Honest opinion of ISP, G-sync and 1440p

W

wrugoin

n00b
Joined
Feb 6, 2012
Messages
48
Hey folks,

Right now I'm sitting with an Asus VG278HE, a 27 inch TN panel, 1080p, 144hz monitor. I've had it for maybe 3 years and have good experiences with the monitor. No dead pixels, little to no light bleed, and the only drawback I deal with is the poor viewing angle. The monitor is exclusively use for gaming and basic computer internet use. It's not an entertainment center for movies, nor do I use it for photo editing or any type of artwork.

Like many, I'm looking at one of the new Acer and Asus gaming monitors and debating the $800+ investment. I'd like honest opinions of someone who has experienced both sides of the coin and can honestly say that the upgrade made a world of difference and is definitely worth the premium, or if you'll be paying a lot of money for very minor differences.

Upgrading from a TN panel to ISP: Currently my monitor sits above eye level and the monitor's tilt isn't enough to make it a flush straight on view. I have to put a wedge under the base to tilt it down enough to see the screen properly, otherwise it it isn't perfect, the colors and brightness wash out dramatically. Will an ISP panel likely solve this? Are the viewing angles that much better?

Vsync to Gsync: Right now I leave v-sync permanently enabled for all games. If there is some stutter, I think my brain ignores it since I've never known anything different for the last decade of LCD monitors. Those who now own a g-sync or free-sync panel, is it a night and day difference? Is this a tech that you couldn't live without once experiencing games with it enabled? When you see a non-Gsync panel, does stuttering hit your eye like an ice pick?

1080p to 1440p: I have a 980TI, so I know I have the juice for it, but I want to get a feel if 1440p is really a noticeable change from typical monitor view distances of 4 to 6 feet. 1080p looks pretty amazing to me for most games. How much better does it get at 1440p? When playing games at Ultra high settings, Is it worth giving up some FPS for that extra resolution?

Thanks for any feedback in advance.
 
Last edited:
Upgrading from TN to IPS was such a massive night and day difference. My second monitor (24 inch TN 1080p) looks absolutely cheap and terrible next to my 27 inch IPS 1440p monitor.

1080p to 1440p.. I have a hard time giving an honest comparison and saying whether or not it was worth it because I changed screen size, resolution and to IPS at the same time. I took a pretty decent performance hit when upgrading though.

On another note, I wish I had gone with a monitor with a higher refresh rate and possibly a lower latency. On games that have small moving letters (such as games with nameplates) I can see a blur on the edges and it drives me crazy.
 
I upgraded to an Acer XB270HU from an Asus VG248QE which is very similar to your current monitor except its 24 inches.

From TN to IPS: Well the 248QE is probably one of the worst TN panels out there in terms of image quality so this upgrade was definitely like day and night. Yes the viewing angles of IPS are THAT much better and this panel in particular has a very light matte coating compared to the grainy coating that was on my Asus so the image was also much much cleaner in addition to having better colors and viewing angles.

Vsync to Gsync: Well I'm the opposite of you in that I never play with Vsync on, I've always been a Vsync off guy so my experience is different. Personally I didn't notice any difference in overall "smoothness" compared to my 248QE but all the screen tearing I use to live with is now gone. Gsync definitely works, it's not some gimmick and it gets rid of all the tearing without any of the drawbacks of traditional Vsync and I've been very happy with it. Since you play with Vsync all the time then you'd probably notice smoother gameplay as well.

1080p to 1440p: Also a day and night difference just like TN and IPS. In fact I found the difference between 1080p to 1440p to be a bigger difference than 1440p to 4k at this size. I just feel like most games out there today don't really have the textures to really justify 4k. The biggest thing I noticed going from 1440p to 4k was just less aliasing going on. 1080p to 1440p made everything look a lot clearer and sharper.
 
LCD sucks in general:
-washed out colours due to no glossy coatings anymore
-bad blacklevels, uniformity, bleed
-IPS glow instead of polarisers to eliminate it.
-cheap LED strips instead of full array backlighting
-dead pixels, trapped dust, trapped insects, "bruise" blemishes and gridline defects
-vertical banding on VA

Don't waste your money on gimmicks like "freesync" and "g-sync". Get a basic 1440p 27" IPS.

Wait for OLED or laser displays which will make LCDs look like old black & white TVs in comparison.
 
Panmaster said:
LCD sucks in general:
-washed out colours due to no glossy coatings anymore
-bad blacklevels, uniformity, bleed
-IPS glow instead of polarisers to eliminate it.
-cheap LED strips instead of full array backlighting
-dead pixels, trapped dust, trapped insects, "bruise" blemishes and gridline defects
-vertical banding on VA

Don't waste your money on gimmicks like "freesync" and "g-sync". Get a basic 1440p 27" IPS.

Wait for OLED or laser displays which will make LCDs look like old black & white TVs in comparison.
Click to expand...

I would agree, except that other features like 144hz and backlight strobing are NOT gimmicks in any way as they are both universal and make a huge difference to what you see.

My ideal monitor in terms of price/performance would be: 27", IPS, 5ms or less input lag, 1440p, 120hz, backlight strobing. That's it. Nothing else. One DP input would be fine.

But nobody makes that yet.
 
Advil said:
My ideal monitor in terms of price/performance would be: 27", IPS, 5ms or less input lag, 1440p, 120hz, backlight strobing. That's it. Nothing else. One DP input would be fine.

But nobody makes that yet.
Click to expand...
Acer XB270HU?
It strobes at 100Hz, not 120Hz but that should not be by any means deal-breaker flaw
 
Panmaster said:
LCD sucks in general:
-washed out colours due to no glossy coatings anymore
-bad blacklevels, uniformity, bleed
-IPS glow instead of polarisers to eliminate it.
-cheap LED strips instead of full array backlighting
-dead pixels, trapped dust, trapped insects, "bruise" blemishes and gridline defects
-vertical banding on VA

Don't waste your money on gimmicks like "freesync" and "g-sync". Get a basic 1440p 27" IPS.

Wait for OLED or laser displays which will make LCDs look like old black & white TVs in comparison.
Click to expand...

2D image rasterization panels suck. Wait for holographic imaging which will make OLED and Laser look like old film projectors in comparison. Or just, you know, upgrade when you're ready and don't focus on the fact that the Next Best Thing™ is always right around the corner.

I'm waiting for the 34" G-Sync Acer 1440p :D
 
Advil said:
I would agree, except that other features like 144hz and backlight strobing are NOT gimmicks in any way as they are both universal and make a huge difference to what you see.

My ideal monitor in terms of price/performance would be: 27", IPS, 5ms or less input lag, 1440p, 120hz, backlight strobing. That's it. Nothing else. One DP input would be fine.

But nobody makes that yet.
Click to expand...

XB270HU does all of those things.

XoR said:
Acer XB270HU?
It strobes at 100Hz, not 120Hz but that should not be by any means deal-breaker flaw
Click to expand...

newer revisions of it strobe at 120.
 
wrugoin said:
Hey folks,

Right now I'm sitting with an Asus VG278HE, a 27 inch TN panel, 1080p, 144hz monitor. I've had it for maybe 3 years and have good experiences with the monitor. No dead pixels, little to no light bleed, and the only drawback I deal with is the poor viewing angle.
Click to expand...

all of asus swift (TN) and acer XB270HU and cheap no-name korean IPS will look noticeably better and have better viewing angles. if you put any of them next to a VG278HE you might use the words "piece of shit" to describe VG278HE. not that it looks bad when you're looking at only it. but in comparison, you would see it's many years of technology behind
 
The XB270HU is horrendously overpriced for the quality. Doesn't mean I won't end up with one since there are no good mid-range choices.

If they made that screen without the G-sync and it reduced the price enough I might take a harder look at it. But even if you took off G-sync and dropped the price $150... that would still be one mega expensive 1440p panel. Features or not.

Having owned the BenQ XL2720Z for a year I am sold on high refresh, strobing and low lag displays.

In fact I regret selling it so soon. It was too early. But my next screen will be 1440 for sure, and the weakest point of the BenQ is the TN panel viewing angles. You just accept it as the trade-off. Which is why next time I really want IPS or some other equivalent too.

Which... brings us right back around the the XB270HU again.

We need competition for these panels. Soon.

If they were $600 I'd buy one today. But $800... it's just milking the early adopters and low hanging fruit. And the quality issues. It makes them too scary to buy.
 
XoR said:
Acer XB270HU?
It strobes at 100Hz, not 120Hz but that should not be by any means deal-breaker flaw
Click to expand...

own two XB270HU

both ULMB is up to 120hz and gsync 144hz

to OP

Never owned a TN panel and will never buy one..
 
A few months ago I upgraded from a Planar 22" 120hz 1080p display to an ROG swift.

The swift is TN, but it's a damn good looking TN panel. The last IPS panel I owned was a Dell 2007WFP, which was a great panel, but I sold it ages ago. I can't really compare here, but suffice it to say the Planars looked notably worse, and the Swift looks a lot better than those.

G-Sync... It's a game changer IMO. It makes that 45-60fps range look so much smoother. On my planars, I tried to keep everything above 100fps. On the Swift, as long as I'm above 45fps, I'm happy. Higher still looks better, but 45fps is completely playable to me. When Witcher 3 first came out, the game had an issue where it would randomly set itself back to borderless fullscreen mode (which at the time did not support G-Sync), and every time it did it I'd fire up the game and immediately notice how much worse it looked in motion. Unless something better came along, I'll never game without G-Sync. Before it I would always game with V-Sync (i can't stand tearing), but the framerate limitations were annoying there. G-Sync not only removes the frame rate problems, it makes lower frame rates so much smoother. Seriously, it's worth the cost of admission.

1080p to 1440p was another change that surprised me. I figured the increase in resolution would be negated by the jump in screen size. For a little while I used a 1080p 22" monitor alongside my 27" 1440p, and it was quickly obvious that I needed a second matching screen. Desktop use was so much better at 1440p. That's where I noticed it most. Games I never had anything to directly compare to (no point in trying to get two screens running the same thing simultaneously) but they do look cleaner, for sure. The performance hit was bigger than I expected, though. I nearly bought a 27" 1080p screen, and I'm incredibly glad I didn't. I think I would have hated it. At 22-24", it would have been fine as that's what I'm used to (but I still think 1440p would look a lot better, just at that screen size, it's less crucial).

I was exactly in your shoes a few months ago. Spending ~$800 on a monitor was more than I've ever done so by a good margin. I spent less than that on three of the Planars. I had a hard time wrapping my head around that cost. I ended up getting a good deal on a perfect used Swift for $600, and there was absolutely no disappointment. Had I paid full price for a new one, I wouldn't have questioned its value. I decided not to wait for the Acer (this was early April, so it was very close to release) for fear of supply and quality issues. Turns out, reading through that thread, that monitor is a crapshoot. Good ones are really good, but it seems like getting a good one is a bit of a challenge. Again, for the price I paid, no regrets about not waiting, or not getting IPS.
 
seeing non gsync gameplay again few days ago I was shocked to see how blind we all are before seeing Gsync, even at high fps the games just felt sluggish, stuttery, cant fully describe it, it just looked and felt fugly.

I could never go back to non gsync displays after gaming with the Acer XB270HU.
 
TroyX said:
seeing non gsync gameplay again few days ago I was shocked to see how blind we all are before seeing Gsync, even at high fps the games just felt sluggish, stuttery, cant fully describe it, it just looked and felt fugly.

I could never go back to non gsync displays after gaming with the Acer XB270HU.
Click to expand...

It's been tough.

A couple of months ago I took the BenQ XL2420G for a test spin.

I have never used a TN before. It's always been IPS and VAs for as far back as I've been using LCD screens for computers. I have been using an NEC 2490wuxi since late 07.

Long/short: Even with the 6 bit TN shortcomings I was shocked and awed by the combo of high refresh rate plus Gsync. I miss it. It haunts me.

The problem was I tried for three days moving heaven and Earth and I simply could not tolerate or overcome the fundamental deficiencies of the 6 bit TN panel on that particular BenQ.

I know the Asus ROG has a newer 8 bit TN... I'd have to see it and try it out... otherwise I am keeping this current Acer in my backpocket along with some potential other options.

I am itching to make the jump as much as I like my NEC2490wuxi but I don't make a dumb choice.
 
TroyX said:
seeing non gsync gameplay again few days ago I was shocked to see how blind we all are before seeing Gsync, even at high fps the games just felt sluggish, stuttery, cant fully describe it, it just looked and felt fugly.

I could never go back to non gsync displays after gaming with the Acer XB270HU.
Click to expand...

Use vsync then its not sluggish or stuttery.
 
When I was young and twenty I would of probably tried to find all reasons why gsync and 144hz ips was overrated. Being in my thirties now the Acer xb270hu was worth the price of admission for pretty much giving me everything in a package that's either good or excellent for a decent price.

I've spent $1500-$2000 on photo monitors in the past and used them for years. I feel the Acer will be the same. I'll use it for 3-4 years and be really haply with it. Compared to my expenses like eating out and other things the monitor is pretty much insignificant while also being a big part of my day for gaming and work.

If anyone is wondering why the age comment above. I find a majority of people hit a "I'm just gonna pay rather than deal with that shit" point. Kinda like pirating software. Great back when I was 18 but now I just buy most of it because it's not worth spending hours and headaches.


Thus why the Acer was great. I got my first one used for $650 and it was worth every penny. It'd not perfect but damn it's nice.
 
TroyX said:
seeing non gsync gameplay again few days ago I was shocked to see how blind we all are before seeing Gsync, even at high fps the games just felt sluggish, stuttery, cant fully describe it, it just looked and felt fugly.

I could never go back to non gsync displays after gaming with the Acer XB270HU.
Click to expand...
V-Sync is equally smooth as long as you can actually lock the framerate to a factor of the refresh rate.
It's only when the two are out of sync that it's not smooth.

What G-Sync solves is making variable framerates appear smooth, not high framerates.
 
Viper87227 said:
A few months ago I upgraded from a Planar 22" 120hz 1080p display to an ROG swift.

The swift is TN, but it's a damn good looking TN panel. The last IPS panel I owned was a Dell 2007WFP, which was a great panel, but I sold it ages ago. I can't really compare here, but suffice it to say the Planars looked notably worse, and the Swift looks a lot better than those.

G-Sync... It's a game changer IMO. It makes that 45-60fps range look so much smoother. On my planars, I tried to keep everything above 100fps. On the Swift, as long as I'm above 45fps, I'm happy. Higher still looks better, but 45fps is completely playable to me. When Witcher 3 first came out, the game had an issue where it would randomly set itself back to borderless fullscreen mode (which at the time did not support G-Sync), and every time it did it I'd fire up the game and immediately notice how much worse it looked in motion. Unless something better came along, I'll never game without G-Sync. Before it I would always game with V-Sync (i can't stand tearing), but the framerate limitations were annoying there. G-Sync not only removes the frame rate problems, it makes lower frame rates so much smoother. Seriously, it's worth the cost of admission.

1080p to 1440p was another change that surprised me. I figured the increase in resolution would be negated by the jump in screen size. For a little while I used a 1080p 22" monitor alongside my 27" 1440p, and it was quickly obvious that I needed a second matching screen. Desktop use was so much better at 1440p. That's where I noticed it most. Games I never had anything to directly compare to (no point in trying to get two screens running the same thing simultaneously) but they do look cleaner, for sure. The performance hit was bigger than I expected, though. I nearly bought a 27" 1080p screen, and I'm incredibly glad I didn't. I think I would have hated it. At 22-24", it would have been fine as that's what I'm used to (but I still think 1440p would look a lot better, just at that screen size, it's less crucial).

I was exactly in your shoes a few months ago. Spending ~$800 on a monitor was more than I've ever done so by a good margin. I spent less than that on three of the Planars. I had a hard time wrapping my head around that cost. I ended up getting a good deal on a perfect used Swift for $600, and there was absolutely no disappointment. Had I paid full price for a new one, I wouldn't have questioned its value. I decided not to wait for the Acer (this was early April, so it was very close to release) for fear of supply and quality issues. Turns out, reading through that thread, that monitor is a crapshoot. Good ones are really good, but it seems like getting a good one is a bit of a challenge. Again, for the price I paid, no regrets about not waiting, or not getting IPS.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the great feedback. I appreciate the detail you gave with your comparisons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top