Overclock.net banner

[Guru3D] Asus ROG Swift PG279Q Gets 165Hz Refresh Rate

14K views 121 replies 45 participants last post by  cookieboyeli 
#1 ·
Quote:
This new PG279Q models still comes with a TN Film panel with support for NVIDIA G-sync, including the useful ULMB motion blur reduction mode. The refresh rate now is a 165Hz maximum refresh rate.

We have yet to see how these "overclocked" refresh rates work, but they seem to be offered on a few G-sync capable screens now (100Hz on the Acer X34, 100Hz on the Asus PG348Q, 200Hz even on the Acer Z35).

The PG279Q will offer a 2560 x 1440 resolution, and will likely offer a 4ms G2G response time, 1000:1 contrast ratio, 178/178 viewing angles, 16.7m colour depth and sRGB gamut. DisplayPort connectivity will be provided of course and we expect to see HDMI as well.
Hmm, unfortunately it looks like this will still be a TN panel. The initial rumors said it would be IPS.

Source
 
#4 ·
#5 ·
with 4ms response, i would assume it probably should be an IPS. TN would be in the 1ms response region.

but honestly, there is literally no one that can see a difference between 144 and 165 refresh rates. why even bother?
 
#7 ·
Glad I didn't wait for this now, and grabbed the swift PG278Q instead, it's mightily impressive
biggrin.gif
 
#8 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by OP20 View Post

Were gona start getting into same race as mice manufacturers and their absurd dpi numbers. I like higher numbers but if it comes at the cost of little artifacts or noise its just not worth it.
There is always a race. In the past it was all about dynamic contrast ratios. Before that it was true contrast ratios. Before that it was G2G response time. Before that it was sharpness algorithms. Before that it was a bunch of CRT nonsense most of you won't understand. etc.

Now it is refresh rate. In a few years it will move on to something else. Most likely resolution. That is just how things sell in a consumer based capitalist economy.

Same thing with mice as you mentioned. Same thing in digital cameras. Same thing in core counts for PC CPUs a few years ago and now for ARM CPUs for mobile devices, etc.

Don't stress it. Sure, there will be overkill in some areas from time to time, but is that really so bad? At least you know that by the time they decide to move on to a new form of race, the last thing they were racing over has been advanced so far that you can now expect it to be near-perfect on even bargain items.

The races can get a bit stupid sometimes, and chasing the latest and greatest high number game is a good way to go broke over nothing, but if absurd 50.6-megapixel cameras weren't being made, we also wouldn't see ~16 megapixel mainstream point and shoots for $50 bucks - we would still be stuck on yesteryear's "amazing" 2 megapixel models that can't even fill up a now-standard 1080p monitor, etc.
 
#10 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by muels7 View Post

Hmm, unfortunately it looks like i'm wrong. The initial facts said it would be IPS.

Source
feex'd
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero4549 View Post

There is always a race. In the past it was all about dynamic contrast ratios. Before that it was true contrast ratios. Before that it was G2G response time. Before that it was sharpness algorithms. Before that it was a bunch of CRT nonsense most of you won't understand. etc.

Now it is refresh rate. In a few years it will move on to something else. Most likely resolution. That is just how things sell in a consumer based capitalist economy.

Same thing with mice as you mentioned. Same thing in digital cameras. Same thing in core counts for PC CPUs a few years ago and now for ARM CPUs for mobile devices, etc.

Don't stress it. Sure, there will be overkill in some areas from time to time, but is that really so bad? At least you know that by the time they decide to move on to a new form of race, the last thing they were racing over has been advanced so far that you can now expect it to be near-perfect on even bargain items.

The races can get a bit stupid sometimes, and chasing the latest and greatest high number game is a good way to go broke over nothing, but if absurd 50.6-megapixel cameras weren't being made, we also wouldn't see ~16 megapixel mainstream point and shoots for $50 bucks - we would still be stuck on yesteryear's "amazing" 2 megapixel models that can't even fill up a now-standard 1080p monitor, etc.
I dont have any problems with overkill. I do have a problem with what mice manufacturers have done which is overclock sensors which adds noise (jitter) for the sake of higher dpi numbers for marketing. Dpi numbers so high no one uses them. I just hope monitors dont go the same way where they display artifacts so the marketing team can get the numbers they wanted.
 
#14 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by OP20 View Post

I dont have any problems with overkill. I do have a problem with what mice manufacturers have done which is overclock sensors which adds noise (jitter) for the sake of higher dpi numbers for marketing. Dpi numbers so high no one uses them. I just hope monitors dont go the same way where they display artifacts so the marketing team can get the numbers they wanted.
Almost all modern mice track just fine at reasonable DPI levels. Sure, you can jack them up to insane sensitivities that no human could ever make use of, and at that point they don't track so great either, but does that really bother you? At least we don't have mice that can't track on surfaces that aren't a particular color any more, or massive acceleration issues, etc that were common just a few years ago.

If monitors "go the same way" (hint, they already have been doing that for years), I'd be more than happy. Sure, you might have some massive overcorrection with OCR on the maximum setting for instance, but dial it back to something reasonable and you still get better response times than you did a few years ago, and without any of the image degradation that results from pushing it into the stupid zone.

Of course on the other hand, we do have the cult of r0ach telling us that mice are worse today than they ever were before. I suppose if you are one of the poor saps that actually believes that nonsense, you might also have been tricked into an irrational fear of modern monitors as well.
 
#15 ·
What is absurd about +50Mp cameras? Canon 5Ds is the camera that I want next. I like being able to zoom and crop in post.
 
#16 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dagamus NM View Post

What is absurd about +50Mp cameras? Canon 5Ds is the camera that I want next. I like being able to zoom and crop in post.
Many things, today.

That said, in about 2-5 years, we will likely have 50+ MP sensors that aren't absolutely chock full of noise and are inexpensive to boot. Of course, at that point, the new hotness will be 150MP cameras that are just as noisy and costly as today's 50MP cameras.

That is just the way progress works.
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dagamus NM View Post

What is absurd about +50Mp cameras? Canon 5Ds is the camera that I want next. I like being able to zoom and crop in post.
Big MP numbers on DSLRs? That's fine, they typically have good sensors to make use of those resolutions. Big MP numbers on cell phones? Pure marketing, like the inhuman levels of DPI some gaming mice are advertised with.
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by muels7 View Post

Hmm, unfortunately it looks like this will still be a TN panel. The initial rumors said it would be IPS.

Source
Then that's a nope for me. You can't do photo editing on a TN panel. You just can't. You need IPS for photo editing especially if you do HDR.
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thready View Post

Then that's a nope for me.
Yeah, because it's SO going to be TN...
rolleyes.gif
 
#22 ·
I'm starting to wonder about all the IPS vs TN arguments.

First off let me state by saying that I have only ever owned TN panels (having bought all my monitors in a supermarket, for convenience, except for my last one). Now some panels looked like crap, others looked quite nice. I think that a good quality TN panel looks perfectly fine, by no means stellar but just because it's TN doesn't mean it looks bad. I don't care about viewing angles because I use my monitors at my desk.

As for IPS panels, I had the pleasure of seeing a few before and spending a few hours with them. They are very nice looking monitors, a 24" or 25" ASUS IPS panel, with 1080p resolution. Very nice for office work, the viewing angles are also amazing which helped because I was using the panel sitting next to my boss.

Enter my BenQ 2411Z, which I bought for its 144 Hz refresh rate and its ability to control strobe. It didn't look so good at first, it's a TN panel. But once it's calibrated it's a perfectly fine looking panel, just as good as the IPS panels I saw at work. What is much, much more interesting is how smooth the image you get is. Even if I'm on my desktop, just having 144 Hz is nothing short of very pleasing to the eyes, to the point where looking at 60 Hz panels starts feeling "laggy". Yes, even on desktop.

My point? I don't really care about panel quality anymore, as long as it's not super bad (I know what a bad looking panel is, with pale colors and crappy contrast). TN vs IPS is, to me, irrelevant. What is much more important to me is the refresh rate of the monitor.

If you're playing FPS, then the blur reduction is also very, very nice to have. The ability to fine tune the strobing is also excellent. It's all about having high refresh rate and quality refresh rate, for me.

I can only imagine what G-Sync or A-Sync panels can do in gaming, in terms of reducing stuttering. That is probably also supremely important, though I've never yet had the pleasure to see a variable refresh rate monitor. That is also a reason which has pushed me to boycott anything G-sync, A-sync or free-sync until a monitor comes out which has working variable refresh rate regardless of the brand of your GPU.
 
#23 ·
Quote:
but honestly, there is literally no one that can see a difference between 144 and 165 refresh rates. why even bother?
144 to 165 is a ~1.146x change. It's like comparing 60 to 69hz.

Not that big a difference, but mainly because of the magnitude change.

If you take a 1.3x increase in refresh rate, it's extremely easy to see. From 30 to 39, 60 to 78 - or even 200 to 260. We're still well within human perception limits, though the latency benefits become very small as now the screen is holding you back by 5-7ms, and not by 15-35ms so halving it again wouldn't make a very notable difference any more.

Smoothness and motion blur benefits continue to be linear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kakik09 View Post

Not to be shown up, Acer one ups ASUS:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/acer-announces-35in-predator-z35-with-g-sync-and-200hz.html

165 Hz... 200 Hz... At what point does one stop noticing the difference? It's the retina argument all over again
tongue.gif
If you wanna use that comparison then 60hz is the 720p, 144hz is 1080p and we've yet to see the 1440p-4k-8k stuff that will push the limits of human perception.
 
#24 ·
Just release the damn thing I am tired of waiting...
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyro999 View Post

144 to 165 is a ~1.146x change. It's like comparing 60 to 69hz.

Not that big a difference, but mainly because of the magnitude change.

If you take a 1.3x increase in refresh rate, it's extremely easy to see. From 30 to 39, 60 to 78 - or even 200 to 260. We're still well within human perception limits, though the latency benefits become very small as now the screen is holding you back by 5-7ms, and not by 15-35ms so halving it again wouldn't make a very notable difference any more.

Smoothness and motion blur benefits continue to be linear.
If you wanna use that comparison then 60hz is the 720p, 144hz is 1080p and we've yet to see the 1440p-4k-8k stuff that will push the limits of human perception.
We're talking 5 inch phones for that analogy right? Now I'm really going to be torn between 4k IPS 60Hz and 1080p TN 144 Hz
 
#26 ·
Almost anyone can see the difference between TN and other panels. The think is we tend to get used to what we have and out brains start to overlook some of the bad parts.

Most TN because of viewing angles are darker on the top than the bottom(can be more or less depending on the height of the screen compared to you).

If you have been using other panel types for a while it will stick out badly.

By the same right if you have been using a TN panel and become used to it, you may start to notice IPS glow much more when switching(but after having it for a while, you may get used to it).

I am hoping for more fast VA panels because of the lack of glow and better contrast. These 2 things help games because some games have lots of shadow detail that gets mixed in with the glow and disappears.

I am not calling IPS bad, just the idea to remove the TW polarizer that was used to greatly reduce glow. Once IPS panels had a cult following it did not matter what they did the the screens(just like anything else.). I just could not get used to the glow on dark games.

I have a TN(color shift) and VA(slooooww) panel they both have advantages and disadvantages. I no longer have my IPS screen.

This image shows the glow I am talking about. My old VA panel actually could also see many darker shades that just become one on some other screens.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top