ASUS PG279Q 144hz 1440P IPS G-Sync

New video of one in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmnxLL-0jfY

and from that youtube vid, this thread (starting and linked to page 211), several people have received their 279s, some mixed reactions:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1558309/various-asus-debuts-rog-swift-pg279q-144hz-ips-and-g-sync/2100

I should have mine tomorrow or day after, it's being UPS'd tonight. Any blemish or issue and I will send back and get something else, not going to play the rma/rinse/repeat game and I am pretty fussy about quality.
 
His monitor looks decent, no noticeable backlight bleed or obvious glow.

BTW Battlefronts environments look photo realistic :p
 
It's the same panel as the Acer HU, it will be no different.
 
Vega said:
It's the same panel as the Acer HU, it will be no different.
Click to expand...
It could have been better binned, the support structure could have been improve to avoid uneven pressure on the panel, and ASUS themselves could have had better quality control.
Obviously none of that is true in this case, however.
 
loll I don't why back then everyone was saying things like "I'll just wait for the Asus instead of getting the Acer for better QC". Looks like this monitor is also going to end up being a QC nightmare sadly just like the original Swift.
 
zone74 said:
It could have been better binned, the support structure could have been improve to avoid uneven pressure on the panel, and ASUS themselves could have had better quality control.
Obviously none of that is true in this case, however.
Click to expand...

The internal metal bezel and associated panel floats exposed with the ASUS design, just like on the TN Swift. There are no uneven pressure issues besides the design of the panel itself. The internal metal bezel is required to secure all layers of the LCD panel together and is independent of the outside monitor case. As for "binning", too costly to examine all panels.
 
Blade-Runner said:
For the premium they charge for these monitors they really should be, or at least demanding that AUO improve its own quality control.
Click to expand...

Why would they do that when they can sell loads of 800$ 1440p TN panels with grainy matte coatings to loads of people who previously denounced both TN panels and grainy matte coatings? AUO must be loving life now that they've become the primary manufacturer of gaming panels. Only the naive will expect this Asus to have better QC than the Acer.
 
Last edited:
There is also this to consider:

If they went heavier with the QC, they may not have enough initial stock to satisfy the initial hype demand, so they sell sub par panels to grab the market first. It may be easier to get people to wait for a replacement screen than it is for people to wait for a monitor to get back in stock, especially with the XB270HU that's already available.
 
chenw said:
There is also this to consider:

If they went heavier with the QC, they may not have enough initial stock to satisfy the initial hype demand, so they sell sub par panels to grab the market first. It may be easier to get people to wait for a replacement screen than it is for people to wait for a monitor to get back in stock, especially with the XB270HU that's already available.
Click to expand...

I would like to think that a company wouldn't do that because of the all the bad rep they got for the TN model but you never know.
 
NCX said:
Why would they do that when they can sell loads of 800$ 1440p TN panels with grainy matte coatings to loads of people who previously denounced both TN panels and grainy matte coatings?
Click to expand...

You would think they would be concerned about preserving their reputation and image as a premium brand. Premium branding generally implies premium quality. You might be right, but ultimately Asus is going to burn its reputation...it might sell loads initially but eventually people will shy away from its products. As it stands, I wouldn't go out of my way to use or recommend Asus products given all the horror stories that seem to consistently come up lately.
 
NCX said:
Why would they do that when they can sell loads of 800$ 1440p TN panels with grainy matte coatings to loads of people who previously denounced both TN panels and grainy matte coatings?
Click to expand...

They wouldn't. They would switch to selling loads of $800 IPS panels with 144Hz refresh rates, G-Sync variable refresh rate tech, and none of that grainy matte coating you always whine about.
 
Last edited:
NukeDukem said:
They wouldn't. They would switch to selling loads of $800 IPS panels with 144Hz refresh rates, G-Sync variable refresh rate tech, and none of that grainy matte coating you always whine about.
Click to expand...

Whoosh! Someone missed the point.
 
Some users on overclock.net appear to have success alleviating back light bleed by taking a hair dryer to their X34s. Wonder if that trick will work with other monitors.
 
NCX said:
Why would they do that when they can sell loads of 800$ 1440p TN panels with grainy matte coatings to loads of people who previously denounced both TN panels and grainy matte coatings? AUO must be loving life now that they've become the primary manufacturer of gaming panels. Only the naive will expect this Asus to have better QC than the Acer.
Click to expand...


You're right.

If I buy this I'm under no illusion about the QC/QA.

I'll be rolling the crapshoot dice to see if I get lucky and get a decent - good IPS monitor that gives me at least 120Hz (obviously this does that and more) and G-sync and the extra input that I want for convenience. I'm tired of waiting.
 
Tych-0 said:
How is the motion blur on this unit compared to the original SWIFT?
Click to expand...

we don't know because it's not out yet but it's the same panel as the XB270HU so it shouldn't be any different than that. 2.9 ms average on the PG278Q with normal overdrive versus 5.9 ms average on the XB270HU with normal overdrive.

N5784Mt.jpg
 
Launching first week of November at $799, per PC Perspective. Asus also says there won't be any supply issues. We'll see. :)

Pricing and Availability

The ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q will ship in the first week of November and will have an MSRP of $799. That puts its pretty much on par with the currently available Acer XB270HU display that sports a 144Hz IPS G-Sync display and 2560x1440 resolution.

ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q - $799
Acer XB270HU - $755
ASUS ROG Swift PG278Q - $670

For this review, I asked ASUS specifically about availability. After all, with the huge debacle surrounding the original Swift's release that included months of availability concerns and price spikes, we had apprehensions that ASUS could keep up with demand. The company has assured me that they "aren’t expecting any issues" for this release. That could mean they have produced a large quantity for shipment or that they expect less of a rabid fervor for the monitors like we saw with the PG278Q. I think the latter seems likely - the initial excitement over G-Sync monitors has died down and now consumers are more interested in picking out the perfect monitor for them, not just whatever happens to hit the market.
Click to expand...

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Displa...-165Hz-2560x1440-27-IPS-G-Sync-Monitor-Review
 
addictedto60fps said:
Launching first week of November at $799, per PC Perspective. Asus also says there won't be any supply issues. We'll see. :)
Click to expand...

I'll be one of the people ordering one as soon as its out. I hope they're right. I also hope I get a good one as they seem to be hit or miss from what I've been reading. Some people have been getting ones with no dirt / dead pixels and others have. I don't think the backlight bleed / IPS glow is going to bother me as much as it does some people but I wont stand for dead pixels.
 
Cypher- said:
I'll be one of the people ordering one as soon as its out. I hope they're right. I also hope I get a good one as they seem to be hit or miss from what I've been reading. Some people have been getting ones with no dirt / dead pixels and others have. I don't think the backlight bleed / IPS glow is going to bother me as much as it does some people but I wont stand for dead pixels.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I hope they're right, too. And I also will be ordering as soon as I'm able to. I share the same sentiment as you - backlight bleed/IPS glow are not dealbreakers for me, but dead pixels are. It's also interesting how in PC Perspective's youtube video review, they say they can tell a noticeable difference between 144 and 165 hz.
 
Yup, I think this is the one I'm rolling the dice on.

So what does this all mean? Well it means that the pixel response times of the screen will vary a little depending on the refresh rate you're using. If you plugged in a 60Hz console, the response times would be ~8.5ms G2G, still very good for an IPS panel. If you use G-sync and the refresh rate fluctuates between 30 and 144Hz, the response times are controlled dynamically and will vary a little as refresh rate changes. To be honest we aren't talking huge differences, although when you combine the slightly higher response time impact on blurring, with the impact of lower refresh rates on perceived blur, you will notice some difference in motion clarity depending on your active refresh rate. The variation in response times isn't really a big factor, and you're more likely to notice the difference in motion clarity caused by the changes in refresh rate anyway. It's just an interesting thing to note. The same thing happened on the Acer XB270HU display, but not on the Asus MG279Q despite the use of the same panel in each display. It seems that the G-sync module is perhaps responsible for dynamically controlling the response times with refresh rate, whereas the FreeSync MG279Q display did not show this.
Click to expand...

Interesting.
 
I wish NVIDIA (or ASUS?) would enable ULMB at 60Hz - or ideally any refresh rate that the monitor can sync to.
So many games are capped to 60 FPS now, which means that there's no benefit to G-Sync if you can run them at 60 FPS, and you can't use ULMB either because it only works at 85/100/120Hz.
 
Last edited:
I haven't seen a single game yet that is capped at 60hz.. if the in game options don't let you select higher than that, you can force highest available in Nvidia CP. I've seen games with *framerates* locked (60fps, 120fps, etc) but those still benefit from higher refresh rates (for reduced input lag.)
 
Colonel Sanders said:
I haven't seen a single game yet that is capped at 60hz.. if the in game options don't let you select higher than that, you can force highest available in Nvidia CP. I've seen games with *framerates* locked (60fps, 120fps, etc) but those still benefit from higher refresh rates (for reduced input lag.)
Click to expand...
Sorry, I'm usually really good about that. Meant to write "capped to 60 FPS".
Refresh rate must be equal to the framerate with impulse-type displays (ULMB) so you can't do 60 FPS at 120Hz.
Since ULMB only supports 85/100/120Hz, and some games are capped to 60 FPS, you cannot use ULMB with them at all.
 
Thanks for explaining, I didn't know that. I personally don't like ULMB because my eyes pick up the strobing really bad.
 
Blade-Runner said:
For the premium they charge for these monitors they really should be, or at least demanding that AUO improve its own quality control.
Click to expand...

Professional monitors cost way way more than $800. If they were to retool this panel to be a professional grade one and throw away all of these "rejects, most people wouldn't be able to afford them. The monitor also includes the "G-Sync tax" of $200.

It's amazing to me how picky people can be. Does anyone remember CRTs? It was impossible to ever have perfect convergence along the screen, let alone getting the geometry and everything else set up.

We've come a long long way.
 
zone74 said:
I wish NVIDIA (or ASUS?) would enable ULMB at 60Hz - or ideally any refresh rate that the monitor can sync to.
So many games are capped to 60 FPS now, which means that there's no benefit to G-Sync if you can run them at 60 FPS, and you can't use ULMB either because it only works at 85/100/120Hz.
Click to expand...

Do you realise what ULMB at 60hz would look like? ULMB at 120hz is already flickery. ULMB at 60hz....
 
igluk said:
What if you run 60fps capped games at 120hz with black frame insertion. That should cut down the blur by 50%.
And then putting 120hz ULMB on top of that is supposed to completely eliminate it.
Click to expand...
With black frame insertion you're relying on the panel being fast enough to switch to black and to the next frame again in 8.33ms.
When the panel can't keep up, it results in a "washed out" look.
I've used black frame insertion in RetroArch and it's nowhere near as good as strobing. It's also not a universal solution.

ULMB and similar tech works really well because it's switching the LEDs off and on, and they respond in less than 1ms.
Since you're switching the backlight off, you also get true black frames. On a 1000:1 IPS panel, "black" is very visible.

When displays from other companies like BenQ have their own strobing solution that works at every refresh rate the monitor will sync to, it seems really limiting to be stuck at 85/100/120Hz with ULMB.

Nicholars said:
Do you realise what ULMB at 60hz would look like? ULMB at 120hz is already flickery. ULMB at 60hz....
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm old enough to have used a CRT before. 60Hz flicker is noticeable, but I can deal with it.
It's a lot better than the alternative, which is 17ms of motion blur.
 
linuxdude9 said:
It's amazing to me how picky people can be. Does anyone remember CRTs? It was impossible to ever have perfect convergence along the screen, let alone getting the geometry and everything else set up.

We've come a long long way.
Click to expand...

Considering this monitor costs ~$800 (MSRP?) and an A+ calibrated with perfect convergence FW900 costs $1000, I'd say no we have not come a long way from CRTs at all.

For $200 more (the price of a G-Sync module), I get a monitor that has superb color and contrast levels, response time, excellent motion clarity, and no risk of dead pixels with 0 scaling issues since every resolution is native. 15 years old and it's still relevant.

If space and weight weren't an issue, I would've brought my FW900 with me. All of the monitors we're buying now are merely stopgaps until OLED monitors (that hopefully use BFI or FI to combat sample-and-hold flaws) join the fray, then we wouldn't need ULMB as much and stick with VRR.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top