ASUS Announces ROG SWIFT PG278Q Premium Gaming Monitor

kasakka said:
I would avoid 4K for now simply because support from 3rd party software is poor in Windows (better in OSX thanks to retina displays), there are still some issues with the tech (regarded as two 1080p screens etc) and the displays available are not so big that there would be a great real estate improvement as you need to use scaling to get easily readable text.
Click to expand...
In that apples to apples comparison graphic I made with all of the monitors at the same 108.8 ppi (the ppi of a 2560x1440 27" monitor), the hypothetical 4k monitor was around 40.5" diagonal. The 1920x1080 monitor was 20.25". I'm referencing that in reply to your readability comments because I find unscaled text at 2560x1440 easy to read. My laptop is about 135 ppi and is easy to read too though it does sit a little closer to me. I can understand your point about text scaling in windows on smaller 4k screens however.

web-cyb.org: 4k_21x9_2560x-27in-and-30in_1080p_same-ppi.jpg

The problem with suggesting that a larger 4k would be more appropriate for text readability is that very large monitors are not suitable for 1st/3rd person gaming at a desk imo. They just make the same scene and scene elements JUMBO on a wall in front of your face. Much over 27" (-30") and you are eye bending and micro-neck bending to the periphery. Huds, pointers, notifications, text/chat, mini maps, action bars, etc also get pushed into the periphery. Unless it became standard for games to allow you to set a virtual primary monitor space in the middle with all extents added FoV, or allowed FoV slider/settings to similar effect with allowances for moveable HUD and other screen elements - larger high resolution monitors won't be adding any additional 1st/3rd person game FoV unless they are a different aspect ratio. Where 4k adds real-estate is desktop/app use.

Imo besides different sizes being more appropriate for different usage scenarios a 4k monitor for desktop/apps would also be best as an IPS, and a 4k gaming monitor would only make sense to me at 120hz-144hz input, 1ms response time (TN), and with g-sync and ulmb options since there will be that available at 2560x1440 with this asus and perhaps a few others down the line. It also wouldn't make sense in a gpu budget vs frame rate sense for quite awhile for me personally. Even with dual 800 series gpus that I will hopefully upgrade to I will be lucky to average 120fps on the more demanding current popular games at 2560x, let alone higher graphics ceiling ones in the next year and on.
 
Ultranifty said:
I guess if you run everything at very low settings then you can push 2560x1440 at 144fps to use this monitor. Just so much vidcard power required if not using LOW settings.
I'll stick with my 3440 x 1440 and crossfire 290x's. 60hz is fine. I don't just play shooters.
Click to expand...

You don't have to go as far as low. You don't need ultra either. A happy medium of medium or high settings in games with a high solid frame rate and high resolution can work pretty well in my opinion.

I'd rather play BF4 with 60fps with fxaa and high setting at 1440p than at 60fps with msaa and ultra settings at 1080p. That's with a OCed 670. My same mentality applies with higher end rigs.
 
Very short detail narration on the web page rather than an actual review but thanks for the link. The ces reporter vid standing next to the hardware on display was decent. The panel looked pretty good on their camera at least.

direct link to the video, which is mostly just dialogue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNgagb0th5s

web page translated:
Asus announced its new gaming monitor ROG Swift during CES in Las Vegas in January, and we still have not seen it on the Swedish market. Now we squeeze a little more on the panel for the forthcoming launch, and as previously paired numbers with a 27-inch 1440p panel with Nvidia G-Sync.

We have previously expressed our enthusiasm about Nvidia display synchronization technology G-Sync, which allows the graphics card to take control of a monitor to control its update frequency. This allows both screen tearing and uneven render times avoided.

Asus PG278Q Swift is one of the market's first 27-inch screens with technology, and uses a TN panel with 2560 x 1440 pixels. Now we have been told that the refresh rate ranging up to 144 Hz, and while TN panels may not always be desirable, we must conclude that Asus has used one of the better TN panels we've seen.

The price tag on the Nordic market is still not nailed, but expect about 700-800 dollars and a launch in the next month.
Click to expand...
 
SynCked said:
Hello guys!

New user here who just registred to tell you some good news about the super monitor we all are awaiting!

As I follow this thread closely I just wanted to share this info with you all as it seems very positive :)

Nordichardware.se just seen this monitor and did say it is one of the absolute best TN panel they have ever seen, so it seems to be a great monitor. They have seen it up close with a whole lot of games and are extremely impressed!

Here it is but beware they are talking Swedis :)

http://www.nordichardware.se/Monito...sus-gamingskaerm-swift-med-nvidia-g-sync.html
Click to expand...

Welcome to the [H] forums, thanks for the share!
 
SynCked said:
Hello guys!

New user here who just registred to tell you some good news about the super monitor we all are awaiting!

As I follow this thread closely I just wanted to share this info with you all as it seems very positive :)

Nordichardware.se just seen this monitor and did say it is one of the absolute best TN panel they have ever seen, so it seems to be a great monitor. They have seen it up close with a whole lot of games and are extremely impressed!

Here it is but beware they are talking Swedis :)

http://www.nordichardware.se/Monito...sus-gamingskaerm-swift-med-nvidia-g-sync.html
Click to expand...

Welcome and thank you.
 
Sancus said:
Yes, the Samsung UD590 and the comparable 28" model from Lenovo. But comparing this monitor to a 4K monitor doesn't make much sense to me. This monitor will provide incredibly high motion resolution. If that's not important to you, why consider this? 4K is awesome for working screen real estate, some strategy games, and stuff like that, but if you are buying a monitor for _gaming_ above all else, 4K makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Right now the most important thing for me is high pixel density, I have hated every LCD I have ever looked at because the image always looks harsh and granular in comparison to CRTs. The only reason I am on an LCD at the moment is that both my CRTs kicked the bucket so I was left with no choice given the almost non-existent second hand market for CRTs where I live.

I was initially interested in this monitor because 4K SST 60hz displays weren't really on the horizon when the ROG SWIFT was announced, and have been contemplating moving to 1440P for some time now. The fact that it will come with G-SYNC out of the box and high refresh rates made it very attractive, but my enthusiasm has waned with all the delays.

Now the way I see it I am probably not going to over invest in hardware because even maxwell is unlikely to be able to drive next-gen games at anywhere close to 144hz at 1440P. That being the case, if I am going to compromise on frame rate then really I am open to compromising a bit more if 4K delivers significantly more clarity and visual fidelity. People on these forums have been gaming on 60hz 1440P displays for a while, and many claim that gaming on them, even for FPS games, is more than feasible.

Right now I don't play any fast paced FPS games which require uber responsive refresh rates, BF4 is garbage and CoD has gotten worse with every iteration after MW1. That being the case, I am just weighing up the available options, although would prefer to reserve judgment until being able to compare displays side by side.
 
Blade-Runner said:
Right now the most important thing for me is high pixel density, I have hated every LCD I have ever looked at because the image always looks harsh and granular in comparison to CRTs. The only reason I am on an LCD at the moment is that both my CRTs kicked the bucket so I was left with no choice given the almost non-existent second hand market for CRTs where I live.
<snip>
Click to expand...

I guarantee you will be disgusted with the low motion definition, low motion/control articulation, and massive viewport smearing blur on of a 60hz lcd on 1st/3rd person games if you are coming from a relatively high hz crt like the fw900 graphics professional crt which has essentially zero blur. These aren't just twitch gaming personal player performance issues/advantages, they are enormous aesthetic issues.

elvn said:
There are a lot of posts in this thread from me showing why I don't consider 4k a good choice outside of desktop real-estate and desktop/app use for at least a few years.

The first and most obvious is 60hz panels have massive screen blur during your continual movement keying + mouse look flow pathing in 1st and 3rd person games. 120hz TN reduces this blur by 50% so that it is more like a strong soften blur, making your entire viewport of high detail geometry and textures (incl depth via bump mapping as well as other shader effects) "fuzz out".

120hz-144hz (even at 100fps or so) also allows many more game world state action slices show per second which has several aesthetic (and depending on the game, potential performance vs game and/or other players) advantages:
Increased motion defintion, increased motion tracking (seeing more "dots per dotted line path length"), and increased animation definition. These factors create a more refined/articulated and smooth motion of both individual screen elements their individual pathing/paths, their individual animation cycles, and of the entire world moving during continual viewport/player-camera FoV movement.

You can barely get (at or just over) 100fps on many of the most popular modern games on ultra settings running dual 780ti's in sli on a single 2560x monitor currently,

The only way I could see using a 4k monitor as your only monitor is if you ran the 4k monitor at 1080p 120hz while playing 1st/3rd person games.. which some 4k monitor's can do. However, the desktop/app real-estate benefit of a 4k panel would be a big tradeoff if you were using a TN panel for the speed. Conversely, using a 4k ips panel would make it blur considerably more even at 120hz 1080p mode. Another big consideration is that most 4k panels so far don't have g-sync. A few coming out soon will have g-sync, however they won't be able to use the ulmb mode at 60hz without looking very flickery, if they can use ulmb mode at all. I'd be curious if they could run ulmb mode in 1080p 120hz mode though. Outside of all that 3840x2160 60hz mode would suck for 1st/3rd person gaming imo. Very low fps on even robust enthusiast gpu budgets, low hz ceiling yielding smearing FoV movement blur, low motion tracking/moition definition, flow, and animation definition. And if the particular 4k model lacks g-sync and ulmb mode there is that too.

That said, 4k is a massive increase in desktop/app real-estate. I would like an ips 4k someday to upgrade the desktop/app side of my dual monitor setup, but with a much more suitable gaming monitor next to it. Currentlly I run a 2560x1440 glossy ips next to a notably lush/vibrant 1920x1080 120hz TN, both 27". A 3840x2160 ips next to this 27" 2560x1440 TN seems like a logical evolution. I'm also very interested in the 90Hz-100hz + low persistence/blur elimination oculus rift when the conumer release comes out.
Click to expand...

Some relevant links:
web-cyb.org 120hz-fps-compared

forums.evga.com: GTX 780Ti Benchmarks 1x-4x SLI (Work in Progress)

Imo the best scenario considering all tradeoffs is still using two different monitors, one dedicated to gaming. In that case, even a 1080p 120hz (with gsync optimally) would still be decent and yield much higher average fps, and the rez wouldn't be as bad since it would be dedicated to gaming with a much higher ppi and rez desktop/app monitor next to it (2560x or 4k).

Will have to see how the 800 series does. If it pushes 20% increase (wishful thinking idk) in sli vs 780ti sli that would be 120fps average on the dual 800's on the games listed as 100fps, and possibly bring the less optimized or future games closer to 100fps ave. All that again at the arbitrarily set by developers maximum (ultra) graphics ceiling. Max is really arbitrary .. devs could make it 3x - 5x more demanding easily (more demanding mods show how you can get more demand/higher ceiling even). The challenge to devs is to whittle down games to "fit" real time, not the other way around. I wish they made the max 3x higher per gen so people would realize they need to find the sweet spot vs rez and gpu power/budget. :b
 
Last edited:
xp3nd4bl3 said:
fast 1440p 27" 120Hz

I think all you're losing is the Gsync adaptive refresh.
Click to expand...

You lose g-sync variable/adaptive hz matched to fps, and you also lose the ulmb zero blur backlight strobing option on games in your library/collection that get very high fps.
However when people were "hacking" lightboost 3d monitors to use lightboost's synchronized backlight strobing in 2d gaming for blur elimination some people released hacks/scripts that allowed amd cards to work - so there is a chance of that happening but not guaranteed. Even so, you'd also likely be dependent on updates from your somewhat anonymous benefactors as time goes on.
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
Even so, you'd also likely be dependent on updates from your somewhat anonymous benefactors as time goes on.
Click to expand...

If you donate to Toasty you get to learn his real name! Don't bother PMing me. I'm not telling.
 
elvn said:
You lose g-sync variable/adaptive hz matched to fps, and you also lose the ulmb zero blur backlight strobing option on games in your library/collection that get very high fps.
However when people were "hacking" lightboost 3d monitors to use lightboost's synchronized backlight strobing in 2d gaming for blur elimination some people released hacks/scripts that allowed amd cards to work - so there is a chance of that happening but not guaranteed. Even so, you'd also likely be dependent on updates from your somewhat anonymous benefactors as time goes on.
Click to expand...

You're saying that AMD users can't use ULMB?

Asus lost my $800. Thanks for the slap in the face to a huge portion of your potential customers. ASUS and NV can stick it with this proprietary BS. My Tempest IPS probably has way better colors than this $800 matte TN anyways.
 
Finally it seems to be avaiable in Italy too, but I think 799&#8364; is really too much for a TN display, even if so fast. (but I would like tor read a test who can tell how really fast it is)
 
NukeDukem said:
You're saying that AMD users can't use ULMB?

Asus lost my $800. Thanks for the slap in the face to a huge portion of your potential customers. ASUS and NV can stick it with this proprietary BS. My Tempest IPS probably has way better colors than this $800 matte TN anyways.
Click to expand...

This actually caught me out, too, as I just switched to team red. But I'm pretty sure the hack can be implemented on this display quite easily. It's not a crapton different than ULBM, I'm sure. Brighter but that's basically it. There's not really much wrong with the hack lb.

That said I'm pretty likely to let the swift pass me by right now. I'm quite pleased with my 120hz IPS. Yesterday the old lady stepped out and I played around with her fg2421 some. The Catleap/tempest/qnix group all just made it look like a toy. Sure 240turbo works... but I actually prefer lightboost. Turbo240 does strange things to the picture that I can't explain. Lightboost is just a bit dimmer, which mostly suits me fine since I like a low level of luminosity anyway. It hurts contrast some but who cares you can see the alien perfectly on testufo.com. But seriously the slightly blurry during fast movement 120hz IPS/pls have amazing gaming potential.

If I were trying to win a bf4 tournament--swift lb tn please.

If I want to be immersed in games that don't necessarily hinge on fast twitch camera movement--catleap/tempest/qnix please
 
Any1 know anything about the rest of the G-Sync monitors? I do want to upgrade to a G-sync enabled monitor but I prefer something cheaper and lower res.
 
elvn said:
I guarantee you will be disgusted with the low motion definition, low motion/control articulation, and massive viewport smearing blur on of a 60hz lcd on 1st/3rd person games if you are coming from a relatively high hz crt like the fw900 graphics professional crt which has essentially zero blur.
Click to expand...

Possibly, as I said I am just weighing up options atm.
 
Bluesun311 said:
This actually caught me out, too, as I just switched to team red. But I'm pretty sure the hack can be implemented on this display quite easily. It's not a crapton different than ULBM, I'm sure. Brighter but that's basically it. There's not really much wrong with the hack lb.

That said I'm pretty likely to let the swift pass me by right now. I'm quite pleased with my 120hz IPS. Yesterday the old lady stepped out and I played around with her fg2421 some. The Catleap/tempest/qnix group all just made it look like a toy. Sure 240turbo works... but I actually prefer lightboost. Turbo240 does strange things to the picture that I can't explain. Lightboost is just a bit dimmer, which mostly suits me fine since I like a low level of luminosity anyway. It hurts contrast some but who cares you can see the alien perfectly on testufo.com. But seriously the slightly blurry during fast movement 120hz IPS/pls have amazing gaming potential.

If I were trying to win a bf4 tournament--swift lb tn please.

If I want to be immersed in games that don't necessarily hinge on fast twitch camera movement--catleap/tempest/qnix please
Click to expand...

I'm waiting for a real 120hz 1440p display (or maybe a FAST 60hz) .
I was happy with the latency my Crossover 2735amg (60hz, 6ms input lag), but is has a very strong glow/bleed on borders, unbearable in dark games like Dark Souls 1-2 (two of my favourite games).
Some Corean IPS monitor customers was more lucky than me (my friend's Crossover 27qw have very low glow-bleed, I could pay twice to find another monitor like that), but it's only luck factor.
 
Bestio said:
I was happy with the latency my Crossover 2735amg (60hz, 6ms input lag), but is has a very strong glow/bleed on borders, unbearable in dark games like Dark Souls 1-2 (two of my favourite games).

Some Korean IPS monitor customers was more lucky than me (my friend's Crossover 27qw have very low glow-bleed, I could pay twice to find another monitor like that), but it's only luck factor.
Click to expand...

6ms is the manufacturers pixel response time rating which should be taken as seriously as dynamic contrast ratios. All of the new 1440p Korean AH-IPS use Plasma Deposition Coating which makes blacks look greyish and washed out. The regular glossy and matte 1440p Korean monitors have much better black levels.
 
elvn said:
In that apples to apples comparison graphic I made with all of the monitors at the same 108.8 ppi (the ppi of a 2560x1440 27" monitor), the hypothetical 4k monitor was around 40.5" diagonal. The 1920x1080 monitor was 20.25". I'm referencing that in reply to your readability comments because I find unscaled text at 2560x1440 easy to read. My laptop is about 135 ppi and is easy to read too though it does sit a little closer to me. I can understand your point about text scaling in windows on smaller 4k screens however.

web-cyb.org: 4k_21x9_2560x-27in-and-30in_1080p_same-ppi.jpg

The problem with suggesting that a larger 4k would be more appropriate for text readability is that very large monitors are not suitable for 1st/3rd person gaming at a desk imo. They just make the same scene and scene elements JUMBO on a wall in front of your face. Much over 27" (-30") and you are eye bending and micro-neck bending to the periphery. Huds, pointers, notifications, text/chat, mini maps, action bars, etc also get pushed into the periphery. Unless it became standard for games to allow you to set a virtual primary monitor space in the middle with all extents added FoV, or allowed FoV slider/settings to similar effect with allowances for moveable HUD and other screen elements - larger high resolution monitors won't be adding any additional 1st/3rd person game FoV unless they are a different aspect ratio. Where 4k adds real-estate is desktop/app use.

Imo besides different sizes being more appropriate for different usage scenarios a 4k monitor for desktop/apps would also be best as an IPS, and a 4k gaming monitor would only make sense to me at 120hz-144hz input, 1ms response time (TN), and with g-sync and ulmb options since there will be that available at 2560x1440 with this asus and perhaps a few others down the line. It also wouldn't make sense in a gpu budget vs frame rate sense for quite awhile for me personally. Even with dual 800 series gpus that I will hopefully upgrade to I will be lucky to average 120fps on the more demanding current popular games at 2560x, let alone higher graphics ceiling ones in the next year and on.
Click to expand...

I pretty much agree with you. I use a 2560x1600 screen without scaling and it's fine. But 4K is not. The displays I've seen have had really tiny text without scaling and like I said, if you use scaling you reduce available screen estate because scaling makes everything larger. So the only real benefit of 4K for desktop use is better looking..well, everything as there are more pixels to display the same things. But trying to cram more windows on the same screen isn't happening as you would be squinting at text.

Considering games generally have poor support for scaling their content, 4K gaming might be annoying with games that don't scale their text according to resolution or scale them wrong (seen plenty that have tiny text at 2560x1600, thankfully not many nowadays).
 
Filiprino said:
31.5 inch 4k is equivalent in PPI to a 15.6 inch full hd screen. That's all right.
Click to expand...

Many people(including me) use the 32" 4K screens without scaling, or with 1.25 scaling at most, which still leaves you with lots of real estate benefit.
 
NukeDukem said:
Your post has me a bit confused. You do realize Korean panels have been achieving real 120Hz at 1440p for a few years now, correct?
Click to expand...

But they aren't intended to be run that way, even if some eBay sellers advertise the fact that they can be set to 120hz. I have a QNIX2710LED monitor, and while it does indeed overclock to that, there are some undesirable tradeoffs that come with this: a much darker upper-right corner (and by corner I mean like almost 1/4th the panel), serious issues with any color temp other than 6500k, and artifacts galore if you're like me and you're picky about it. That being said, on the artifacts front: My panel doesn't have any of the solid lines/dead pixel problems when overclocking that some people tend to get (under normal circumstances; I've seen it once or twice in Starcraft II, but only once or twice), the effects are there if you look for them. On a "real 120hz 1440p" IPS panel, you'd be able to get 120hz out of it without any drawbacks.

The above problems are inherent to just about all QNIX2710 panels when overclocked to 120hz, though like mine, you have to meet some conditions (which aren't hard too hard to meet) in order to see them: Lower the brightness a bit, full white (or preferably grey) screen. When you DO see it though, its bad.
 
Cyalume said:
But they aren't intended to be run that way, even if some eBay sellers advertise the fact that they can be set to 120hz. I have a QNIX2710LED monitor, and while it does indeed overclock to that, there are some undesirable tradeoffs that come with this: a much darker upper-right corner (and by corner I mean like almost 1/4th the panel), serious issues with any color temp other than 6500k, and artifacts galore if you're like me and you're picky about it. That being said, on the artifacts front: My panel doesn't have any of the solid lines/dead pixel problems when overclocking that some people tend to get (under normal circumstances; I've seen it once or twice in Starcraft II, but only once or twice), the effects are there if you look for them. On a "real 120hz 1440p" IPS panel, you'd be able to get 120hz out of it without any drawbacks.

The above problems are inherent to just about all QNIX2710 panels when overclocked to 120hz, though like mine, you have to meet some conditions (which aren't hard too hard to meet) in order to see them: Lower the brightness a bit, full white (or preferably grey) screen. When you DO see it though, its bad.
Click to expand...

This is true about the Qnix. But not the Catleap, in my experience. The Koreans priced them higher because they know what they have. They dropped the price on the Catleap because the Swift is coming. Duke has a Tempest, iirc, and his does 120Hz proper, as in, it doesn't cause color or backlight uniformity issues. I have a native 120Hz monitor in the house (FG2421)... it doesn't run any better than the "non-native" 120Hz panel I have.
 
kasakka said:
I pretty much agree with you. I use a 2560x1600 screen without scaling and it's fine. But 4K is not. The displays I've seen have had really tiny text without scaling and like I said, if you use scaling you reduce available screen estate because scaling makes everything larger. So the only real benefit of 4K for desktop use is better looking..well, everything as there are more pixels to display the same things. But trying to cram more windows on the same screen isn't happening as you would be squinting at text.

Considering games generally have poor support for scaling their content, 4K gaming might be annoying with games that don't scale their text according to resolution or scale them wrong (seen plenty that have tiny text at 2560x1600, thankfully not many nowadays).
Click to expand...

Well one of my points was that a large 4k (ips) monitor would have larger ppi and might work well for a lot of desktop real-estate where you don't mind having to tilt your eyes and neck to see different things (as you do when you use multiple monitors), but that would be unsuitable for a game since the same viewport would just be jumbo sized and pushed into your periphery rather than adding any game world real-estate (unlike what LLL triple monitor gaming or a 21:9 monitor does). Conversely a smaller (27" - 30") very high ppi TN 4k display with dynamic hz, backlight strobing, and 1ms response time would work well for games (if it weren't for the horribly low framerates at 4k with even robust enthusiast gpu budgets).. but it would be tiny default text, tn shading/shadow and lower color range for desktop/app use.
The one thing you could do is move the larger 4k monitor back considerably further when gaming to "shrink" it more within your focal view which would also shrink it's ppi to your perspective as well, but only if your layout and setup allowed it. You'd still have a desktop/app vs gaming tradeoff though.. especially if they ever make 4k 120hz input gsync monitors on dp1.3. That would be a long way off yet, and combined with the gpu demands of 4k that makes me have no interest in it outside of a larger ips 4k dedicated to desktop/apps perhaps.

You did bring up a good point about in game text, like in a mmo for example or other chat boxes in first person shooters/coop (L4D2, TF2). However I usually find that you can resize the text pretty well even without perfect scaling but I don't have a 4k to comment on that specifically. I find lower resolutions more problematic with making text smaller on 1080p without the characters (letters) starting to look mangled.

The hypothetical 4k panel in the graphic was around 40.5" to hit the 108.8 ppi a 27" 2560x1440 has. For me personally I could go a little higher even, like my laptop's 130 ppi, so it could be a bit smaller than 40.5" without problems at default text sizes for me at least. That would be 34" 4k at 3840x2160 to hit ~ 130ppi.
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
Well one of my points was that a large 4k (ips) monitor would have larger ppi and might work well for a lot of desktop real-estate where you don't mind having to tilt your eyes and neck to see different things (as you do when you use multiple monitors), but that would be unsuitable for a game since the same viewport would just be jumbo sized and pushed into your periphery rather than adding any game world real-estate (unlike what LLL triple monitor gaming or a 21:9 monitor does). Conversely a smaller (27" - 30") very high ppi TN 4k display with dynamic hz, backlight strobing, and 1ms response time would work well for games (if it weren't for the horribly low framerates at 4k with even robust enthusiast gpu budgets).. but it would be tiny default text, tn shading/shadow and lower color range for desktop/app use.
The one thing you could do is move the larger 4k monitor back considerably further when gaming to "shrink" it more within your focal view which would also shrink it's ppi to your perspective as well, but only if your layout and setup allowed it. You'd still have a desktop/app vs gaming tradeoff though.. especially if they ever make 4k 120hz input gsync monitors on dp1.3. That would be a long way off yet, and combined with the gpu demands of 4k that makes me have no interest in it outside of a larger ips 4k dedicated to desktop/apps perhaps.

The hypothetical 4k panel in the graphic was around 40.5" to hit the 108.8 ppi a 27" 2560x1440 has. For me personally I could go a little higher even, like my laptop's 130 ppi, so it could be a bit smaller than 40.5" without problems at default text sizes for me at least. That would be 34" 4k at 3840x2160 to hit ~ 130ppi.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I wouldn't be comfortable sitting in front of a 40" 4K display to make use of the non-scalled desktop real estate. I'd rather have smaller size 4K with scaling enabled. 30" is pretty close to max for me. But I think it will still take a few years before developers bother to truly make their software scaling compatible. I mean even something so widely used as Google Chrome simply doesn't scale correctly.

I'm considering buying the new ASUS display simply for gaming and keeping my Dell 3008WFP as another monitor and seeing how that works for me. Is it even possible to run a 60Hz and 120Hz display at the same time or does the 120Hz just get forced to 60Hz?
 
kasakka said:
Yeah, I wouldn't be comfortable sitting in front of a 40" 4K display to make use of the non-scalled desktop real estate. I'd rather have smaller size 4K with scaling enabled. 30" is pretty close to max for me. But I think it will still take a few years before developers bother to truly make their software scaling compatible. I mean even something so widely used as Google Chrome simply doesn't scale correctly.

I'm considering buying the new ASUS display simply for gaming and keeping my Dell 3008WFP as another monitor and seeing how that works for me. Is it even possible to run a 60Hz and 120Hz display at the same time or does the 120Hz just get forced to 60Hz?
Click to expand...

No you can run both - bare in mind ATI cards (if you have one) only have one dual link DVI port. So you would need to go down the display port route.
 
Dcode said:
No you can run both - bare in mind ATI cards (if you have one) only have one dual link DVI port. So you would need to go down the display port route.
Click to expand...

The Powercolor PCS+ 290x I have here has 2 dual link DVI-D outs. I've tested them both with my catleap they run the same.
 
Cyalume said:
But they aren't intended to be run that way, even if some eBay sellers advertise the fact that they can be set to 120hz. I have a QNIX2710LED monitor, and while it does indeed overclock to that, there are some undesirable tradeoffs that come with this: a much darker upper-right corner (and by corner I mean like almost 1/4th the panel), serious issues with any color temp other than 6500k, and artifacts galore if you're like me and you're picky about it. That being said, on the artifacts front: My panel doesn't have any of the solid lines/dead pixel problems when overclocking that some people tend to get (under normal circumstances; I've seen it once or twice in Starcraft II, but only once or twice), the effects are there if you look for them. On a "real 120hz 1440p" IPS panel, you'd be able to get 120hz out of it without any drawbacks.

The above problems are inherent to just about all QNIX2710 panels when overclocked to 120hz, though like mine, you have to meet some conditions (which aren't hard too hard to meet) in order to see them: Lower the brightness a bit, full white (or preferably grey) screen. When you DO see it though, its bad.
Click to expand...

uh, what. the only issues once overclocked to a stable refresh rate are the gamma gradient and slight color desaturation (neither of which are noticeable in games), nothing else. if you're getting lines then your refresh rate needs to be lowered or your timings need to be fixed.

besides that, they're <$300... for a 1440p, 0 input lag, 96+ Hz IPS panel. if these were sold by a mainstream manufacturer like asus you'd be paying $1,500. they're also one of a kind. we haven't heard anything from any large manufacturers about high refresh rate non-tn 1440p monitors. you can't have it all.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if anybody has posted it, but ASUS Nordic said the monitor will be released week 30 in the Nordic stores. Source was there Facebook page. That would put it at July 21-27.
 
This monitor is designed so you can your K/D ratio improves over people without this monitor in First person shooters. Does that make you a better player =)
 
Comixbooks said:
This monitor is designed so you can your K/D ratio improves over people without this monitor in First person shooters. Does that make you a better player =)
Click to expand...

Whether this is marketed as giving an edge in gaming or not, there are huge aesthetic advantages to this monitor in regard to motion and it is the only one to combine such a high level of aesthetic motion advantages and options with 2560x resolution so far. Some game's coding/physics aren't tight enough to gain much if any player performance advantage that the monitor might otherwise give too.

elvn said:
<snip>
The first and most obvious is 60hz panels have massive screen blur during your continual movement keying + mouse look flow pathing in 1st and 3rd person games. 120hz TN reduces this blur by 50% so that it is more like a strong soften blur, making your entire viewport of high detail geometry and textures (incl depth via bump mapping as well as other shader effects) "fuzz out".

120hz-144hz (even at 100fps or so) also allows many more game world state action slices show per second which has several aesthetic (and depending on the game, potential performance vs game and/or other players) advantages:
Increased motion defintion, increased motion tracking (seeing more "dots per dotted line path length"), and increased animation definition. These factors create a more refined/articulated and smooth motion of both individual screen elements their individual pathing/paths, their individual animation cycles, and of the entire world moving during continual viewport/player-camera FoV movement.
Click to expand...

Of course this monitor also adds g-sync dyanamic hz option to eliminate screen abberations w/o using v-sync, and downsides of v-sync like frames per second limitations/penalities and added input lag. It also should have a ulmb option (mutually exclusive from the dynamic hz option) that can produce near zero blur similar to the pristine motion clarity of a high end crt on games that get very high fps. All this again on the only 2560x1440 monitor that has all the aformentioned techs by design (and hopefully on panel that has vibrant/saturated color compared to some of the more recent 144hz reportedly pale tns).

web-cyb.org 120hz-fps compared
 
Last edited:
Comixbooks said:
This monitor is designed so you can your K/D ratio improves over people without this monitor in First person shooters. Does that make you a better player =)
Click to expand...

Whether or not that is true, it's still a silly argument. It's like saying a car is designed to get you from point A to B faster so you can improve your travel time over people who walk or take the bus. Does it make you a better traveler?

I switched to 120hz and it didn't really improve my KD in any games but it certainly made it a much more pleasant experience. And that's what it's all about for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top