The Asus ROG SWIFT PG278Q – a 27” 1400p 144Hz Monitor with G-SYNC

1kiwi · 29 Oct 2014 at 10:07

Biomorphs said:
+1

Just bought a GTX 980 and was thinking about upgrading my 144hz 27" 1080, but think ill hold out

I think what you are seeing are a few users (and it is really a couple throughout the course of this thread) having issues which is perfectly normal given the volume of units sold and the fact that we working with new technology.

If you have the money I would wade in.

HazardO · 29 Oct 2014 at 11:19

This monitor is really fantastic for FPS gaming. Coming from a 60Hz 25ms input lag HP IPS 24in monitor to this <5ms input lag which I run at 120Hz has been a revelation.

The colours are good when setup properly, the only thing I miss is the viewing angles which make no difference when I'm actually sat in front of it.

1kiwi · 29 Oct 2014 at 12:17

Why do you run at 120Hz - ULMB?

Blitzkrieg · 29 Oct 2014 at 12:45

Monkeyspaz5000 said:
Hi guys.

I received my Swift today, but I'm having a bit of an issue.

I'm not sure it's card or monitor related - although I'm swinging towards card.

If I select anything over 85Hz the screen will flicker and then it will display a message saying displayport link failure.

If I try 144Hz the screen will flicker and flash (as if the monitor doesn't support it).

I'm using the displayport cable that came with the monitor so I assume that's up to the task.

Using a R9 290 (yes I know it's not a Nvidia card! lol).

My only issue is that I have nothing else I can put into this monitor to test it.

I'm half tempted to order up a 970 tomorrow....

thoughts? Has anyone experienced anything similar?

As someone stated the Swift doesn't like AMD cards is very true.

I had an R9 295x2. I got this monitor and anything over 85hz would cause issues. So I sent the card back and grabbed some 980's. The Monitor requires G-sync working to achieve above 100/120/144hz.
So really you have 3 choices:
Either live with the 85hz knowing you're not getting the most out of the monitor.
Send the monitor back which will probably cost a bit in shipping.
Or get your self a 970 or two.

I'd go with the last option personally.

Oh and on the other topic, shame a lot of people are being put off by the monitor. Running this monitor with a pair of Nvidia cards is fantastic. Best monitor i've ever owned, absolutely love it for gaming.

HazardO · 29 Oct 2014 at 12:55

1kiwi said:
Why do you run at 120Hz - ULMB?

I figured it made more sense than 144Hz as I get between 110 and 120 fps in BF4 (I like to have all the graphics on highest setting except for AA.)

Am I doing it wrong? (Apart from not using low settings).
It's still a different league in smoothness compared to my 670s and 24in IPS.

PCM2 · 29 Oct 2014 at 12:58

If you're using G-SYNC then it is better to leave it at 144Hz. That's the beauty of G-SYNC.

HazardO · 29 Oct 2014 at 13:18

PCM2 said:
If you're using G-SYNC then it is better to leave it at 144Hz. That's the beauty of G-SYNC.

Better how? (Genuinely interested)

llamadal · 29 Oct 2014 at 13:26

Ayahuasca said:
Think I'm going to avoid one of these completely. Seems to be far too many problems for a £600+ screen.

Maybe 1%, most have no issues at all.

Like anything you buy, if you have a problem, sent it back and get another.

Best screen I've ever owned by far.

Jeps · 29 Oct 2014 at 13:53

HazardO said:
Better how? (Genuinely interested)

The whole point of gsync is that it syncs you monitors refresh rate to your fps. With the monitor set to 120hz, you essentially limit gsync to only go up to 120hz and no more, even if you push more fps then 120 at any time. Set it to 144hz and it allows gsync to work u to 144hz, which is better.

Think of the refresh rate as the upper limit with gsync, there is no good reason not to set it to the highest possible.

1kiwi · 29 Oct 2014 at 14:00

HazardO said:
Better how? (Genuinely interested)

Couple of links you should read

http://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/preview/

http://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/how-does-gsync-fix-stutters/

If you go with 144hz I would use the game time max variable fps command to limit BF to 135.

HazardO · 29 Oct 2014 at 14:16

Thanks.

I still suspect the difference between 120hz and 144 is going to be difficult to perceive especially for an old git like me

This comment didn't do much to answer the question:

Chief Blur Buster said:
Even without G-SYNC, you also have a bona-fide 144Hz monitor that makes everything else much smoother. In a blind test, 88% of gamers preferred 120Hz over 60Hz.

I'm sure most people would notice 120 over 60!

I guess I'll just give it ago this evening and see if I notice a difference. Less input lag is less input lag after all!

I was worried I'd get overshoot or more inversion artifacts though.

Oh, and gg last night kiwi.

1kiwi · 29 Oct 2014 at 15:02

Yeh gg

Was great to have you guys helping me with some payback given my team was utter rubbish!!

When setting 120hz you lock your frames to 120fps. This may make sense for non gsync monitors (to maintain a consistent and smooth experience) but gsync will smooth these inconsistencies out at high framerates thus making your reasoning a little redundant.

In saying that I tend to agree that you probably won't notice much of a difference, but I don't see any harm in running 144hz @ 135fps (make sure you cap via config)

Also you may want to try turning MSAA off in BF4 and using res scaling / dynamic super resolution. It's not for everyone but I run everything on low except for mesh and textures with no MSAA as I personally don't think its worth the performance hit when @ 2560x1440

Regardless of resolution I think the MSAA implementation in frostbite is simply not worth it.

zia · 29 Oct 2014 at 18:45

When setting 120hz you lock your frames to 120fps. This may make sense for non gsync monitors (to maintain a consistent and smooth experience) but gsync will smooth these inconsistencies out at high framerates thus making your reasoning a little redundant.

In saying that I tend to agree that you probably won't notice much of a difference, but I don't see any harm in running 144hz @ 135fps (make sure you cap via config)

is there a clear difference between regular 144hz gameplay and 144hz with gysnch?
surely if you can maintain 144fps and above there will be no obvious tearing and lag is nonexistant on both?, making G sync redundant at high fps?

Zia

ironmysox · 29 Oct 2014 at 18:50

Well, my ROG has been sent back Asus for a repair/replacement. So what happens if a replacement is sent and it has dead pixels or some other issue? Does it then have to go back to the manufacturer again as the original purchase date is 23rd August? This whole experience has put me off this panel (this isn't my first ROG Swift). Yes it works well when it works but after nearly a decade of using Dell panels and only having one problem with a panel which was replaced the following day at my door, I'm going to get rid of the ROG.

Monkeyspaz5000 · 29 Oct 2014 at 18:51

Blitzkrieg said:
As someone stated the Swift doesn't like AMD cards is very true.

I had an R9 295x2. I got this monitor and anything over 85hz would cause issues. So I sent the card back and grabbed some 980's. The Monitor requires G-sync working to achieve above 100/120/144hz.
So really you have 3 choices:
Either live with the 85hz knowing you're not getting the most out of the monitor.
Send the monitor back which will probably cost a bit in shipping.
Or get your self a 970 or two.

I'd go with the last option personally.

Oh and on the other topic, shame a lot of people are being put off by the monitor. Running this monitor with a pair of Nvidia cards is fantastic. Best monitor i've ever owned, absolutely love it for gaming.

I have a 970 coming tomorrow!!

chaparral · 29 Oct 2014 at 18:55

zia said:
is there a clear difference between regular 144hz gameplay and 144hz with gysnch?
surely if you can maintain 144fps and above there will be no obvious tearing and lag is nonexistant on both?, making G sync redundant at high fps?

Zia

But you would not get a game that the FPS would maintain at the same 144fps without some kind of FPS lock,
as the FPS would most likely be going up and down between 120 to 160fps or something like that....

snappyfish · 29 Oct 2014 at 19:40

I see this is £629 now is that the rrp from now?

1kiwi · 29 Oct 2014 at 20:15

zia said:
is there a clear difference between regular 144hz gameplay and 144hz with gysnch?
surely if you can maintain 144fps and above there will be no obvious tearing and lag is nonexistant on both?, making G sync redundant at high fps?

Zia

After running gsync tearing is still very notable for me at high fps. It's strange because after years of running a 120hz screen I had been fine with the performance - but when switching between gsync on/off on the swift its night and day.

Trox · 29 Oct 2014 at 20:37

Mister B said:
Sounds like a similar problem. I have tried to take photos to demonstrate

ULMB Off

ULMB ON

The effect can be seen above especially in the menu buttons where the underscore touches the text in the first image. I am hoping its something software based and not RMA

Is this normal on all ROG Swift screens?

zia · 29 Oct 2014 at 21:31

switching between gsync on/off on the swift its night and day.

Can you elaborate on what the difference is for you? or it more of placebo effect?
can one else feel that gsync add to the experience of gaming at 144hz?

Zia