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

[Phixsator]

Your going to see a nice drop @ 144Hz with this monitor based on those stats. I guessing you're not running any AA whatsoever otherwise I'm calling BS.

Settings were listed in the previous post and ofcourse there is going to be a drop but looking at how close i am to the 190-200 mark most of the time i would think its pretty doable or very close to it.


Settings:
Simulated 1440p using Resolution scaling within BF4
FOV: 70
Textures: Ultra
Filtering: Ultra
Rest: Off or low
Resolution scale: 150%
Max ingame fps unlocked to 999

Spoiler

 

[pgi947]

Remember its gsync, you don't have to be so anal with sitting at a certain frame rate, more a frame range, suspect you'll be good for 70-120 with your current settings at 1440. You certainly don't want to aim above 144fps as then you'd have to disable gsync to reap the rewards of your settings.

 

[Phixsator]

Remember its gsync, you don't have to be so anal with sitting at a certain frame rate, more a frame range, suspect you'll be good for 70-120 with your current settings at 1440. You certainly don't want to aim above 144fps as then you'd have to disable gsync to reap the rewards of your settings.

who was that for? cause i personally dont have to be at 144 fps all the time but just think its pretty close to doable with a 780

 

[1kiwi]

Depends on game/settings. I'll want to run this monitor at constant 144fps on BF4 which may be a push with my 780 although I think I'll wait for the 880 before upgrading.

I'm actually more interested in ULMB (Ultra Low Motion Blur) mode which operates separately from G-Sync. G-Sync is not really geared towards those of us that don't see allot of drops - but ULMB is.

Remember its gsync, you don't have to be so anal with sitting at a certain frame rate, more a frame range, suspect you'll be good for 70-120 with your current settings at 1440. You certainly don't want to aim above 144fps as then you'd have to disable gsync to reap the rewards of your settings.

Who's talking about G-Sync? My view was that ULMB would better at 2560x1440 @ 120Hz which is why the discussion is oriented to higher end frame rates. If I was to run a single play game maxed out I'll choose G-Sync but I dont understand how it will be any kind of advantage for those of us that are on high end setups.

 

[Phixsator]

Who's talking about G-Sync? My view was that ULMB would better at 2560x1440 @ 120Hz which is why the discussion is oriented to higher end frame rates. If I was to run a single play game maxed out I'll choose G-Sync but I dont understand how it will be any kind of advantage for those of us that are on high end setups.

Because tearing is still an issue even at 120hz. You may not notice it, which is something you should be happy about, but it still exist and some of us is annoyed by it but would rather have some tearing than major input lag due to vsync. This is where gsync comes in.

 

[Ayahuasca]

If gsync implements input lag then I won't be using it, slightly disappointed if it's true, probably do as 1kiwi said and just use the ULMB mode instead.

 

[Washout]

From one of those diy modules right? Could this be the reason behind the delays? Nvidia getting that fixed before it ships with monitors. Hope so!

 

[1kiwi]

Because tearing is still an issue even at 120hz. You may not notice it, which is something you should be happy about, but it still exist and some of us is annoyed by it but would rather have some tearing than major input lag due to vsync. This is where gsync comes in.

I have read that ULMB mode provides a smother experience if you're consistently hitting the refresh rate than G-Sync. I guess we'll see in a few weeks - fingers crossed.

 

[RetrogamerX]

I have read that ULMB mode provides a smother experience if you're consistently hitting the refresh rate than G-Sync. I guess we'll see in a few weeks - fingers crossed.

Ive read different. They say g-sync blows everything out of the water. As of now this is all here say. Until the monitor is out nobody knows. Don't care really. I want this monitor more because it's the world's first 1440p 144hz monitor mass produced.

 

[delpy8]

anyone got an exact weight of this monitor without the stand

 

[LambChop]

lol at £720 for this. I hope no-one buys it at that price, but unfortunately they will. Asus will make a killing on these.

 

[LambChop]

Surprised there's not been much mention of 3D on this as a feature, is 3D dying a slow death ?

 

[PCM2]

Interest in 3D is dwindling, yes. With this monitor it is something that is supported with additional equipment (i.e. Nvidia 3D Vision 2) and not really something most people are interested in compared to fluid 2D. It is worth mentioning that this monitor apparently supports 3D at 2560 x 1440, according to ASUS.

 

[Gibbo]

Interest in 3D is dwindling, yes. With this monitor it is something that is supported with additional equipment (i.e. Nvidia 3D Vision 2) and not really something most people are interested in compared to fluid 2D. It is worth mentioning that this monitor apparently supports 3D at 2560 x 1440, according to ASUS.

It still sells, just a handful a week but in fairness we've sold nearly 2000 NVIDIA 3D Vision kits, so worldwide I can imagine they have done extremely well out of it.

 

[DougalDC]

i have a 3d vision 1 kit, do you think that would work with it?

 

[LambChop]

Interest in 3D is dwindling, yes. With this monitor it is something that is supported with additional equipment (i.e. Nvidia 3D Vision 2) and not really something most people are interested in compared to fluid 2D. It is worth mentioning that this monitor apparently supports 3D at 2560 x 1440, according to ASUS.

2560 x 1440 and 60Hz each eye ?

 

[LambChop]

i have a 3d vision 1 kit, do you think that would work with it?

I would be very surprised if it didn't, isn't the only diff between 1 and 2 is the glasses not the transmitter ?

 

[DougalDC]

I would be very surprised if it didn't, isn't the only diff between 1 and 2 is the glasses not the transmitter ?

i think there was a change in light intensity, so the lenses are different, and maybe the old glasses only work at 120hz .. so i might end up with needing new glasses then.

 

[PCM2]

2560 x 1440 and 60Hz each eye ?

I assume so. Nvidia 3D Vision should only operate in Frame Sequential, so the resolution will certainly be 2560 x 1440 for each eye. As for the refresh rate I don't see why that would be restricted to 30Hz per eye.

 

[InSync]

Yes nVidias 3d Vision is the real deal if it's 3 you'r after but beware that most games have issues or dont work at all.

I have been a 3d vision gamer for years and I do hang around nvidias forum but trust me when I say it's a mess, most often do other people have do do fixes. Take a look over the HelixMod site and on nVidias 3d vision forum and see for yourself.

We 3D Gamers have been angry at nVidia for years now as they dont seem to give a flying f*ck about 3D anymore but just resently they have started incorporated this fake 3 mode such as 3d Tv's use and it's just worthless POS, to tell the truth.

When 3d works then yes it's good, it's frikking awesome but right now I mostly do my gaming in regular 2d as how good 3D may be, it still crush/kills a lot of how the game looks, I talking about seying details/colours and such as its darkens the picture a lot and I have the Asus VG278H with 3D Vision 2.

So for me I have to say that the novelty wears of so im looking at g-sync with perfect picture right now, to hell with 3d for me ..LOL!

I cant wait for VR tho, as then we can talking about immersion and can say bye bye to ghosting/crosstalk as we are looking at one screen for each eye.
So I think VR will be totaly awesome and then you really can say you are in the game