I believe it does it in multiples of 15 or 30. So 90 would be the fixed point . I may be completely wrong though
** ASUS DO IT AGAIN: IPS, 144Hz & FREESYNC!!! Asus MG279Q thread **
- Thread starter Gibbo
- Start date
I believe it does it in multiples of 15 or 30. So 90 would be the fixed point . I may be completely wrong though
Hi all, been fan of forum and avatars for some time 
so decided to join.
Can someone please help me. I'm interested in MG279Q, and so far everyone is aware of his limitation, but I am much more worried that the cards such as 7970 can not even drive 144Hz, without freesync?!?...and over DisplayPort!
Is this because of Radeon or one more low point of MG279Q?
so decided to join. Can someone please help me. I'm interested in MG279Q, and so far everyone is aware of his limitation, but I am much more worried that the cards such as 7970 can not even drive 144Hz, without freesync?!?...and over DisplayPort!
Is this because of Radeon or one more low point of MG279Q?
Last edited:
To be honest I'm not seeing the FreeSync limit as being too much of an issue, purely because if this is confirmed to have the same panel as the Acer (which it more than likely is) and has virtually no input lag like the Acer, it's really the same display sans G-Sync for £200 less, or another way to put it, only £50 more than the very good Dell U2715H.
144Hz 1440p IPS with decent build quality, nice non-cheap-plastic bezels, for £500 sounds alright to me.
As for the Korean panels somebody previously mentioned...you get poor warranty service, shoddy build quality, poor calibration, what are likely to be second rate panels, and historically speaking shoddy power supplies and more. Not really an alternative.
144Hz 1440p IPS with decent build quality, nice non-cheap-plastic bezels, for £500 sounds alright to me.
As for the Korean panels somebody previously mentioned...you get poor warranty service, shoddy build quality, poor calibration, what are likely to be second rate panels, and historically speaking shoddy power supplies and more. Not really an alternative.
not as i understand it, no. if you have it set to use Vsync when out of FreeSync range (above 90Hz on this model) then it wilkl cap it at 90Hz maximum
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 4,205
- Location
- Oxfordshire
So basically, if you want 0 screen tearing (which lets admit, is the whole point of freesync/gsync monitors) you're "limited" to 90hz...
well FreeSync is there to eliminate tearing without introducing the lag/stutter of vsync, but i get your point. but yes, if you want absolutely no tearing you would have 90 Hz maximum on this model. Although to be fair, at 2560 x 1440 thats still a fairly hefty graphics demand
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
That's a good point. It's not really an issue that single 290x user such as myself, and anyone that prefer single GPU over crossfire should worry about as I doubt it would have graphic grunt to push 90fps+ at 2560 res in modern games.
The chances are even if the 390x was "slower" than crossfire 290 or 290x, the minimum frame rate would most probably be higher on the 390x with the single GPU I think.
It's not the minimum fps that's the problem really it's the fact that if your fps is fluctuating over and below 90 a lot then freesync will be switching on and off which will definitely be noticeable.
I just can't understand why they would limit the maximum that far below the 144hz spec, 120hz would have been acceptable but 90 is just a huge turn off for me.
I just can't understand why they would limit the maximum that far below the 144hz spec, 120hz would have been acceptable but 90 is just a huge turn off for me.
Last edited:
Thanks Baddass, and everyone who provided feedback.
I don't have an immediate press release style response, but what I'd like to pass onto all of you at OcUK is that:
- it has been confirmed that there is presently a 90 Hz FreeSync cap
- I have alerted our team about everyone's concerns, and they have told me it's a priority that they'll be looking into this week
- it was capped for a reason, though I haven't had the specifics confirmed and ready to share, and furthermore I hope that we'll be able to give users the choice, if there are potential drawbacks >90 Hz
I also would be more than happy even if the cap was at 120hz, heck I rather have the refresh rate at 120 instead of 144hz anyway as from what I have read about the swift, it sounds like 144hz is really pushing it for that panel, some people have it running at 120hz and say it seems to be better than 144, it avoids some problem???
Could you not set it to vsync to 120fps? As others have said, I'm not massively concerned about this as freesync was a bit of a bonus for me (especially since I'm a crossfire user who couldn't use it anyway just yet), but I'd like to make sure I know 100% what I'm getting!
Regarding the 144hz problem:
IIRC, quite a few others reported the same although I can't remember who they were.
IIRC, quite a few others reported the same although I can't remember who they were.
That's either a faulty one or the issue isn't the monitor itself as he's said it wasn't unusual for other 144hz monitors.
He also stated at 120hz he only enables gsync in certain games anyway so it's not like he's using 120hz to fix an issue. Looks like he just prefers the screen without it for some reason.
I've certainly not seen any reports of late in the Swift thread about 144hz being a problem.
He also stated at 120hz he only enables gsync in certain games anyway so it's not like he's using 120hz to fix an issue. Looks like he just prefers the screen without it for some reason.
I've certainly not seen any reports of late in the Swift thread about 144hz being a problem.
Probably not but the higher number looks better
Yup got to have that epeen marketing term!
You laugh, but you may know that the MG279Q when announced was a 120 Hz monitor as we hadn't gained 144 Hz accreditation at that stage - though it was always planned.
I genuinely received messages (not on OcUK though) sent to me complaining that if it was only 120 Hz and not 144 Hz they weren't interested and why even bother releasing it.
So to some people, it apparently does make a big difference. Whether you could actually tell between 120 and 144 Hz in a double-blind test... I'm not so sure. But it's not just a case of marketing epeen
