• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

** THE FIRST FREESYNC MONITOR ARRIVES AT OcUK!! **

Marine-RX179 said:
You are missing the point...you are paying the £150-£200 premium for Gsync comparing to the non-freesyc model it's base upon on, while the Freesync monitor is not costing anymore than the non-freesync model it's based upon on.
Click to expand...

No you're the one missing the point.

I posted that for £499 Freesync doesn't seem so free. And it doesn't, not to me any way.

Non Freesync model blah. Not exactly off to a good start is it?
 
Orangey said:
ITT ***** who thought AMD were going to buy them a new monitor.

And you mention Acer as being a brand you've set your sights on for a budget offering... when they're slated to possibly have the most expensive panel out on the gaming market soon.
Click to expand...

Then they're talking a good fight, possibly wanting in on the "Hey look every one, we're Asus and we can charge nearly six hundred or more notes for a monitor !!!!".

Just because I've bought an Acer does my opinion change. I already know that apparently the Acer I have "Feels cheaper" when compared to the Swift.

And no, that doesn't mean I agree that the Swift should cost what it does.
 
ALXAndy said:
You still don't get it do you. I'll say it one more time. In fact, I'll just keep saying it every time you post something else.

At £499 Freesync doesn't seem so free. Repeat ad nauseum.
Click to expand...
And by that analogy, you didn't pay £150-£200 for using Gsync, you paid £500 to use it, and being a 4K monitor part has no value in it :rolleyes:
 
Alx m8 your arguments has absolutely no basis

The price is £500 because of the panel being 1440/144hz.It can be argued that 1440/144hz panels are overpriced i guess,but thats in no way related to freesync/Gsync

There are only 3 monitors the BenQ can be compared too

The Rog swift with Gysnc £620
The Acer Predator XB270HU with Gysnc £689 (pre-order)
Acer Predator XG277HU 27" FREESYNC £430 (pre-order)

compared to the gysnc monitors it is clearly significantly cheaper.The acer Freesync monitor is cheaper still ,but then again acer monitors generally arnt the best.

Gibbo: The Benq uses the exact same panel as the swift doesnt it?
 
MrMD said:
Alx m8 your arguments has absolutely no basis
Click to expand...

I don't have an argument. Never did.

At £499 Freesync doesn't feel so free.


Now let's ignore the feverish type trying desperately to convince me that £499 is a good price, a premium monitor, cloudy confusion ETC ETC.

At £499 Freesync doesn't feel so free /end comment.
 
MrMD said:
Alx m8 your arguments has absolutely no basis

The price is £500 because of the panel being 1440/144hz.It can be argued that 1440/144hz panels are overpriced i guess,but thats in no way related to freesync/Gsync

There are only 3 monitors the BenQ can be compared too

The Rog swift with Gysnc £620
The Acer Predator XB270HU with Gysnc £689 (pre-order)
Acer Predator XG277HU 27" FREESYNC £430 (pre-order)

compared to the gysnc monitors it is clearly significantly cheaper.The acer Freesync monitor is cheaper still ,but then again acer monitors generally arnt the best.

Gibbo: The Benq uses the exact same panel as the swift doesnt it?
Click to expand...

I believe what he is trying to say is that until it is included as standard on every panel(£100, 1080p Panels) he does not see it as free as you have to purchase a premium panel to obtain the Freesync feature. Nothing to do with Gsync.

Correct me if I am wrong Andy.
 
Stanners said:
I believe what he is trying to say is that until it is included as standard on every panel(£100, 1080p Panels) he does not see it as free as you have to purchase a premium panel to obtain the Freesync feature. Nothing to do with Gsync.

Correct me if I am wrong Andy.
Click to expand...
And I also said this:
Marine-RX179 said:
Actually it make FAR more sense to not start with 2560 res or above monitor, as most of use who would want to upgrade would probably already have a 1920 res monitor already. Take me for example who already got a 1920 res 120Hz monitor would really only be looking at 2560 res or above monitor to move onto rather than going onto 1920 res again, and the same probably apply for anyone who already got a 1920 res monitor as well.

It will just be a matter of time that 2560x1440 res IPS monitors become available.
Click to expand...
I mean who already got a 1920 res monitor would actually want to move from one 1920 res monitor to another 1920 monitor just for freesync?

His analogy is like upgrading from a slower dx10 card to a faster dx11 card people are paying a premium specifically for the dx upgrade rather than the increase in performance/performance upgrade.
 
Last edited:
Stanners said:
I believe what he is trying to say is that until it is included as standard on every panel(£100, 1080p Panels) he does not see it as free as you have to purchase a premium panel to obtain the Freesync feature. Nothing to do with Gsync.

Correct me if I am wrong Andy.
Click to expand...

Totally. That was how AMD gleefully put it, that's what I want to see. That's fair enough too. Otherwise hey, if I'm going to spend £499 then I may as well go for a £499 monitor with a better spec (or something I have to pay for like G-Sync, ever so loosely speaking (yes I know it doesn't work on AMD).

But as I said, not looking for an argument, not looking to argue or debate. My comment stands firm. AMD promised me G-Sync or there abouts for free, it doesn't feel so free at £499.

It's just another case of more hyperbole with the same thin, vague outcome as anything else we're promised. Just more rubbish tbh.

Those who think it's worth it? fair enough to them. Go pay £499. Not my money is it?
 
This monitor does look nice and fits together quickly and easily and comes with just about all the cables you could need.

WP_20150304_15_14_48_Pro__highres_zpsuvvpst6l.jpg


WP_20150304_15_15_33_Rich__highres_zpsjjblj2lb.jpg


WP_20150304_15_15_25_Rich__highres_zpst9yihlqa.jpg


WP_20150304_15_16_40_Rich__highres_zpsmzlvf0zv.jpg


Yes it does say HDMI 2.0 on the back of the monitor on the HDMI port

WP_20150304_15_16_50_Rich__highres_zpsr0p0bcmh.jpg


the stand comes in two parts base and stand and fits together quickly and easily. The monitor then attaches on quickly and securely as well.

WP_20150304_15_17_25_Rich__highres_zpsacoqhmfq.jpg


WP_20150304_15_18_05_Rich__highres_zpsoajpewec.jpg


WP_20150304_15_18_30_Rich__highres_zpsvhrkb5yb.jpg


Portrait mode
WP_20150304_15_19_12_Rich__highres_zpsnn1kwphq.jpg
 
Marine-RX179 said:
And I also said this:

I mean who already got a 1920 res monitor would actually want to move from one 1920 res monitor to another 1920 monitor just for freesync?
Click to expand...

But if it costs nothing why can it not be in these screens. I imagine 1080p screens still far outsell any other resolution by a large amount.

Anyway I will leave it there as I am not fussed. I would just buy the £500 screen ;)
 
Marine-RX179 said:
And I also said this:

I mean who already got a 1920 res monitor would actually want to move from one 1920 res monitor to another 1920 monitor just for freesync?
Click to expand...

Up until my Acer 4k2k I had never, in 35 years of gaming EVER bought a monitor costing more than £200. Won't go into up to 2010, but 2010 and I jumped on the 1080p wagon for £139 and bought my Hannspree 24" 1080p. It was more than good enough.

Had, six months later, Freesync come along for £139 more I would have 100% bought into it. Why not? it's only £139. A treat if you will. But with an entrance fee of £499? it doesn't seem so appealing.

And me? well I'm mostly Joe Public. It's me you need to convince, not those who will open their wallets to anything costing stupid money.

Edit. To solidify my point, my ACTUAL argument (other than the one people started, then started answering for me, cheers for that !!). In 2012 I bought a LG passive 3D screen. 24" 1080p no better than the Hannspree. But it was passive 3D. Cost £143. I was more than happy to pay another £143 for 3D as I didn't have it. Had it been £499? forget it....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom