ASUS Announces ROG SWIFT PG278Q Premium Gaming Monitor

Warrior said:
This thread is like a long echo.... the same shit over and over...

I personally can't wait for this monitor. I am not picky, when it comes to obviously the best monitor when available. The reviews and first impressions are all stellar, and I've read/heard/watched nothing but positive from this monitor. Except this thread.... It's been awhile since I unsubbed a thread. But, I see no reason why I keep coming back here...
Click to expand...
IPS and VA fanboys do have some valid criticisms about TN panels, but I find none of them affect my real-world gaming experience. But for so many to come in here and crap on the thread constantly is a bit annoying. Everyone on this forum should know what they're getting if considering the purchase of a TN panel.

Viewing angles? Why would I be looking at any angle but straight on while I'm gaming?

Black levels? This was a by-product of most TN panels using 6-bit+FRC. This is a true 8-bit colour panel so it should put black levels on par with IPS.

Contrast ratio? TN has always had comparable levels of contrast ratio to IPS, but VA panels will always be superior in this regard.

Matte coating? This is a subjective opinion. I have never noticed any graininess with monitors using a medium AG coating when compared to semi-glossy or even glossy.

Colour reproduction? The only valid criticism against TN in my opinion, an it is simply the reality of the pixel matrix structure. For gaming purposes, the differences in colour between IPS/VA and TN are not enough for me to jump onboard a panel technology with inferior response times.

I am really excited for this monitor, so this 2 week wait is going to be torturous :D.

elvn said:
Nothing wrong with discussing tradeoffs and imperfections in a monitor before, - and perhaps more importantly after - people buy them and discussing it in threads. That's one of the main reasons for these threads, being informative (helping people decide on purchases, helping people get the most out of their purchases, etc.).

Plainly, there will be plenty of reason to keep viewing this thread to see owner's report back on their purchases and experiences with them.
Click to expand...
Just to add, I'm not saying stop that type of discussion, but the discussion should be about the monitor and not a constant argument about panel technologies.
 
Just for my own comparison purposes, does anyone know or care to venture a guess at what type of panels Samsung uses/used in their LCD televisions? The model I have is LN40A650A1F and it was manufactured in November of 2008.

I'm interested in picking up a Swift, but I love the large 40inch screen i currently use. I dunno how bad of an adjustment it would be to move to a smaller screen and different seating position. I'm not a huge IQ snob and can live with some disadvantages of the TN so long as it comes close to what I currently have I would be happy for the increase in resolution and gsync.

EDIT all I can find is its listed as a TFT.
 
Last edited:
I'll be watching this thread. And, when I get mine hopefully next month, I'll report back. But, I'm not up on all this panel technology, the tech changes too much for me to keep up. But, If there is one thing I know, that's high refresh rates and response time. Something we all can agree on. I cant wait to get back to the green side and see some GSYNC action. I play mainly BF4 and CS:GO. I need this. I could not give a damn about color reproduction and contrast. I work at Xerox... I work with this shit AAALLLLL day, and hear about it AAALLLL day... Color this, profile this, correction this.... It's rotted my brain enough that I just don't care anymore... When I go home to relax the last thing I'll be thinking about is how the colors look on my $800 monitor. I play games that don't need the perfect colors or contrast, it's a damn game... lol.


But, of course to each their own... Maybe I'm getting tired of waiting for so long... CES was a loooong time ago.
 
wasteomind said:
Just for my own comparison purposes, does anyone know or care to venture a guess at what type of panels Samsung uses/used in their LCD televisions? The model I have is LN40A650A1F and it was manufactured in November of 2008.

I'm interested in picking up a Swift, but I love the large 40inch screen i currently use. I dunno how bad of an adjustment it would be to move to a smaller screen and different seating position. I'm not a huge IQ snob and can live with some disadvantages of the TN so long as it comes close to what I currently have I would be happy for the increase in resolution and gsync.

EDIT all I can find is its listed as a TFT.
Click to expand...
Most modern Samsung televisions use some type of VA panel. My UN40FH6030 uses a S-PVA panel. PVA is a type of MVA panel technology developed by Samsung. One quick way to check (not foolproof, mind you) is to check the contrast shift on wide viewing angles. If the contrast appears to lessen (picture gets darker/blacks get crushed) then it is probably a VA panel. TN panels will get washed out with contrast appearing to get higher on off-angles.
 
Armenius said:
Most modern Samsung televisions use some type of VA panel. My UN40FH6030 uses a S-PVA panel. PVA is a type of MVA panel technology developed by Samsung. One quick way to check (not foolproof, mind you) is to check the contrast shift on wide viewing angles. If the contrast appears to lessen (picture gets darker/blacks get crushed) then it is probably a VA panel. TN panels will get washed out with contrast appearing to get higher on off-angles.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the response. Moving off center on my screen seems to lighten the image, and colors shift very slightly into a greenish hue (again very slight) and lighten up, perhaps more pale. It isn't a drastic shift, but noticeable. It is consistent from any angle, viewing from above doesn't appear any more/less impacted than viewing from a wide wide side angle. It doesn't look as bad as I've seen from images of some TNs.
 
Over under 100 pages before this thing actually comes out:p


Everytime I see this thread bumped I am hopping for a release or pre order info and its still a bunch of dudes circle jerking the same stuff over and over.


Come on Asus!!!
 
Does anyone know what would be stand-less wieght of this thing? The spring on my Herman Miller monitor arm is very stiff and does not support anything under 15-20lbs....I am pretty sure this monitor will come under that, just hoping it is not as light and flimsy as my Qnix.
 
Andyk5 said:
Does anyone know what would be stand-less wieght of this thing? The spring on my Herman Miller monitor arm is very stiff and does not support anything under 15-20lbs....I am pretty sure this monitor will come under that, just hoping it is not as light and flimsy as my Qnix.
Click to expand...

7 kg or 15.4 lbs. w/ stand. I'm sure the stand doesn't weight all that much.

I mean if your arm is Hermann Miller, that's pretty high end, surely that spring has a tension ratchet of some sort?

You could always double sided 3M tape some weight disks on the back of the monitor I suppose.
 
Last edited:
Warrior said:
This thread is like a long echo.... the same shit over and over...

I personally can't wait for this monitor. I am not picky, when it comes to obviously the best monitor when available. The reviews and first impressions are all stellar, and I've read/heard/watched nothing but positive from this monitor. Except this thread.... It's been awhile since I unsubbed a thread. But, I see no reason why I keep coming back here...
Click to expand...

People are only heavily critical because they care. It might come off as been snooty but the truth is it stirs up a lot of emotion in people because they love being a PC enthusiast.
 
Godmachine said:
Contrast and black depth are.. below what I expected. Even the input latency is a tad higher than I expected considering this is being marketed to gamers very heavily..

Wish they talked about the OSD menu , G-sync function and some other things. First impressions of this monitor are a bit disappointing.
Click to expand...

Really? On their review it has the lowest input lag on 3 of their tests.

And from what I saw in other reviews the input latency seems about as fast as it can get.


Also for this review they said this
We are working with Leo Bodnar input lag tester, but is restricted to Full HD and displays at higher resolutions unpredictable results; also works only with HDMI connection which the ASUS PG278Q not available.
Click to expand...
 
it received a Gold Award from that review, so you cant complain much.

the only downside is the contrast ratio, but like all TN's and IPS monitors, there is nothing that can be done unless you buy that Eizo Forris display, but again I only enjoy movies with high contrast ratio.

for gaming all i want now is 1440p/144hz.
 
Last edited:
My, the tftcentral review looks pretty tempting.

What really interests me about this monitor is the possibility of 1440p ULMB @85 Hz, with great colors. A steady, smooth, largely blur-free 85 fps should be reachable in many more games than 120 or even 100 fps - and for the rest of the games there is G-sync. Hopefully G-sync and ULMB will work ok with a multiple monitor setup, that's the only potential showstopper for me. I do want to have 2 monitors worth of desktop space, especially now that both can be the same size and resolution.

My current Lightboost-hacked BenQ has pretty poor PQ if color profiles do not work in-game (the BenQ is more usable when gaming than my Qnix with its risible overclocked gamma though :eek: ). So I am kind of ready to upgrade. 849 euros in Finland is a bit much, however - not an impulse buy anymore.
 
Last edited:
Godmachine said:
Contrast and black depth are.. below what I expected. Even the input latency is a tad higher than I expected considering this is being marketed to gamers very heavily..

Wish they talked about the OSD menu , G-sync function and some other things. First impressions of this monitor are a bit disappointing.
Click to expand...

Just how much contrast ratio and black depth you'd like from a TN or IPS panel? they never go much above 1000:1
VA is the only option.
 
Anyone know if a HDMI to displayport cable would make this be able to work with my consoles as well as my PC?
 
Are there any 1440/1600p 27" secondary monitors that anyone could recommend to go with this. I would love to keep a dual screen setup but finding good value screens at this resolution to maintain the same PPI is hard. I was looking at the PB278Q but dam that is expensive, wish it was more like $400.
 
kregstrong said:
Anyone know if a HDMI to displayport cable would make this be able to work with my consoles as well as my PC?
Click to expand...

AFAIK Yes(for consoles only), but you would only get 60hz out of that converter. And if it did work you would also need something else for Audio.
 
Pre-orders finally available in Australia!

Looks like A$999.00 is the baseline (PC Case Gear, PLE Computers, Scorptec and Centrecom). MWave has it on for $1,049.00. Plus about $30 shipping of course...

ETA is a bit variable;

19 August at Scorptec (but also 'mid to late august')
25 August at PLE
29 August at PC Case Gear
MWave is saying "ETA: Mid to Late August 2014".

Anyone see it cheaper anywhere else?
 
Last edited:
xinux said:
Oh, they 'upgraded' the g-sync module. Maybe that's what took so long.
Click to expand...

Yes by upgraded the g-sync module they mean, "we had children on bicycles bring them to us from other children who redesigned and built them many hundreds of miles away, and then when they arrived we realized they forgot some parts so they had to turn around and go back for those also. It was really annoying." :rolleyes:
 
NeonWhite said:
Pre-orders finally available in Australia!

Looks like A$999.00 is the baseline (PC Case Gear, PLE Computers, Scorptec and Centrecom). MWave has it on for $1,049.00. Plus about $30 shipping of course...

ETA is a bit variable;

19 August at Scorptec (but also 'mid to late august')
25 August at PLE
29 August at PC Case Gear
MWave is saying "ETA: Mid to Late August 2014".

Anyone see it cheaper anywhere else?
Click to expand...

Wow the Aussies always get shafted with higher prices from hardware to software(games).

If mid August is when the Aussies get it when do we in the US get it? September?
 
Who am I kidding, there's no way I'd be able to keep myself from ordering this thing. With some luck I'll have it by next monday.
 
jaguax said:
Does refresh rate impact the frame rate at all? I keep reading "you need a powerful graphics card" for all of these high hz monitors but that doesn't make sense to me. I understand that if the game is running at 60 fps then 144 hz will have no benefit, but will it actually hurt performance to keep the refresh rate at 144 hz all the time even if the games aren't reaching 144 fps?
Click to expand...

enough with this "144fps or go home" BS, i bet my left nut that most of these so called "reviewers" and "gaming experts" never ever played an action game on a good old crt,using a high refresh rate display is ALWAYS beneficial gameplay wise

http://pcmonitors.info/reviews/benq-xl2420t


Note: The observations during gameplay on Battlefield 3 and Dirt 3 below are based on them running at 120fps, which is the maximum frame rate the monitor will output correctly. Although trailing becomes increasingly pronounced as the frame rate falls (see the PixPerAn comparison, for example) the overall feeling of connectedness and fluidity is still key to the experience even at lower frame rates. You will certainly get the most out of the XL2420T at higher frame rates but as the proceeding paragraphs explore there is still much benefit to be gained regardless of frame rate.

On Battlefield 3 (BF3) running about on foot, tracking and engaging enemies was a painless task. Textures remained sharp whilst running and even whilst rapidly turning – so you don’t miss a beat. There was the tiniest hint of overdrive trailing during the odd high contrast pixel transition but not enough to cause concern. If looking at a bright white van next to deep blue sky and strafing past it, for example, a small dark ‘vibration’ was visible. This really needed to be focussed on to be seen and clearly the BenQ handles BF3’s on foot action very well. If you ramp up the pace of the action by getting into a nimble jeep, for example, the ‘high contrast’ overdrive trailing at the edges of white objects becomes a little more pronounced. Even then it is very slight and would need to be specifically focussed on for you to even register its existence. The overall fluidity of the scene whilst driving is very impressive – allowing you to keep tabs on any enemies as you zoom past. Overall smoothness and connectedness on the XL2420T in the game was very good. 120Hz monitors such as the BenQ are not only able refresh to frames of the game twice as quickly but are also able to update input responses from the mouse twice as often. This effect is greatest at a frame rate of 120fps but even at 60fps provides a significant advantage in this regard over even the most responsive 60Hz LCD monitors. Coupled with low input lag, which is covered in the next section, the game has a level of smoothness that no 60Hz LCD can touch.
Click to expand...

g-sync is overrated too, you should still buy this monitor even if you have an amd gpu http://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/preview2/
 
SoFGR said:
enough with this "144fps or go home" BS, i bet my left nut that most of these so called "reviewers" and "gaming experts" never ever played an action game on a good old crt,using a high refresh rate display is ALWAYS beneficial gameplay wise

http://pcmonitors.info/reviews/benq-xl2420t




g-sync is overrated too, you should still buy this monitor even if you have an amd gpu http://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/preview2/
Click to expand...
The problem I see with Blurbuster's test is that they are measuring lag at maximum available framerate in games. The input lag benefits of GSync are more pronounced, and thus more beneficial, the lower the framerate is when compared to the refresh rate. If the framerate is close to the refresh rate, then it is basically behaving the same as VSync. In game you play where you are able to push the framerate required for a given refresh rate, then it is better for you to use ULMB. That is why this monitor gives you the option for both. I know for myself in games where I can easily push 120 FPS I will be using ULMB, and games like Crysis 3 I will be using GSync.
 
Vega said:
So overclocked G-Sync, required larger heat-sink, more air vents in case = 4+ month delay. Maybe they should have put me on their design team. ;)
Click to expand...

De-matteing tens of thousands of monitors would have surely delayed things further.
 
SoFGR said:
enough with this "144fps or go home" BS, i bet my left nut that most of these so called "reviewers" and "gaming experts" never ever played an action game on a good old crt,using a high refresh rate display is ALWAYS beneficial gameplay wise

http://pcmonitors.info/reviews/benq-xl2420t




g-sync is overrated too, you should still buy this monitor even if you have an amd gpu http://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/preview2/
Click to expand...

If G-Sync is over rated then is there any reason to buy the ROG over the 120hz IPS Overlord Tempest ?
 
Armenius said:
The problem I see with Blurbuster's test is that they are measuring lag at maximum available framerate in games. The input lag benefits of GSync are more pronounced, and thus more beneficial, the lower the framerate is when compared to the refresh rate. If the framerate is close to the refresh rate, then it is basically behaving the same as VSync. In game you play where you are able to push the framerate required for a given refresh rate, then it is better for you to use ULMB. That is why this monitor gives you the option for both. I know for myself in games where I can easily push 120 FPS I will be using ULMB, and games like Crysis 3 I will be using GSync.
Click to expand...

Easily 120fps sure. Just remember there is a difference between 100 - 120fps average and minimum. The "mode"/most common frame rate being 100+ fps is what I am shooting for when I do sli someday. That would still be a frame rate variance in a frame rate graph which could potentially benefit from g-sync. If dual 800's could tweak gfx down to high or high+ and hit 120ave that would work for me however.
For now I would be using single 780ti so g-sync would probably be the way to go for the most demanding titles. I do still have a lot of titles in my steam library that could hit 100-120fps (or higher on simpler ones). One that stands out is skyrim (obviously a console port but still..) with 2k texture pack still gets around 106 fps (average, on ultra) with a single 780ti. The rest of the more modern, demanding popular games are 80's and less unfortunately (~on ultra~) without adding a second higher end card. These ceilings are of course arbitrary and can go even higher with mods on some games. The devs could easily release games with magnitude's higher gfx ceilings (as those with mods that bump it up some indicate). Their challenge is whittling games down to still play in realtime, not the other way around. You really don't have to always be ultra on every game unless that is your zealous thing and your budget can handle it - especially on a monitor that is 2560x with a 120 - 144 visible frame rate/sec ceiling (as compared to easier to render 1080p)... but that's just my personal perspective. Playable framerate and "good" frame rate are somewhat subjective terms as well, and when/if you can't have everything due to graphics horsepower and/or cost limitations (gpu price/performance are falling way behind higher rez + hz imo) you might have to choose between better motion clarity, motion articulation + motion&animation definition, or prettier still shots running lower fps "freeze-frames" as compared to the higher fps+hz option.
forums.evga.com GTX 780Ti Benchmarks 1x-4x SLI (Work in Progress)

Some games just judder/tear worse than others code wise so it's not always a universal and can be different for different games (and per game per patches, drivers, profiles, customized cfg's etc).
 
Last edited:
Sweet I just sold off $600 of useless crap to put towards for the monitor. 3 months on Ebay and cleared out 2 closets. I still have my monitor to sell off after I get this, I havnt been this excited since the launch of the Playstation 1 lol.
 
This is worth addressing:
Overall smoothness and connectedness on the XL2420T in the game was very good. 120Hz monitors such as the BenQ are not only able refresh to frames of the game twice as quickly but are also able to update input responses from the mouse twice as often. This effect is greatest at a frame rate of 120fps but even at 60fps provides a significant advantage in this regard over even the most responsive 60Hz LCD monitors.
Click to expand...
The output device makes no difference as to the rate at which input is polled and the rate at which the game ticks. The refresh rate, as defined by the adapter, may matter — a game engine may decide to tick more frequently if the refresh rate of the adapter is greater, but BF3 doesn't work this way. The idea, also, that the monitor is sampling input devices is absolutely incorrect. The game samples inputs; the monitor does not.

In BF3, the rate at which the game updates its state in response to inputs is constant and is defined independently of adapter's refresh rate. Unless changed within Windows itself, the rate at which USB devices are polled remains constant and is defined independently of adapter's refresh rate.
 
The problem I see with Blurbuster's test is that they are measuring lag at maximum available framerate in games. The input lag benefits of GSync are more pronounced, and thus more beneficial, the lower the framerate is when compared to the refresh rate. If the framerate is close to the refresh rate, then it is basically behaving the same as VSync. In game you play where you are able to push the framerate required for a given refresh rate, then it is better for you to use ULMB. That is why this monitor gives you the option for both. I know for myself in games where I can easily push 120 FPS I will be using ULMB, and games like Crysis 3 I will be using GSync.
Click to expand...

smooth precise and fluid mouse response without having to run the game @ 60fps+ ? I'll believe it when i see it :)

Martha Stewart said:
If G-Sync is over rated then is there any reason to buy the ROG over the 120hz IPS Overlord Tempest ?
Click to expand...

ULMB for fast paced gpu-light games, less ghosting overall, 144 vs 120hz and ROG's stamp for bragging rights :p
 
wonderfield said:
This is worth addressing:
The output device makes no difference as to the rate at which input is polled and the rate at which the game ticks. The refresh rate, as defined by the adapter, may matter — a game engine may decide to tick more frequently if the refresh rate of the adapter is greater, but BF3 doesn't work this way. The idea, also, that the monitor is sampling input devices is absolutely incorrect. The game samples inputs; the monitor does not.

In BF3, the rate at which the game updates its state in response to inputs is constant and is defined independently of adapter's refresh rate. Unless changed within Windows itself, the rate at which USB devices are polled remains constant and is defined independently of adapter's refresh rate.
Click to expand...
Agreed. However depending on the game it is possible to have more motion control articulation within the confines of that game's sample rate, up to the maximum, and also to see more degrees of motion definition of onscreen elements, again within the game's limitations.
The mouse pointer example is usually shown in a circle with many more degrees(frames) of motion shown per given mouse path length. Of course the desktop poll rate and unhindered fps would be way higher than a 1st/3rd person game, especially a console port/developed heavily with console in mind (or as priority) game. The ceiling for the potential amount of world action slice states shown per second, the amount of control articulation/path changes per second, and overall animation cycle definition is definitely higher from a visual standpoint at high fps+high hz. The rest is up to the devs of the particular game (and in some cases mods and config changes) to not cripple it. This could potentially be more limited by online arena geared code than single player games, and by console ports/console focused development.

I guess a good question would be, what is the max "fps+hz" action/world state variation "visible to the game"/registered by the game engine equivalent considering poll rate of particular games from their game engine's perspective regardless of what you are seeing on screen, and for different games does this change for online/arena play vs single player, etc. (disregarding online latency factors).
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
Agreed. However depending on the game it is possible to have more motion control articulation within the confines of that game's sample rate, up to the maximum, and also to see more degrees of motion definition of onscreen elements, again within the game's limitations.
The mouse pointer example is usually shown in a circle with many more degrees(frames) of motion shown per given mouse path length. Of course the desktop poll rate and unhindered fps would be way higher than a 1st/3rd person game, especially a console port/developed heavily with console in mind (or as priority) game. The ceiling for amount of world action slice states shown per second, the amount of control articulation/path changes per second, and overall animation cycle definition is definitely higher from a visual standpoint at high fps+high hz. The rest is up to the devs of the particular game (and in some cases mods and config changes) to not cripple it. This could potentially be more limited by online arena geared code than single player games, and by console ports/console focused development.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Any improvement in smoothness is an artifact of the visual perception at a higher framerate. Due to how we perceive motion this improvement in framerate will also improve one's precision. The quote stating a doubling of input response from the mouse is factually and technically false. Outside of video games the mouse is still limited by the sampling rate and resolution of the mouse itself, multiplied by the sensitivity.
 
Yeah that review is wrong. Read their review of the newer Z model - http://pcmonitors.info/reviews/benq-xl2420z. No mention of input polling crap. Also:

"At lower frame rates the advantages in motion blur reduction vanish and although the monitor still has very low latency (and the ‘input lag penalty’ to using VSync is reduced) you don’t get the same level of connectedness. So overall the monitor provided the snappy pixel responsiveness and extremely low latency to put the 144Hz refresh rate to good use, provided you can pump out well over 60fps to really benefit from it."

Quite clear that high frame rates bring the real benefits. They also have an article about responsiveness, no mention of input polling etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top