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

jh30uk said:
QUOTE:

Up first is a display which has been touted for years as a very low latency monitor, the Dell UltraSharp 3007WFP. This monitor only has a Dual-Link DVI connection, meaning that there is no scaler chip included, so latency should be low.

Assume scaler chip is same as multiplier and they are not talking about upscaling like TV's do with SD to HD.


http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Displa...1440p-IPS-Display-Under-350/Input-Lag-Testing
Click to expand...



A scaler adapts non-native input resolution / refresh rate to that of the panel and can allow PiP and PBP modes and (obviously) multiple inputs. However both you and the quote are conflating one input with no scaler, no scaler with one input, and one input / no scaler with no input lag.

It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever what kind of scaler (or how many of them) the monitor has, or how many inputs as long as it has a direct mode that bypasses as much lag inducing circuitry as possible (usually the scaler entirely) - pretty much all 'gaming' monitors have this, though they vary as to how much stuff they bypass.

NVIDIA have chosen to include no support for multiple inputs, or any input besides DP with Gsynch. The Gsynch monitors would require a second controller (not necessarily scaler) in order to provide extra inputs, which would have no impact on the performance of the monitor whatsoever, but would increase cost and possibly contravene agreements with NVIDIA.
 
jh30uk said:
QUOTE:

Up first is a display which has been touted for years as a very low latency monitor, the Dell UltraSharp 3007WFP. This monitor only has a Dual-Link DVI connection, meaning that there is no scaler chip included, so latency should be low.

Assume scaler chip is same as multiplier and they are not talking about upscaling like TV's do with SD to HD.


http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Displa...1440p-IPS-Display-Under-350/Input-Lag-Testing
Click to expand...

Had that monitor for a few years - such a nice screen.
 
the screen is with me now and hooked up! lovely looking design i have to say. On to the testing! Keep an eye on @TFTCentral on Twitter for updates as we go :)
 
jh30uk said:
1st time I seen my FW900, doubt any LCD can ever match it.
Click to expand...

I really don't know how people can use them. Even at higher refresh rates the eye strain is epic, emissions are unhealthy to say the least, power consumption is way higher and the size at most desks is a problem.

LCDs are less than perfect, but I think they have many fewer problems or drawbacks than CRT (or Plasma), and they're what we're stuck with for a while.

OLEDs still seem to have serious durability and cost issues in larger screens, so I'm hoping we'll start to see some PC monitors with quantom dot filters, and eventually full emissive quantom dot displays ... since with all the setbacks, OLEDs still seem 5 years plus away for the PC industry.
 
Size and power isn't issue to most, and here was nothing better back in 2001 when they 1st launched.

Outside of text which is sharp but not LCD sharp the photo/video work and games will look far better.

I was holding out for SED but it and FED have been mothballed for now.
 
jh30uk said:
Size and power isn't issue to most, and here was nothing better back in 2001 when they 1st launched.

Outside of text which is sharp but not LCD sharp the photo/video work and games will look far better.

I was holding out for SED but it and FED have been mothballed for now.
Click to expand...

SEDs dead. I suspect FEDs are too ... but AU Optronics never announced that they were shutting development down, and if they were or had you'd imagine they'd have to inform investors of it. If they don't make enough headway with their OLEDs, perhaps they'll resurrect it.
 
Toshiba pulled out of SED during that legal battle but partners Canon keep in it and won.

They said its not dead but on shelf for consumers for now but they will use SED screen for businesses/medical applications (from what I can remember).

I have no clue why they would do all this after going all the distance and buying out Toshiba share and winning that battle to shelf it.

I think cost came down to it and can live and hope someday it comes back as LCD never will be as good, nothing with backlight can be.

QUOTE:

"Canon's 55" prototype SED offered bright images of 450 cd/m2, 50,000:1 contrast ratios, and a response time of less than 1 ms.[6] Canon has stated that production versions would improve the response time to 0.2 ms and 100,000:1 contrast ratios."

Now imagine that later model did come out back then and by now on a lot newer Gens.

Fap. Fap, Fap.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-conduction_electron-emitter_display
 
Last edited:
jh30uk said:
Toshiba pulled out of SED during that legal battle but partners Canon keep in it and won.

They said its not dead but on shelf for consumers for now but they will use SED screen for businesses/medical applications (from what I can remember).

I have no clue why they would do all this after going all the distance and buying out Toshiba share and winning that battle to shelf it.

I think cost came down to it and can live and hope someday it comes back as LCD never will be as good, nothing with backlight can be.

QUOTE:

"Canon's 55" prototype SED offered bright images of 450 cd/m2, 50,000:1 contrast ratios, and a response time of less than 1 ms.[6] Canon has stated that production versions would improve the response time to 0.2 ms and 100,000:1 contrast ratios."

Now imagine that later model did come out back then and by now on a lot newer Gens.

Fap. Fap, Fap.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-conduction_electron-emitter_display
Click to expand...

Nah, it's dead and has been for years. Canon said that then completely liquidated all related assets and discontinued all development.

Cost was never THAT prohibitive, I don't think ... it's just that it cost quite a bit more than conventional LCDs, and its main advantage was response times (something TV and the majority of monitor buyers either don't care or don't know about). Colours weren't any better than IPS or VA panels being developed, and contrast / blacks less good than the VAs being developed. Improvements in power consumption due to adoption of LED backlights with conventional LEDs meant that power benefits of SEDs would have been negligible. So effectively, had they gone ahead, they'd have been producing something more expensive that only really had a USP for gaming and / or professional users needing low response times. Numbers didn't add up at all. Presumably why AU Optronics didn't do anything after acquiring all the Sony assets.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom