[Various] ASUS debuts ROG SWIFT PG279Q 144hz IPS and G-SYNC - Page 205 - Overclock.net

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2041 of 9463 Old 10-07-2015, 11:53 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
CallsignVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Washington D.C.
Posts: 7,432
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny89 View Post

Actually, 15 biggrin.gif new Acer XB is 150Hz with G-Sync and 144Hz without G-Sync: http://www.144hzmonitors.com/monitors/acer-xb271hu-27-inch-1440p-144hz-ips-g-sync-monitor/

I want finally some reviews of this monitor!!

I'd rather go off of the actual manufacturers site than whatever 144hzmonitors.com is (not to mention they also say it's 6-bit+FRC which is wrong):

http://www.acer.com/predator/en_US/predator_xb1.html


But really of course 6 Hz over 144 isn't really worth talking about, especially since 165 Hz isn't that big of a deal.

CallsignVega is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2042 of 9463 Old 10-07-2015, 12:00 PM
 
Benny89's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Executor
Posts: 2,320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallsignVega View Post

I'd rather go off of the actual manufacturers site than whatever 144hzmonitors.com is (not to mention they also say it's 6-bit+FRC which is wrong):

http://www.acer.com/predator/en_US/predator_xb1.html


But really of course 6 Hz over 144 isn't really worth talking about, especially since 165 Hz isn't that big of a deal.

Exactly! smile.gif That is why I say this 165 Hz on PG is just money grab smile.gif I hope we will hear more soon on new XB release date and prices.

CPU: Intel i7 5775C 4.3 Ghz 1.376V. MOBO: Asus Maximus VII Hero. GPU: ASUS GTX 1080 Ti STRIX OC 11 GB: 2101 mhz core/6100 Memory 1.09V RAM: G.Skill DDR3 16GB (2x8GB) TridentX 2133MHz. SSD: HyperX Savage 480GB SATA3. AIO: Corsair H105. PSU: EVGA Supernova G2 1000. Monitor: Acer XB271HU. CASE: Phanteks Evolv ATX Tempered Glass Black.

Water Loop: EK Water Blocks EK-XRES 140 Revo D5 PWM; EK Water Blocks EK-FC1080 GTX Ti Strix Backplate - Black; EK Water Blocks EK-FC1080 GTX Ti Strix - Acetal+Nickel; EK Water Blocks EK-Supremacy EVO - Acetal+Nickel; All adapers and fittings: EK brand Radiators: 2x Black Ice Nemesis GTS 360 - Black; Fans: 9x 120 mm Corsair ML120 Pro Premium
Benny89 is offline  
post #2043 of 9463 Old 10-07-2015, 12:01 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
CallsignVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Washington D.C.
Posts: 7,432
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny89 View Post

Exactly! smile.gif That is why I say this 165 Hz on PG is just money grab smile.gif I hope we will hear more soon on new XB release date and prices.

If any monitor could actually utilize "greater than 144 Hz", it would be the TN Swift as it's pixels are actually fast enough to make a difference. Even then it would be a small upgrade.

CallsignVega is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2044 of 9463 Old 10-07-2015, 05:05 PM
 
xg4m3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 226
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 5
Aaaand PG279Q is available in Germany. 850€.

xg4m3 is offline  
post #2045 of 9463 Old 10-07-2015, 05:08 PM
Overclocker
 
Pragmatist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 498
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by xg4m3 View Post

Aaaand PG279Q is available in Germany. 850€.

That's 1100 SEK cheaper than what I pre-ordered it for...........................

Do you have a link to said store?
Pragmatist is offline  
post #2046 of 9463 Old 10-07-2015, 05:10 PM
 
xg4m3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 226
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post

That's 1100 SEK cheaper than what I pre-ordered it for...........................

Do you have a link to said store?

http://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/27Zoll--68-58cm--Asus-PG279Q-schwarz-2560x1440-DisplayPort-HDMI_1014728.html

xg4m3 is offline  
post #2047 of 9463 Old 10-07-2015, 05:20 PM
Overclocker
 
Pragmatist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 498
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14

I must be missing something. 849 € is 7872 SEK, and the pre-order price is 8990 SEK. redface.gif

http://www.prisjakt.nu/produkt.php?p=3333873
Pragmatist is offline  
post #2048 of 9463 Old 10-07-2015, 05:55 PM
Commodore 64
 
Rocketlucco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 31
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post

To me personally this discussion is old, and I can't fathom that there are people like you still doubting the what you gain from it..

If you actually read what I wrote, my argument is not that there is no benefit. I think a higher refresh rate is a very noticeable feature, that it's a worthwhile feature, and that there a bunch of benefits to obtaining such a monitor, many of which I listed in my above posts. I just don't think have any meaningful competitive advantage is one of those benefits.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post

The same can be said about your claims, you have no factual proof. I am not saying that 165hz will be better than 144hz, I'm saying 60hz vs 120hz is a huge gosh darn step that most top gamers and other folks with a good pair of eyes can notice. IF you can't notice the difference, then that's fine. It's just odd to argue against the gain in this day in age.

The burden of proof is on the person claiming the new product makes the change. When you are claiming nonsense like "a good pair of eyes" can make a difference, you need to provide evidence for that. Unless you are arguing that people who literally can't see the screen due to poor vision will get less benefit than people who can, in which case why even bring that up. Also I again think you aren't actually reading my posts, because you seem to be under the impression I think there is a higher refresh rate is not a real feature. I'm not talking there about the presence of the benefit, I'm discussing the quality of that benefit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by overvolted View Post

Of course it's subjective, that was the entire point of my post. I'm not saying you should expect a massive increase in K:D ratios because you upped the refresh rate. The main point of spending money on a more expensive, higher hz display is for the eye candy, and whatever margin it helps (better motion clarity, decreased input lag) for competitive FPS is just a welcomed bonus. BTW looking at 60hz after fully adjusting to 144hz is very difficult, in fact it's a blurry mess. No one should be pumping 60hz in 2015 lol.. .

We are actually in agreement. You and I are both saying that higher refresh rate has many benefits, but specifically increasing your competitive skill is likely only a marginal one. So yes, we are in agreement here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by overvolted View Post

I have 0 experience with a outrageously priced cans, so rushing to judgement on them would be a bit arrogant. The only thing I can comment on is the $300 and less range, which I laugh at the idea what improvements I hear are placebo. But this is me after trying several headphones, made by different companies in different price ranges. Not going off what I read on the world wide interwebs and jotting that down as my real world experience. So here's a test, below linked are the headphones I have (that blows everything I previously owned out of the water) and I want you to find me something that will provide the same accurate powerful bass, sound stage, detail, and clarity for a much lower price.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00193FT26?keywords=dt%20990s&qid=1444235319&ref_=sr_1_1&sr=8-1

I'm not sure if there is a reading comprehension problem, you didn't read what I wrote, or you are being willfully facetious by talking past my posts. I was never talking about 300 Dollars headphones compared to the 20 dollars headphones you get in CVS. I was talking about enthusiast quality $1000+ headphones being compared to the lower end stuff, and I actually specifically mentioned price ranges in the 1000s. Your set of headphones (which I actually own and are sitting on my head) would be considered low-mid end to a high profile audiophile. Your set of headphones would absolutely be better than the junk you can buy in Radioshack, but they aren't necessarily realistically worse than much more expensive headphones.
Rocketlucco is offline  
post #2049 of 9463 Old 10-07-2015, 06:16 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Kinaesthetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,529
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocketlucco View Post


If you actually read what I wrote, my argument is not that there is no benefit. I think a higher refresh rate is a very noticeable feature, that it's a worthwhile feature, and that there a bunch of benefits to obtaining such a monitor, many of which I listed in my above posts. I just don't think have any meaningful competitive advantage is one of those benefits.
The burden of proof is on the person claiming the new product makes the change. When you are claiming nonsense like "a good pair of eyes" can make a difference, you need to provide evidence for that. Unless you are arguing that people who literally can't see the screen due to poor vision will get less benefit than people who can, in which case why even bring that up. Also I again think you aren't actually reading my posts, because you seem to be under the impression I think there is a higher refresh rate is not a real feature. I'm not talking there about the presence of the benefit, I'm discussing the quality of that benefit.
We are actually in agreement. You and I are both saying that higher refresh rate has many benefits, but specifically increasing your competitive skill is likely only a marginal one. So yes, we are in agreement here.
I'm not sure if there is a reading comprehension problem, you didn't read what I wrote, or you are being willfully facetious by talking past my posts. I was never talking about 300 Dollars headphones compared to the 20 dollars headphones you get in CVS. I was talking about enthusiast quality $1000+ headphones being compared to the lower end stuff, and I actually specifically mentioned price ranges in the 1000s. Your set of headphones (which I actually own and are sitting on my head) would be considered low-mid end to a high profile audiophile. Your set of headphones would absolutely be better than the junk you can buy in Radioshack, but they aren't necessarily realistically worse than much more expensive headphones.

 

So you honestly don't think being able to track an object's motion across the screen easier with a high refresh rate a competitive advantage? I fear for your logic. You are quite literally receiving more information. If that isn't a competitive advantage, I don't know what is.


I hate fanboys/fangirls. You ruin the friendlyshilling atmosphere of OCN./s

 

 

Kinaesthetic is offline  
post #2050 of 9463 Old 10-07-2015, 06:19 PM
Overclocker
 
Pragmatist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 498
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocketlucco View Post

If you actually read what I wrote, my argument is not that there is no benefit. I think a higher refresh rate is a very noticeable feature, that it's a worthwhile feature, and that there a bunch of benefits to obtaining such a monitor, many of which I listed in my above posts. I just don't think have any meaningful competitive advantage is one of those benefits.

The burden of proof is on the person claiming the new product makes the change. When you are claiming nonsense like "a good pair of eyes" can make a difference, you need to provide evidence for that. Unless you are arguing that people who literally can't see the screen due to poor vision will get less benefit than people who can, in which case why even bring that up. Also I again think you aren't actually reading my posts, because you seem to be under the impression I think there is a higher refresh rate is not a real feature. I'm not talking there about the presence of the benefit, I'm discussing the quality of that benefit.

I can't experience what you're experiencing and vice versa, and I honestly don't know how to make you acknowledge the fact that playing with a higher refresh rate than say 60 will make you a better player. For instance, if player A is playing with 60fps (V-Sync) and there's a lot of explosions going on he's frames will dip to 40, but player B is playing with a 120hz monitor and he's fps will dip to lets say 90 for the sake of arguement. Player B will have a direct advantage because poor player A is lagging out in the midst of the battle.


Other advantages are input latency, and the fluidity 120fps+ offers in comparison to the stutter and jitter whilst playing at 60fps.
If you're playing Heartstone it won't matter much, but if you're into shooters it will be advantageous. If by chance you have a 60hz monitor, have them side by side and just move your mouse cursor around. Also, watch the youtube links I posted since they are informative.
Pragmatist is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off