0, and there's no way Nvidia is going to make an OLED gaming TV(and I mean.. this is a TV) because the whining about burn-in would be endless.
Click to expand...

What's the cheapest 2018 LG OLED? I would think it would be much more expensive than a BFD per inch...
 
KazeoHin said:
What's the cheapest 2018 LG OLED? I would think it would be much more expensive than a BFD per inch...
Click to expand...

2300 for the 55" C8 on Amazon right now. I'm literally just waiting for them to add HDMI 2.1 hopefully in 2019 and I'll buy one of those and use it as a computer display. Maybe AMD will even release a decent video card so I can have VRR and not even miss gsync. Haha yea I know that part is a crazy fantasy of mine :p
 
Sancus said:
2300 for the 55" C8 on Amazon right now. I'm literally just waiting for them to add HDMI 2.1 hopefully in 2019 and I'll buy one of those and use it as a computer display. Maybe AMD will even release a decent video card so I can have VRR and not even miss gsync. Haha yea I know that part is a crazy fantasy of mine :p
Click to expand...
200.gif


tenor.gif


tenor.gif


source.gif
 
Last edited:
If the following three stars align, it's straight up game over for computer display companies:

1) 40" LG OLED comes out in 2019 as has been hinted at
2) It's 120hz and has HDMI 2.1
3) Some video card manufacturer is smart enough to actually support it

If this happens, yup, fuck computer monitors. Can't see anything being half as appealing as that until MicroLED displays, which are probably at least 5 years off (got to milk those shitty image retention plasma--I mean OLED--displays for a few years).
 
HiCZoK said:
40 inch is too big for a desk monitor
Click to expand...

I would agree with you unless you have a very deep desk where you can put it further away from you. For my desk, I'd say 32" would be the biggest I would be able to handle.
 
kasakka said:
I would agree with you unless you have a very deep desk where you can put it further away from you. For my desk, I'd say 32" would be the biggest I would be able to handle.
Click to expand...

I could probably do it but 40 would be pushing it. No way I'd go any bigger.
 
There is 0 chance anything smaller than 40" comes out from LG in the next 1-2 years. Even the 40-49" is pretty slim, they talked about it in like one press release and we haven't heard anything about it since.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skott
like this
If they could get it down to 50" I'd probably bite. My desk is 37" deep so a 50" would work but I'd want 4k @ 120+Hz and HDR. It'd have to be good. Nothing half ass quality. I don't expect it to happen though. I have a better chance of seeing this Acer X35 they been teasing us for last year or so.
 
HiCZoK said:
40 inch is too big for a desk monitor
Click to expand...
Actually, it's a really nice size. I used a Samsung 40" 4K set as a monitor for like 2 years and it was great.

Recently replaced it with a 55", which admittedly is insanity, but it's possible. Not great for desktop use, but gaming and movies are awesome.
 
You pussies aren't [H]ard enough to handle a BFGD. After you've experienced a BFGD you can't be satisfied by a pathetic 32" or an average 55" D. You NEED 65 inches. Stop crying it won't fit and mount it.
 
If they sold a bundle deal with this display and a Corsair Lapdog with a K70 keyboard, they might sell more of them. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top