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

Baddass said:
"nothing compared to an IPS"? in what way? a decent IPS panel can reach about 1000:1 maximum, same as a decent TN Film panel. The Asus PG278Q was 858:1 static CR after calibration which is a very decent performance and better than most IPS panels you will find.



I've not read the review, but that can't be right!! how would 356:1 be "respectful" (do they mean respectable!?) - thats an appalling figure for any screen, but i don't believe that's accurate. How did they ever record it at such a low level. It's far higher than that!
Click to expand...

Not sure Baddass, was from this page

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_rog_swift_pg278q_gsync_gaming_monitor_review,8.html
 
reading their review, i'm not sure how their "camera method" works or why they are doing it that way, but as a real figure that isn't a good indication of a true contrast ratio spec there at all. It's useful I suppose if you purely only compare it with other screens they've tested using the same method. But the spec doesn't make sense and isn't accurate in any monitor measurement sense imo. not sure why they don't use a better method like a colorimeter or light meter!? Especially when they go on to use one for other tests.

on another note, I don't know what colorimeter device they have used either, they don't say, so their colour temperature tests could also be inaccurate as a lot of devices don't read the white point of W-LED backlights well. Considering we measured a very accurate ~6500k white point with an i1 Pro spectrophotometer, their 7500k figure is possibly skewed by device inaccuracies related to the backlight.
 
Yeah I wouldent trust what that clown over Guru3d says, clearly he doesent seems to have a clue. The only review worth mentioned and the only one you need are those from TFT Central. If he says 858:1 static CR after calibration, then it's how it is :)

When I read guru3d's the other day I laugh at when he said 360, what a clown ..LOL!
 
ShadowFlare said:
Yeah, usual TN panel issue there if you are looking even slightly up. I think it is best for TN panels that your eyes are leveled to the top of the screen or lower to avoid looking up. Looking down on the screen doesn't cause the bad TN dark colour shift to my experience.
Click to expand...

Yeah, thats what I thought, just would be nice to hear what you guys think :)
Exactly, looking down doesent darkens the picture tho.

Thanks for your reply mate!
 
Was just reading this forum post on bluebusters regarding internal and external lag - when using GSYNC should I be capping my framerate in game @ 143fps?

I also read that I should be using 1000hz polling rate so have adjusted my mouse accordingly.

I'm assuming that with ULMB mode I should remove the cap.
 
Last edited:
Baddass said:
reading their review, i'm not sure how their "camera method" works or why they are doing it that way, but as a real figure that isn't a good indication of a true contrast ratio spec there at all. It's useful I suppose if you purely only compare it with other screens they've tested using the same method. But the spec doesn't make sense and isn't accurate in any monitor measurement sense imo. not sure why they don't use a better method like a colorimeter or light meter!? Especially when they go on to use one for other tests.

on another note, I don't know what colorimeter device they have used either, they don't say, so their colour temperature tests could also be inaccurate as a lot of devices don't read the white point of W-LED backlights well. Considering we measured a very accurate ~6500k white point with an i1 Pro spectrophotometer, their 7500k figure is possibly skewed by device inaccuracies related to the backlight.
Click to expand...

Reasons why TFTCentral are the boss :D
 
Baddass said:
"nothing compared to an IPS"? in what way? a decent IPS panel can reach about 1000:1 maximum, same as a decent TN Film panel. The Asus PG278Q was 858:1 static CR after calibration which is a very decent performance and better than most IPS panels you will find.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected if that is the case, im not to hot on monitors. I always though one was a lot better than the other on contrast ratio.

Still i probably wont be keeping my Current cheapo Korean 27" IPS I don't have the desk space, maybe with two monitor arms but that would add cost (allready pushing the CC higher than i want on this one) and bulk to a already small room :(

Maybe a can borrow a calibrator from one of the art teams at work to get the most out of the Swift
 
KillBoY_UK said:
I stand corrected if that is the case, im not to hot on monitors. I always though one was a lot better than the other on contrast ratio.

Still i probably wont be keeping my Current cheapo Korean 27" IPS I don't have the desk space, maybe with two monitor arms but that would add cost (allready pushing the CC higher than i want on this one) and bulk to a already small room :(

Maybe a can borrow a calibrator from one of the art teams at work to get the most out of the Swift
Click to expand...

I went from a Qnix 27" IPS to the swift. Colour wise, the IPS does look a bit more vibrant, colours just seem to pop more but its not a massive difference. The swift does actually have better blacks though which surprised me.
 
jh30uk said:
A Glossy/Glass front can make the colours pop out TBH, assume your Qnix 27" is one of those?
Click to expand...

My Qnix is semi glossy, much more so then the swift but not full on gloss. Not really sure my desk is big enough to get them both on but i shall give it a go a bit later
 
I thought it would be good to repost this gem from blurbusters:

DisplayPort has the potential to transmit refresh cycles faster than DVI and other ports. It's theoretically possible to push a 1080p refresh cycle over a single DisplayPort channel in approximately 5 milliseconds (IIRC, 1/177th of a second, to be precise).

As for their GSYNC input lag tests -- duh! -- Old news (and incomplete, too). I already found out that too. GSYNC will begin to behave as VSYNC ON when frame rates caps out to maximum. I do not believe the site tested the use of fps_max as a method of reducing input lag.

But as I already wrote, you can take advantage of GSYNC's low input lag behavior by capping the frame rate below the GSYNC maximum. By using fps_max values below GSYNC maximum, you eliminate the driver waiting for VSYNC.

The people at infinite.cz needs to point out the frame capping technique of reducing GSYNC input lag. You can take advantage of GSYNC's low input lag behavior by capping the frame rate below the GSYNC maximum. By using fps_max values below GSYNC maximum, you eliminate the driver waiting for VSYNC. Instead, the driver delivers the refresh immediately to the monitor.

1. Set your GSYNC monitor to 144Hz
2. Modify your test to run at a maximum frame rate of ~135fps
3. You will observe that input lag falls dramatically.

This is because the input lag is caused by driver waiting for the previous refresh cycle to finish before GSYNC. Same kind of issue as VSYNC ON. But if the monitor has already finished refreshing (e.g. you software-based-throttle your framerate, e.g. fps_max), the frame is delivered immediately after your input read without waiting.

There are many games with built-in configurable frame rate capping, and software-based frame rate capping eliminates the input lag caused by hardware capping (e.g. frame rate limited by via driver, frame rate limited by VSYNC ON, etc) because you did an input read, then the external factor (outside of game control) forced an input lag upon you beyond your control -- before displaying the frame. But! That's solved by building a frame rate cap into your game. If you are a game developer, you are smart if you included "fps_max" like the Source Engine. As game developer, you then successfully control the GSYNC input lag via this technique!. It solves the GSYNC input lag in my tests.

That's because game engines often do a keyboard/mouse read [input lag time begins], then renders and presents the frame (e.g. Direct3D Present()), and monitor displays frame [input lag time ends]. If the driver or monitor blocks when you attempt to display the frame, then you've got a forced input lag beyond your control. That's what happens when you let GSYNC hit maximum refresh rate. (same issue as VSYNC ON). Because it's now waiting for the previous refresh to finish first -- that's input lag! But as game developer, one can solve this, bring this into your own game applications control (if you are a game developer) simply by running at framerates slightly lower than the currently configured GSYNC maximum refresh rates. When this happens, your frames are immediately delivered (because previous frames are already fully finished refreshed, so no waiting at all), there's no blockage, no added lag, because you're not hitting the maximum. The average latency becomes equivalent to VSYNC OFF, and you get ultralow GSYNC latency with the full benefits of GSYNC fluidity with no tearing.

Therefore, infinite.cz has made a mistake by incomplete test (only testing out full frame rate). They need to display benchmark numbers during framerate-capped situations. They didn't publish that. They need to modify their input latency test to also test software-base frame rate capping, like the frame-capping capabilities currently found in several game engines now. Their software application that they used for the photodiode needs to have a configurable fps_max value, and I don't think they added that. Thus their lag testing app isn't functioning the same way as a game engine (that has a built in fps_max ability). They need to make their lag testing technique fully explained. fps_max in CS:GO essentially configures the refresh rate of a GSYNC monitor, and using fps_max during GSYNC fixes the input lag that infinite.cz is reporting.
Click to expand...

It's not too different from several CS:GO users doing fps_max 143 when playing. Ideally, the drivers should be adjusted so that there is no need for this differential, and be able to run at full frame rate, but for now, fps_max 135-138 works great with virtually the same average latency as VSYNC OFF.
Click to expand...

Thread is here. I have now adjusted my max fps to 135 in my user.cfg.

NB: This looks like a follow up from the original blur busters article which shows input lag with GSYNC on.
 
Last edited:
mastering3d said:
I will check that next time i play ..

just noticed your using 2x670 2gb cards are you not running into any problems and what games do you play .


Just tried on CTE which is much smoother , Was using only half the gpu ram on both cards 1.5gb the cards have 3gb ,i think i may of found the problem not 100% sure will check some more tomorrow its late now and going to bed ..

Thanks to all that helped with your idea's ..
Click to expand...

Sadly, I've not had time to even unbox it due to illness but I've seen silly memory use even on my 1920 monitor. Some titles can be very wasteful or you can eat vram by using aa methods. I'm waiting on the 800 series for more vram and a worthy upgrade.
 
OK i've taken some side by side photos of the swift and my qnix IPS. I take back what I said about black levels, the Qnix is a bit better for blacks too (it does suffer pretty bad backlight bleed though.)

Only phone photos and some are a bit on the wonky side so appologies for that. I'm no photographer thats for sure :p

Side by Side
LltrRFc.jpg

Swift
hWsUUgK.jpg

Qnix
TRJ2zds.jpg

Side by Side
25Wcp3L.jpg

Swift
Nx8MK2S.jpg

Qnix
Z2pK8Ni.jpg

Side by Side
ErEpVPZ.jpg

Swift
FmjrW5a.jpg

Qnix
wXnuPkK.jpg

Side by Side
tdvRnyk.jpg

Swift
3qJmeZs.jpg

Qnix
BLvVLsP.jpg
 
Gregster said:
Nice feedback ShadowFlare and as a 3D gamer and movie watcher, I like to hear the negatives as well. If you set 3D gaming at 1080P in game, does it still show ghosting? I still have the peasant Asus VG278H 3D monitor and don't get any of the ghosting either.
Click to expand...

Ok, re-tested 3D Vision, here are my findings:
- No visible ghosting on 3D games
- No ghosting on 3D movies
- 3D movies looks somewhat smoother (less flickery) than VG278HE
- 3D in movies feels more subtle than VG278HE, had to increase depth
- Due to 1080p 3D movies viewed on 1440p resolution, understandably it looks less sharp (not really blurry), and I could pick up these vertical "scan lines" if looking closely
- Ghosting on the 3D Vision setup is still there, but really really faint, the white background just makes the bright green hexagon. You'd have to be staring intensely at the screen to see the faint ghosting.

My conclusion: Negligible ghosting, and I kinda like how 3D movies look a tiny bit less flickery. It's just one helluva monitor :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom