Asus PG279Q ROG Swift 27-inch 165Hz Gaming Monitor Review

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

alidan

Splendid
Aug 5, 2009
5,303
0
25,780
0
I didn't understand the difference between TN and IPS but l sure do now, it's a real treat. I also didn't understand how important the color gamut error was either but trust me, l don't need 165fps to kill you in any fps. :)
honestly, it barely matters outside of pro applications, contrast ratio and viewing angles however do.

my monitor doesn't have a good stand and no way to get a different mount, if i'm even 10 degrees off center, the image is so distorted that you can no longer see in shadows in a game.

i want to get rid of my piece of crap monitor, (syncmaster t240hd) but i refuse to lose resolution, and i refuse to go below 1000 contrast ratio. mix in reviews that go in depth and aren't just the press release are a rarity, and its really hard to find decent monitors... not to mention, dropping 500$ on something sight unseen is difficult for me to do too.
 

DAOWAce

Distinguished
Feb 27, 2014
3
0
18,510
0
Can we have a 120Hz 16:10 display already? This is getting absurd.

I refuse to drop back down to 16:9 after using a 21:9 monitor. They feel so incredibly small by comparison.
 

pezonator

Distinguished
Dec 13, 2011
356
0
18,860
27
I can highly recommend this monitor! I did buy the Acer X34 curved widescreen and it is frikkin beautiful but it had issues so I returned it and bought this. Very happy with it, no issues apart from a little light bleed in the bottom right corner as described in this review.

I'm running an i7 6700k with a 980ti. People who say they can max out 1440p at 144hz on a 970 are dreaming. BF4 at ultra settings, 64 player Lockers I average around 80-100fps. GPU running at core speed 1400Mhz. Anyway, great screen!
 

f-14

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
2,344
0
19,960
50
i'd settle for a 75-120 hz model of this at $200-300 price point
for $700 tho it better be 30"= and not that ultra wide POS measuring system where they cram a double wide 19" into one panel.
 

SpAwNtoHell

Reputable
Dec 5, 2015
45
0
4,530
0
While i was waiting a review for this from Tom... I must confess i was expecting some of the worries to go away and unfortunatly it did not, while good specs and very expensive tho not necessarly a issue light bleed is putting of many people as reported by many buyers of this panel. The actual problem is that are hand full of panels suporting over 120hz used by the the manufacturers like asus dell aoc i am really want to see if lenovo fixes this things for gamers with the anounced 27" fhd gsync curved va panel made by samsung. Of course for can leave with this back bleed greater than then tn panel and ips glow( the last will bother very few but baclight bleed...) In uk this is over 700£ many will refuse to pay that and receive a backlight bleed ips....

In regards to power to run this, to be fair 165 is just another marketing gimmick with no real benefit, but driving this under 100hz i consider that who ever does this should look at another video card.. as breaking the 60hz barier porpuse was to achieve anything above 96hz which is somehow ergonomic over that point, the only real benefit of over 100hz is fast processing to force reduce imput lag where i think lcd lacks still before crt.
 
165Hz is ridonculous! But to push that you need a lot. I run mine at 120Hz and land a really solid 85fps in BF4 at maxed out. I love this monitor and I recommend it to anyone that wants higher resolution beyond 60Hz.

Great review.
 

hixbot

Distinguished
Oct 29, 2007
818
0
18,990
1
Still waiting for a gsync 1440-4k PVA panel. I don't understand the fuss over IPS. Sure, IPS is much better than TN, but the contrast ratios are terrible compared to PVA. In my book, contrast ratio defines picture quality. Looks like I'm still gaming on my CRT.
 

codo

Honorable
May 5, 2012
69
0
10,630
0
Been running the original swift now for over a year, SLI 970s. Once you see the high refresh rate and GSync theres no going back. It does require some power though. BF4 is butter totally maxed out but some others dont do so well. Far Cry 4 maxed is only playable in the eyes of a console player. I tried KOTOR2 the other day and that was slow, not sure if some kind of disagreement with the monitor and high refresh rate or just something wrong with the game. I'm weary of ASUS' quality, I dont like their software, the original batch of these monitors had a lot of issues and mine has about an inch long white line protruding from the left side of the panel, as well as bad backlight bleeding along the bottom. I hope it holds up until its time to jump to 4K
 

none12345

Distinguished
Apr 27, 2013
431
2
18,785
0
I question the point of 165hz. I mean all things considered, more hz is better. But, it wont sync right with any standard out there. Games tuned for 30 or 60 fps, which is evenly scaled up for a 120hz monitor, not for 144, and not for 165. TV is at 24 fps, which again scales evenly to 120hz, and also evenly for 144, but not to 165.

If i had that monitor id probably set it to 120hz for desktop, ie watching videos for framerate syncing reasons. Of course in full screen games id set it to 165hz tho. Same thing i do on my 144hz, set it to 120 in desktop for that reason, and 144 in fullscreen games.

Really if you want even scaling so you dont get studdering for locked formats, you need to get to 240hz for it to be worth it again. Which i would like!

The faster the monitors refresh rate, the less the need for freesync/gsync as well. You just turn on vsync and presto same thing once your framerate is high.

For gaming i doubt youd see much difference with a 144hz monitor on vsync, vs a 60hz monitor on freesync/gsync. Your max wait time on 144hz is 6.9ms per vsync, vs the 16.7ms on 60hz, youd notice a massive different there.

At 240hz youd be at 4.2ms. Which begs the question. Which will happen first, a standard among freesync/vsync, and it becoming avaliable in every monitor....or new panel tech that moves us to 240hz+ negating the need for it at all.
 

crateria

Distinguished
Apr 25, 2011
31
0
18,530
0
"But for those craving the highest possible speed there is nothing that can compete with the Asus PG279Q."

So Tom's hardware doesn't even know about the Acer Predator XB271HU then? Like yes, it was the first 1440p 165hz monitor, but it no longer is the only one. This review is months late. Where is the comparison?

Tom's hardware just not what it used to be...
 


If you play fps games then you want higher fps beyond 60.

Saying " I doubt you'd see much difference" between a 144hz and 60hz monitors shows you really haven't experienced it. The difference is real and more fluid. For playing games like BF4 it is great and I love going beyond 60fps. Do I think 165Hz is necessary? no. But going from an average of 60fps to now 85fps is awesome. To reach 165fps I'd need to SLI and not gonna spend that much $$$.
 

picture_perfect

Distinguished
Apr 7, 2003
278
0
18,780
0
this monitor is actually more demanding than a 4k 60hz monitor.. you need at least dual GTX 980tis/Titan Xes to run everything at good settings.
This is totally wrong, don't mislead people researching things. IT is not more demanding than a 4k monitor in anyway. As someone with Techy in their name I would imagine you had a clue about this.
His math is totally right.

Bottom line is Hz are pointless without a matching FRAME RATE. 165hz gains you nothing if you can only average 60fps. Additional Hz contribute NOTHING visually or functionally. These monitors fail with their emphasis on high resolutions / high Hz while ignoring frame rates. It's frame rates that do what people want (1) reduce stutter (2) decrease input lag (3) reduce blur. Hz only serve as the medium. You need both so don't fall for the marketing hype, like 20,000 dpi mice.
.
1080p @ 120fps vsync'd beats 1440p @ 60fps gsync'd every time:
1/2 the blur
1/2 the lag
no "below 40fps" stutter

What I mean is Hz are fine but you need the horsepower to back it up. These monitors make it impossible without SLI. And for those who think 165hz is "future proofing", there is no such thing anymore. Oled anyone?
 

sephirotic

Distinguished
Jan 29, 2009
67
0
18,630
0
Enough of this TN crap, These high HZ tn displays are horrid, they have worse motion resolution and more motion blur than CRT's at half their resolution. You know what? Even if theoretically the human can actually distinguish flashes of light as fast as 200hz, in practice, the persistence and hold effect from TFT monitors and they high response time (GTG, no BtW) are much more crucial to a worse motion-resolution performance than pure FPS. I dare to say that a 72hz CRT monitor has best MOTION RESOLUTION this 165hz LCD. But the mass of misinformed gamers that doesn't really understand how displays and the human eyes work, will keep buying this crap, and of course the hardware industry loves it, after all, it also pushes the sales of SLI and Xfire configurations higher.

Enough of this eyecancer TN crap. We want Low input lag OLED displays at a reasonable price NOW. We don't need 120, 144 or even more hz, a 72~96hz (100 for PAL) OLED would be more than enough and have much better motion fluidity (if lightstrobe is implemented) than Any overdriven overpriced TN LCD.
It's time to kill the "high-end" TN lcds already.
 

chenw

Honorable
Oct 25, 2014
1,666
0
12,460
211


This post would be far more appropriate in PG278Q thread, not a PG279Q thread, since the monitor is not TN.

Also, CRT's got phased out because it is too bulky for the general consumer, as well as problem in making large monitors using that tech, so curently it's not gamers or even general mass doesn't know better, but there is really no alternatives currently available.

There is also a stigma in tech that everything newer is supposed to get smaller.

Oh, and OLED is also unlikely be the holy grail of all monitors, unless they make it a very high refresh rate that sample and hold blur becomes inperceptible, which has more to do with the controller and the connection standard itself than the panel (TN response times is fast enough to use higher refresh rates). All OLED provides is the infinite or very near infinite contrast it provides, which enhances static IQ, motion IQ still require either very fast refresh rates or proper interpolation implementation similar to the one in CRT's.
 

picture_perfect

Distinguished
Apr 7, 2003
278
0
18,780
0
LCD blur is close to CRT with backlight strobing (Lightboost ect) but at the cost of faded colors and decreased brightness. I still root for OLED because in addition some blur remains. They might perfect it. The problem with OLED has always been lifetime and production cost.
 


Yeah I do hope they fix the endurance problem with most OLEDs.

But, what I don't understand is that we already have OLED TVs on the market, why are we not seeing OLED monitors?
 

chenw

Honorable
Oct 25, 2014
1,666
0
12,460
211


I would too, that infinite/near infinite contrast in a sea of sub 4000 contrast monitors is going to be glorious.

I just have reservations about the blur.
 

picture_perfect

Distinguished
Apr 7, 2003
278
0
18,780
0
I just have reservations about the blur.
I doubt Dell will strobe it unless it's specifically for gaming. The extra brightness required further reduce life span. But hey LG is coming out with HDR OLEDs so the future looks bright (literally).
 
I just have reservations about the blur.
I doubt Dell will strobe it unless it's specifically for gaming. The extra brightness required further reduce life span. But hey LG is coming out with HDR OLEDs so the future looks bright (literally).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but with these new OLED screens there is no backlight. So strobing the backlight to reduce the blur would no longer be an available option. Also, strobing relies on a static refresh and that's what everyone is trying to move away from with adaptive sync technologies because they have refresh rates that match the variance in the framerate output of graphics cards.

I think an OLED G-sync monitor would be the bomb, but I wouldn't touch one at today's prices.
 


Not all 144hz/G-Sync monitors support 3d vision. They need to have the 3d vision badge on the product in order for them to be 3d vision ready.
 


Your post makes almost zero sense (not quite zero though) since the review is about an IPS monitor and not a TN monitor. Read this article (really read it), then read other articles about this monitor and G-sync technology. After you've taken the time to do that, make an informed decision rather than a passionate diatribe against TN panels, G-sync technology and high-refresh rate monitors.

I do agree with you on OLED. It provides a great picture and colors, but there are things that still need to be ironed out with that tech before it becomes commonplace.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY