• ASUS announces 1440P and 144hz Monitor!
    155 replies, posted
[quote][t]http://images.anandtech.com/doci/8085/ASUS%20ROG%20SWIFT%20PG278Q%20Gaming%20Monitor%20-%20Copy_678x452.png[/t] Monitor talk is crazy. In this modern era we have a choice between 4K panels, cheap Korean 1440p monitors, panels that cover wide gamuts those that refresh at 30 Hz, 60 Hz, 120 Hz and 144 Hz, as well as TN/VA/IPS panels with all the variants therein. The issue comes when putting as many of these features together - typically IPS panels at higher refresh rates are hard to come by, whereas TN panels can lack the wide viewing angles and color reproduction. So by saying that ASUS are paring a 27” 2560x1440 display with a high refresh rate and NVIDIA G-Sync, we open our arms to this kind of evolution.[/quote] [url=http://www.anandtech.com/show/8085/asus-rog-swift-pg278q-launched-1440p-144hz-panel-with-gsync]AnAndTech[/url]
It'll take another 1-2 generations of video cards until they can actually drive these things at decent fps... (I'm trying to drive a 2560x1440x50hz monitor with a GTX670M to terrible effect, not often do you want to buy a computer for a monitor instead of a monitor for a computer.)
[QUOTE=Angus725;45014646]It'll take another 1-2 generations of video cards until they can actually drive these things at decent fps... (I'm trying to drive a 2560x1440x50hz monitor with a GTX670M to terrible effect, not often do you want to buy a computer for a monitor instead of a monitor for a computer.)[/QUOTE] You are using a mobile GPU? Did you ever expect that to perform? I'm thinking of getting this monitor for my CSGO needs, 60hz is just painful but eh, i've stuck with it since I don't want to go from 1920x1200 to 1920x1080.
[QUOTE=AGMadsAG;45014659]You are using a mobile GPU? Did you ever expect that to perform?[/QUOTE] I didn't realize how much more difficult 2560x1440 was on the GPU until I tried gaming on it. Luckily, I'm using it for programming primarily, which isn't GPU heavy at all.
Can somebody elaborate the difference between 60hz and 120hz?
[QUOTE=Angus725;45014686]I didn't realize how much more difficult 2560x1440 was on the GPU until I tried gaming on it. Luckily, I'm using it for programming primarily, which isn't GPU heavy at all.[/QUOTE] But your comment still does not make sense - games in the future will require more horsepower. So yeah, you could wait a few years to max the current games - or you could max a few years old titles now with current high end GPUs. If the stupid console ports allow for it..
it seems a bit overpriced if they actually sell it for $800 you can get a 4k display for that price now
[QUOTE=AGMadsAG;45014707]But your comment still does not make sense - games in the future will require more horsepower. So yeah, you could wait a few years to max the current games - or you could max a few years old titles now with current high end GPUs. If the stupid console ports allow for it..[/QUOTE] The funny thing with graphics in games in the past decade or so, is that the "extra long generation" of gaming consoles with limited GPU power slowed down graphical improvements in games. Simultaneously, GPU power increases allowed graphics cards that costs a reasonable amount to play high-end games at decent settings and frame rates. 2 Generations of graphics cards takes about 3-4 years; and if the past predicts the future, then roughly the same thing will happen again.
$800 yeah fuck off. I've seen 4K's for that much.
Ugh the tech might be nice, but the way the monitor itself looks is just ugly.
This is the kind of monitor I've been waiting for, now I'm hoping the color will actually be decent, no yellow whites or anything of the sort
Also, why is it that in all these monitor displays they have a picture of some stupid fucking robot or something? Can they not show a game picture or something along those lines.
[QUOTE=Antimuffin;45014703]Can somebody elaborate the difference between 60hz and 120hz?[/QUOTE] The monitor can display things at higher FPS (max hertz = max FPS), that means it is way smoother and no tearing (tearing usually happens when monitor is capped at 60 hz but your GPU gives out more, like 90-100. Now 120 fps is harder to reach than 60, resulting in no tearing)
[QUOTE=Antimuffin;45014703]Can somebody elaborate the difference between 60hz and 120hz?[/QUOTE] Ok, so you know how you feel when you look at 60fps movies? How it's amazingly smooth? 120hz gives you that, but everywhere
Ooh, nice. I rock an ASUS monitor myself; a VE248H. Couldn't be happier with it. Color's excellent, and going on four years with no problems.
I have an Asus VG248QE, got it for cheap and the 144hz is awesome, even for daily desktop use. Though it is TN so don't expect superb colors. Default color settings result in colors WAY too much washed out, I had to fiddle with settings and color profiles for two whole days to get it to feel right.
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;45014776]Ok, so you know how you feel when you look at 60fps movies? How it's amazingly smooth? 120hz gives you that, but everywhere[/QUOTE] Sounds awesome.
[QUOTE=damnatus;45014773]The monitor can display things at higher FPS (max hertz = max FPS), that means it is way smoother and no tearing (tearing usually happens when monitor is capped at 60 hz but your GPU gives out more, like 90-100. Now 120 fps is harder to reach than 60, resulting in no tearing)[/QUOTE] That's not why 120hz has less/no tearing. otherwise running games at 30-40fps at 60hz wouldn't tear.
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;45014776]Ok, so you know how you feel when you look at 60fps movies? How it's amazingly smooth? 120hz gives you that, but everywhere[/QUOTE] I can confirm this. I spent 5 minutes just moving Windows when I first got my 120hz screen.
800 USD ain't that bad for that refresh rate. Might get it in the future.
VG278HE with the Lightboost hack basically makes it feel like a CRT. I can never go back to 60Hz.
Wait, Asus with Nvidia tech? How does that even work? [editline]6th June 2014[/editline] Oh wait, I'm confusing it with AMD and ATI when they were still separate.
[QUOTE=The Genie;45015281]Once you use it for yourself for a while you will find it difficult to adjust back to 60Hz. I run a 144Hz monitor and recently had to reinstall my graphics drivers, which reset my display settings. The first thing I thought after rebooting was "what the fuck why is my mouse so slow?". The motion is incredibly fluid though and I do not regret the purchase.[/QUOTE] I wish it wasn't so damn expensieve though. I can't really say I'd pay 400 euros for this. Hopefully once it becomes more spread, prices will drop. But that is coming from a student perspective.
[QUOTE=Techbot;45014836]I can confirm this. I spent 5 minutes just moving Windows when I first got my 120hz screen.[/QUOTE] imagine what one would say had anyone watched that "dude are you high?"
[QUOTE=Antimuffin;45014703]Can somebody elaborate the difference between 60hz and 120hz?[/QUOTE] Your monitor updates its picture 60 times every second (which is measured in Hz) With 120Hz your picture updates 120 time in a second, which gives you noticeably smoother motion.
[QUOTE=damnatus;45014785]I have an Asus VG248QE, got it for cheap and the 144hz is awesome, even for daily desktop use. Though it is TN so don't expect superb colors. Default color settings result in colors WAY too much washed out, I had to fiddle with settings and color profiles for two whole days to get it to feel right.[/QUOTE] According to JJ (Asus rep) this monitor has a much higher quality TN panel than what we usually see on monitors. It is native 8-bit instead of 6-bit with dithering, so the color quality should be much nicer. He said the panel is comperable to an e-IPS panel in terms of color accuracy. [QUOTE=JJ]"It is a specially developed TN panel offering comparable performance to an eIPS display in regards to color accuracy, image quality and black reproduction. Overall I feel most enthusiasts and gamers will not have any issues with quality of the display as it equals and excels compared to our current range of VG monitors which have garnered consistently positive feedback from a diverse range of gamers."[/QUOTE] There are some other interesting tidbits from JJ in the comments on [url="http://pcdiy.asus.com/2014/01/pg278q-rog-swift-gaming-monitor-the-best-gaming-monitor"]this page.[/url]
[QUOTE=Antimuffin;45014703]Can somebody elaborate the difference between 60hz and 120hz?[/QUOTE] I have a 144Hz monitor after upgrading from 60Hz. At first everything will look like a soap opera, but it takes just an hour or two to get used to it. After that everything will be smooth as butter in a hot pan. So smooth in fact, that when I updated my drivers, which capped the framerate at 60Hz, I thought something with my system was fubar since it felt like the whole thing was running at 20fps. But then I bumped it back to 144Hz and everything was super smooth again. Also games feel fucking fantastic at such high framerates. Bonus points: You get double the amount of cursors when you move your mouse across the screen really quickly.
[QUOTE=Angus725;45014646]It'll take another 1-2 generations of video cards until they can actually drive these things at decent fps... (I'm trying to drive a 2560x1440x50hz monitor with a GTX670M to terrible effect, not often do you want to buy a computer for a monitor instead of a monitor for a computer.)[/QUOTE] I know the feel bro. I'm using ASUS's flagship 27" 1440p monitor, and my R9 280x has a hard time running it to it's full potential. To be fair though, the 200 series of cards is pretty garbage IMO. I've been using Radeon cards since the X800 days, and I have never had issues. This 280x has had some artifacting issues, and ASUS's RMA process didn't help. I spent the money on a 290x, and then found out how many glitches their were in the Hawaii chipset. I just returned the 290x to Newegg, and I'm going to just suck it up and buy a GTX 780. It will be the first nVidia card I have used in almost ten years.
I thought g-sync solved the problem with screen tear by matching the refresh rate with the frame rate?
As an early adopter of WQXGA 2560x1600, running a 30" since 2007. I can tell you that maintaining good FPS has always been an issue, always requiring dual GPU solutions to run the majority of current games at a good clip. I've not seen it change since 2007, since every new generation of cards comes with a new generation of games that push the cards to the same level. This is what confuses me about 4k, being so much larger that WQXGA you literally are forced to go with multi-gpu solutions and unless there's a big jump in card technology I can see it being another 6 years or so, like WQXGA, until high end single cards can consistently play at 4K if past trends hold true.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.