C'mon, the review started with "The ASUS Republic of Gamers (ROG) line includes everything you want for building a high-end gaming." How can anyone trust a review that contains drivel worse than a press release?
Yes. For building *a* high-end gaming PC. Not for building the best or the cheapest or whatever. It's a statement about the completeness of the line-up.
I tried buying an ROG Swift and really liked the panel's speed, color, and g-sync. However I went through 4 monitors, all defective, before finally giving up. One monitor was utterly damaged (cracked LCD panel). The other 3 had extremely bad color calibration with gamma as low as 1.6, making everything extremely washed out and looking worse than a low end budget LCD from 2005. The gamma was so far off that attempting to calibrate it caused terrible color banding and white/black crushing.
It took me four months and 5 monitors to get a non-defective one.
I've since had a nightmare where it fails with red lines down the middle. Asus RMA support reportedly ships them back in a back in a normal cardboard box with one piece of crushed paper to protect it.
Unfortunately you're misinterpreting refresh rate for response time. The ASUS monitor has 1ms response time while the Acer: "one of the world’s first IPS monitors with a response time of only 4ms G-to-G"
If it is 4 ms Gray to Gray, that means it should be able to achieve 144 Hz if the screen is refreshing at that. Required response time for 144 Hz is 6.944... ms. 4 ms on the dot would get you 240 Hz, and of course 1 ms should equal 1000 Hz.
That does not mean these displays will not have input lag, another issue for FPS and fast paced games, or terrible picture quality, an issue for everyone and movies especially.
If they advertise "4ms GtG," it is most likely closer to a 6ms average transition time. If you read the reviews on TFT Central, when they measure actual pixel response times, they are often about 2-3ms higher than the reported value. For example, the Swift is a supposed "1ms GtG" panel, but in practice the average transition time was about 3ms.
In reality, the ghosting effect of slow pixel response times could be a minor problem for an IPS running at 120+ Hz, however... I'd take an IPS running at 120Hz over one at 60Hz any day... the blur caused by ghosting is minimal compared to the blur caused by 60Hz persistence compared to 120Hz persistence.
The one thing that incredibly fast pixel response times allow for is strobing, which makes LCD behave practically like a CRT display, meaning practically 0 motion blur. For now, IPS doesn't look like it can transition fast enough for a clean strobe.
Sorry, I misread low for lower. TN is still the quickest to be sure, though as DiHydro points out, IPS should now cleanly manage transitions at 120 and 144Hz.
if we're talking total input lag (signal processing+response time) than BenQ's XL2720Z is actually a little faster. it's a TN 144hz, 3d vision w/o g-sync @ $450. a better deal imo than the Swift.
27" @ 1080p? And i thought 24" @ 1200p was bad. How in the world is that a better deal? I'm not saying the Swift is a good deal, since it is really a crappy piece of junk seeing all the quality issues it has. Online shops are stockpiling refurbished units from Asus that few wants to touch with a ten foot pole.
One hopes that AMD can finally deliver it's freesync vaporware, but no one should hold their breath. I think Asus and their ROG is hoopla is half the tax. Next we'll get a $300 over normal price 1nf1n1ty gamerz gsync so all the drooling ad controlled robotic braggers can forum it up. Well at least it's not quite as bad as apple fans.
AMD will indeed deliver FreeSync. They've got a bunch of monitor manufacturers onboard for this (who admittedly would just need to add a few extra lines of code to their firmware for this, but still), so they can't just back out now.
<speculation > The problem is with the way FS works. When the framerate is reasonably consistent, it would work fine, but if the framerate is jumping around, there would probably be some stuttering. Ultimately I suppose, as per AMD's MO of late, it would be another compromise between price and quality.</speculation>
I paid the nVidia tax... I was one of the lucky folks that got this monitor when it first came out. Boy was that an adventure!!! Constantly trying to find someone that had a stock of it. Anyways, I was also fortunate enough to get a great display in terms of backlight bleed etc. I have had ZERO issues with mine. Now that I have seen G-Sync in motion... I would have gladly paid $1,000 for this monitor. Fortunately, I got mine for $800. This monitor is truly the best gaming monitor I have ever owned!!! For me, it even beats out my old trusty Sony GDM-500 display and that's saying something!!
I paid the nVidia tax too and I love it too but haters will hate. I only spent one evening with it but I gotta say GSync is the best thing that happened to gaming since the SSD. You have to see it to believe it. No tearing, no lag, no sync issues. Perfectly smooth. I was sitting there looking at the Unigine Valley demo for minutes running buttery smooth at around 100fps with my jaw on the floor. Then I fired up Skyrim and OMFG!!! Gaming heaven!
But... Yes, the color quality leaves something to be desired, though I'm picking up a used iMac for my photo editing and will strip this PC down to gaming only. You wouldn't want to use this display for photo editing. But for gaming this is huge. I want to play all my games all over again.
I'm still stunned how hard it seems for the manufacturers to get the USB ports right, especially since Dell was spot on more than ten years ago. Two or more in the back for static equipment, be it a webcam or similar, two along one of the sides for easy access when using a USB memory stick, attaching a camera or what not. http://www.anandtech.com/show/1193/2 Its larger siblings like the 3007WFP made it even better by adding a sd- and cf-reader.
I've wondered this as well. My Dell 2001FP, which is still in use today despite being 14 years old, was their first to get this right. It's as if other manufacturers don't recognize the value enough to even copy Dell's design, let alone design something as nice themselves.
My dad wanted a new monitor and this was the HARDEST requirement to fill for him. The amount of monitors with 4 USB ports, positioned correctly, is terribly low.
Buy a tiny USB hub and attach it under the edge of the monitor with dual-sided sticky tape. I've done on many monitors. Not perfectly pretty but works.
The issue with having those kinds of things on the side of the monitor, is you require a thick bezel or one with more depth or both. currently most monitors are going with a thin bezel design both on the edge and in depth. I own the dell 3007 3011 and 2005fpw and they are about 3x as thick around the edge and 2x the depth of the pg278q. The asus "feels" much smaller than other 27" that i have experienced just because of the bezel size. also the screen part of it is much shallower than any other monitor i have used. usually from the edge of the Bezel to the surface of the screen is about 2-7mm depending on the size of the screen but, on the asus i would say 1mm.
you can always get a usb hub on your desk, or strapped to the back of the monitor. as monitors get thinner you'll have a much harder time finding ports in the future.
I wouldn't rave too much about dells button layouts, especially on the U2410. Having a button form the corner of the bezem (or any edge) can cause frustrations. At work I use three of these monitors, and anytime they got bumped, one of them gets switched off because the corner button is inadvertantly pressed in the process.
I've got one of these, as part of a big gaming machine update I've been doing. I'd say the assessment is spot on.
Colour quality and especially consistency are clearly not in the same league as any halfway reasonable IPS display, but the smoothness you get from a high-refresh panel is lovely, and fast-paced games feel superbly solid. G-Sync is something I'm completely sold on, and having a ULMB 120Hz option for 3D Vision is also really handy for stable images. Sadly you can't mix the two - I'd love for "3D Vision 3" / "G-Sync 2" to be able to vary frame rates and store left and right eye frames on-display so lower frame rates can be doubled up properly, but that's probably wishful thinking, and a niche atop a niche. That's to say nothing of my theory that 3D Vision will probably die a death once there's a consumer desktop VR solution out there.
I also agree that it's a high-priced (perhaps overpriced), niche item - but it doesn't really have any competition at the moment.
The picture quality still won't be hugely impressive with IPS, because the color palettes used in games have saturation gradients, and the areas of a map or character that should be noticeable will be extremely heavily oversaturated, whereas the less important, insignificant parts will have very, very little saturation and less polys than the important parts that the saturated colors will be on.
I went from a 3007WFP-HC, to a RoG Swift. The size drop was a little annoying, but when my 2nd Swift failed last week the 3007 seemed weird because of the aspect ratio, and I missed 144hz.
"Like the other G-SYNC displays I have tested, the ASUS ROG has no inputs aside from a single DisplayPort. Because I have no CRT monitor that can run at the same native resolution as it, nor a DisplayPort compatible lag tester, I can’t produce an accurate input lag measurement for the display. Obviously this is not an ideal result for a gaming display, but any number I could produce I would have zero faith in."
I wonder if they have overdrive (or whatever it's called on this LCD) enabled? I know I've seen on a lot of LCDs that the overdrive modes often end up being worse than running without -- the Acer XB280HK has that issue for sure.
So I just spent a while looking for this phenomenon, and either my display doesn't have it or my eyes simply can't see it. In a pathological test like this (http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/inversion.php#invpatt... I can see flickering when scrolling, but then I get that same flicker on every LCD I've tried today. Also odd: the pattern turns green if I resize the window past a certain point; not sure what's causing that. Anyway, I'm not sure what exactly I'm supposed to see that I'm missing -- I don't notice vertical lines, but then I won't say that I'm the most picky of LCD consumers.
First of all, I would like to apologise for the extreme length of this post. After anxiously waiting for more than a year since the announcement of this monitor and spending a not insignificant amount of time and mony on it, I have quite a strong opinion that I would like to share with you.
I currently own 2 ROG Swift monitors and have also gone through 5 returns (12 monitors in total). On most of them the monitor would randomly begin flickering to black and sometimes recover with every second column of pixels being vertically out of position, which caused text to become unreadable and images to appear like an incorrectly deinterlaced frame with vertical interlacing. This issue could only be resolved by completely powering down both the monitor AND the pc; merely reconnecting the monitor would not solve it. It was quite interesting to me that a monitor could affect the host pc it was attached to, but after confirming the same problem on multiple systems, I finally got a pair of monitors that did not exhibit such debilitating flaws.
Before I move on to the "pixel inversion" issue I would also like to point out that the "1ms pixel response time" is purely a marketing term and in no way gives any quantitative measurement of how fast the pixels will actually transfer between states during real-world usage. Please have a look at the pixel response graphs over at http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_rog_swift... to visually see what I am describing here: With the ROG Swift already being short on processing power, the RTC (Response Time Compensation) mechanism got tied to the monitor's refresh rate, which means that any set brighness change will take a minimum of 2 frametimes to complete (i.e. one frame with the brightness set higher than wanted and then another frame with the brightness set at the actual wanted value). This is the same system that you can use with any monitor via, for example, the display overdrive feature in AMD's Catalyst software and is not even close the same quality as a higher sample rate dedicated hardware control loop would be. Here, Asus have simply assumed that 144Hz is "faster than the eye can see" (a myth / misunderstanding about the flicker fusion threshold that everyone seems to repeat as being anywhere between 24Hz and 100Hz) so that these brightness steps will become masked and merge into one instantanious transition. The only problem is that there is a large chunk of the population, myself included, to whom 144Hz is not anywhere near the limit of perception and consequently perceive this implementation to result in an excessive amount of ghosting. Unfortunately, as I will explain a bit later, this blur is not simply a residual of the original image as in most lcd monitors, but rather takes the form of a highly coloured comb-like fringe.
The main issue that I have encountered with the monitor is the fact that 144Hz is just not fast enough to give an illusion of smooth motion to my eyes (when I tested with, amongst other things, a high tickrate 288fps-locked local counter-strike server, where panning the screen still caused the farmiliar "frame jumping" behaviour, which makes it quite hard to complete a successful saccade to quickly focus on a moving object). Therefore, with each frame onscreen for a relatively long amount of time the infamous "pixel inversion" issue became painfully obvious. Unfortunately, after numerous RMAs spaced out over a period of 3 months it has become quite clear that this is not recognised as a fault by ASUS as they have purposely engineerd the product this way.
Let me explain: That green discoloration you are seeing is a side effect of the alternate row rendering technique they use to draw the image. Every frame, each alternate vertical column only gets either its green subpixel or its red and blue subpixels (hence the purple colour occurring next to eachother) refreshed. This is what causes the greenish "ghosting" trail to follow window dragging on a Windows 7 desktop that people are reporting, because if you sit far enough away from the monitor (or, I suppose, have bad eyesight), those green lines start to merge into a homogenious blur. The reason that that many people don't seem to notice it at a 'normal' distance of about 2 meters (where the individual pixel colums are still clearly visible) is that this rendering technique seems to be controlled by some type of adaptive image segmentation algorithm. Large high-contrast areas containing mainly primary, unsaturated colours seem to reliably trigger the behaviour, which explains why so many DOTA2 players have reported seeing the issue, as well as why entire sections of the screen becomes either green or purple on the lagom pixel inversion test (alternating white and black pixels with no chroma information and no well-defined object boundaries). Another side-effect of this technique is that any straight-lined object moving in only the vertical direction will exhibit a fine comb-like pattern on its leading edge as every second pixel has to wait for the next frame to be updated.
Now I can only speculate as to why Asus would have done this, on what is supposed to be a "premium" monitor, but I believe it to be the result of a combination of two factors: 1) Insufficient processing power or bandwidth to render QHD at 144 fps (originally the ROG Swift was only capable of 120Hz operation, but community feedback caused Asus to very quickly change that spec to 144Hz). Doing some sort of chroma subsampeling by only updating alternating sets of subpixels would enable Asus to use a narrower or lower clocked LVDS bus as well as requiring less processing power since all subpixels' overdriven values don't have to be calculated every frame. 2) The panel itself only being designed for 120Hz operation and not fully supporting the higher currents and faster switching that 144Hz requires. This would explain why the "pixel inversion" effect is confined to entire columns at a time (instead of hiding the unupdated subpixels by dynamically and randomly changing the update mask for every frame) and would also explain another effect that I have witnessed while investigating the "pixel inversion" issue, i.e. the amount by which a given number of pixels at the start of the same row changes, influences the pixel response times of the other pixels in the same row. This shows up as, for example, the desktop background having faintly darker lines extending from the end of the interface between the blue desktop and a bright window border. It also shows up as random darkening/lightening of backround pixels, that resemble FRC dithering of solid colours on other 120Hz TN monitors, when the mouse cursor is rapidly moved nearby (but never actually touching the region you are staring at). If true, this would also explain why there have been so many more reports of customers experiencing reliability issues with this monitor than normal (since the monitor is working at the edge of its limits).
At the end of the day though, I still own 2 of these monitors, because despite their flaws, the upgrade from a 120Hz monitor is still very significant and this is the "fastest" 144Hz monitor currently available. Again I do apologise for the length of this comment; if you actually did read through all of it and have also owned a ROG Swift I would love to hear your opinions on these issues. Also, do you think it's okay for Asus to resort to these kinds of quality compromises to try to get away with using cheap hardware in an expensive, "premium" product?
Clearly you're passionate about this subject, and if you can really detect flicker at 144Hz you've got better eyes than most -- certainly better than I do. Anyway, there's a lot of guess work and supposition involved in your theories as to what ASUS did with this monitor, and honestly I couldn't tell you whether you're correct or not.
What I do know is that the pixel inversion testing stuff on that site I linked shows problems on all of the other displays I've looked at, and in fact they're generally worse than the "problems" with the PG278Q. Which sort of makes me think that what they're showing is just a problem inherent with LCDs -- that you have to invert the polarity in order to avoid causing damage and that certain patterns will have issues when you do this -- and if so there's nothing to be done about it. I've looked at the site with TN and IPS displays, and all the displays behaved at least as bad as the PG278Q I think.
If ASUS truly skimped on some parts to save a few pennies, that would be pretty lousy for a nearly $800 LCD that uses a TN panel, but I don't know what their actual BoM looks like. I also think it's a lot more difficult to make a display that can handle 144Hz at QHD than most people realize -- that the tolerances need to be tighter and thus the price goes up. I'll be very curious to see what the FreeSync stuff looks like when it ships, as well as how much it ends up costing.
Ultimately, this is a bit of a niche product, and when something is niche it means price will go up. ASUS probably will sell a decent number, but compared to the $150 1080p stuff on the market the volumes on the PG278Q are going to be much lower. Such is the life of being an enthusiast.
TFT Central reports running this display in "Normal OD (overdrive)" is the best setting with minimal overshoot (ghosting) and very little total (signal processing+response time) lag (in the 4ms range).
Hmm, I don't know. I think I'll stick to my search for a decent 1080p 144hz 24" monitor. GSync would be nice, but I'm just not quite sold on it yet (due to price).
Just can't see the added benefit of Gsync and higher refresh worth the high $ when its still just a TN panel. I have the ASUS PB278Q 27" 2560x1440 monitor and it is a PLS [IPS]! 5ms, 60Hz and it looks stunning. I have no dead pixels, no backlight bleed and I absolutely love it. Viewing angles are a non issue. Yes I would like 144Hz refresh but I can play BF4 with my single GTX 980 at 60Hz and stay around 90-100 FPS on Ultra with no noticeable ghosting. The detail is awesome. I have a very decent Samsung 23" 1920x1080 TN monitor setting next to the ASUS for monitoring apps, and the difference is huge. Not just the pixels, I'm talking the diff. between PLS and TN. I going to make the jump to 4k next year probably (got to be around a 32" IPS/PLS), but I won't go back to a TN panel unless the tech somehow changes significantly.
This ROG Swift just seems too little too late. Not to mention I see a lot of post about QC issues.
As this is my final review here at AnandTech, I just wanted to thank everyone that read them and commented on them over the past few years. I've always enjoyed my work and hope most of you enjoyed it as well, and I'm sure whoever handles displays next will continue to be excellent.
I set up monitor arrays and I have found it very difficult to find the right information on monitor bezels. Would it be possible to measure the distance from the outer most pixel to the edge of the monitor on future reviews? This information seams to be distorted or misleading from a lot of the manufacturers.
People talk a lot of smack on this monitor it seems or try to justify why it doesn't suit their needs. I own one and a GTX 980 and I can tell you that it is far superior in terms of motion than any LCD I've seen and it is about on par in terms of motion with my retired Sony GDM-C520K. The Asus has a much higher refresh rate than the Sony, not to mention resolution and size. My unit hasn't had any QC issues, so I'm happy about that. Hopefully the future will bring 4K or greater color-calibrated OLED desktop displays. Until then I'll wait it out to see if IPS becomes worth a damn for motion and in the meantime enjoy the next best thing to CRT.
I thought the main point of the GSync module was that, unlike standard monitors, it has an internal frame buffer to enable self-refresh. Am I remembering incorrectly?
The reason I ask is that I would not think that a self-refresh capable monitor would need the video card to actually re-send the previous frame over HDMI or DisplayPort in do a refresh to keep the pixels lit up in low-framerate situations. I would think that, theoretically, even though the interconnect is limited to 60hz, if the panel itself were capable of 144hz then self-refreshes could still be done at that speed internally to the monitor.
Or perhaps the connection between G-Sync and the panel itself becomes the bottleneck at that point?
I don't think the G-SYNC module does a self-refresh like you're describing. I could be wrong, but if it decided to start a refresh just before a new frame got sent, there would be either more latency or tearing, and neither is desirable. Anyway, whatever is happening, I know at 30FPS (e.g. in certain cut scenes where the FPS is locked at 30), flicker is more evident to me on the Acer than on this one, but I think there's still flicker here so I don't believe the PG278Q is refreshing the display twice (e.g. at 90 Hz) when the frame rate is 45 FPS.
"You can only do so much with VBLANK manipulation though. In present implementations the longest NVIDIA can hold a single frame is 33.3ms (30Hz). If the next frame isn’t ready by then, the G-Sync module will tell the display to redraw the last frame."
"Game/hardware/settings combinations that result in frame rates below 30 fps will exhibit stuttering since the G-Sync display will be forced to repeat frames"
Of course, that article was about first gen, pre-release hardware, and I don't know if things have changed since that initial article.
But if that's still the way it works, it sounds like it will only kick in if the frame rate is below 30 fps, and even then it's kind of dumb in that it waits the full 33 ms before re-showing the previous frame. So if the next frame is ready moments later, it will have to wait for the next refresh, causing a stutter.
Unfortunately, it sounds like it wasn't doing anything smart like noticing frame rate is falling lower than a certain threshold and then doubling the frame rate to prevent the possibility of flicker and stutter. Seems like it needs the ability for the GPU to send a "redraw the last frame now" command for situations like that so that frame refresh can be doubled without doubling bandwidth requirements.
I got this monitor at launch and I'm still loving it. G-Sync is incredible, ULMB is incredible, the higher refresh rate makes a noticeable difference, and the color quality is very good for a TN panel. Heck, better than any TN panel I've seen.
However, I did notice a dead pixel towards the top of the screen recently. It's not bad but I hope more don't start to show up. Back light uniformity is sub par but it's not very noticeable to me unless I have my lights off and the screen is black or a darker color.
Overall I'm very pleased with this monitor and hopefully higher refresh rate panels and VRR technology become the norm.
May as well remove the Input Lag from the reviews until you can produce some results for that. Every time I see that I get disappointed because that's a key metric for me.
It's only missing on monitors that are DisplayPort only, which has only been the G-Sync models to this point. If we left the section out without the explanation, it would cause far more comments.
Input lag was addressed in the piece. Since the ROG Swift runs at a resolution beyond a CRT, and has no HDMI input for a lag tester, there is no way to generate a reliable number for lag. I've seen numbers for it that indicate under 5ms when using SMTT, but SMTT stopped issuing licenses and ours expired, so I cannot use it to test anymore. If you have a way to measure the input lag that is reliable and accurate and works with DisplayPort, we'd love to know.
Honestly, I cannot see a difference between 60 Hz and 144 Hz, which leads me to assume that: 1. Either my eyes are defective or 2. Those who claim to see a difference between 60Hz and 144 Hz are lying.
It's not your eyes, it's your brain. I guess it could be like being colorblind or something. In a way, it's an advantage to you because you'll never need to bother spending money on something like this :)
it's like being an audio peasant, you spare lots of money if you're content with desktop speakers. I've never tried a 144Hz monitor so the jury is still out for me.
You know what - I own this monitor and I see where you're coming from. Initially I was quite disappointed. Then I played Battlefield 4 with a decent gaming mouse and you quite literally *feel* the difference then.
I think if you saw the two side-by-side, you would recognize the difference. But some people really can't tell much of a difference between the two, regardless. One area that really is impacted by higher frame rates is motion blur; if you track the movement of an object on a 60Hz display, it gets blurry due to image persistence (see blurbusters site for more info), but on a 120Hz display the blur is reduced significantly due to the image changing faster to match where it should be relative to your eye movement.
"Even when falling down to 25-30fps, the G-SYNC displays manage to remain smooth when compared to a standard 60Hz display."
G-Sync doesn't work under 30fps, or rather it doesn't do anything when frame render time is over 33ms, so not sure where this comment comes from.
I own this monitor and it's stunning for gaming. Sub-60fps though, there's a tight window where the G-Sync illusion (if you can call it that) works. Below 50fps and things start to look a bit wonky. I tried it with 980 SLI where frame-rate zooms up to 90-140fps, and it does a great job there.
I have a ROG Swift, and I must have been quite lucky to not have any issues... I think. The only weird thing that I ever see with the monitor is that there are times when I'll touch something on my desk or just my desk itself, and the monitor's picture goes black for a second. I've never really figured out exactly what's going on, but it seems like a harmless issue so far.
The only complaint that I really have about the monitor is probably the lack of inputs, but I knew that going into it. I had been using my desktop setup with my work laptop where I'd just switch inputs on demand. Well, unless I feel like swapping cables, that's not an option anymore. Although, I did swap from 2x 1080p to 2x 2560x1440, so using a single monitor isn't too bad.
I used to have that issue, it was from the DP plug not being in all the way on my vid card.
sometimes the case where the vid card sits gets in the way of the DP plug because the housing for the DP cable is thick and needs to be plugged in all the way. the plug on the monitor side or power plug might have fallen out since most people would plug up their monitor first, then move it back, which might cause unexpected tension on the cables. yeah, i must have been lucky too, i can't find any dead, stuck pixels and it's been working great. same with my vg248qe, but i did "pray" that my monitor comes without issues for the pg278q
This is the best monitor I've ever used but only after color calibration. If you can borrow an I1 Display Pro, you'll be in heaven. If you're a full-time desktop publisher you'll probably still want an IPS until OLED monitors become a reality but for anyone else, this is the monitor to own....especially if you appreciate smooth motion, no blur and virtually zero input lag.
I have no issue with mine, except I also had wonderful EU VAT taxes to pay. Well, the USB ports on the back do seem buggy, so I've stopped using them, but otherwise, so glad I chose this monitor for gaming. Unless you really nitpick, movies look fine, too.
There's really no reason to use IPS for gaming as the colors are still heavily saturated so you just get even richer, more saturated colors that are gross.
Color satuartion has no direct link with the panel tech. I've had oversaturated TN panels (HP w2408h) and I've had undersaturated IPS panels (Qnix 2710LED). The difference between IPS and TN that makes IPS more desireable for me personally are the viewing angles. With TN, I need my head to be pretty much in the right spot (like the old Nintendo 3DS) in order to have a good picture. If I move around the colors get inverted or washed out and if I want to show someone something on the monitor, they have a shitty picture or they need to be in my spot. With IPS, colors are the same from almost any angle.
The saturated colors have more to do with the type of backlight used. A lot of the earlier monitors with IPS panels were designed for professionals (photographers etc) so they used a special bulb in the backlight to give an extended gamut to better match the color spectrum available for print. But you can find IPS displays that cover the standard RGB gamut.
I was looking at the PG278Q, but as soon as I was thinking of getting one the prices jumped another $50+ everywhere in Canada which totally turned me off. Then started to read about the Acer XB270HU which might end up being a superior monitor. At the least that should make ASUS compete a bit with their ridiculous pricing.
Honestly BenQ has been making monitors like this for a while now and they cost much less. I've got one that has almost identical spec's and it is three years old now. Didn't even come close to costing that much. Hilarious article.
I think you're missing how this monitor has g-sync, but still, that should only be a ~$200 premium. ASUS is very obviously taking advantage of having the only monitor with these resolution/refresh rate specs with g-sync. That should change later this year though. If you can wait for g-sync, you really should. This monitor is very close to being a low end 1440p/144hz +g-sync monitor.
I owned the ASUS VG248qe for a year before selling it off to a friend. It was the best monitor for gaming I've ever used...for gaming. The so called not-so-accurate colors, and not-so-great viewing angle of a TN panel is irrelevant for gaming IMO. What bothered me was when using it as an everyday panel for productivity because the panel uses PWM lighting. On white backgrounds, it was just too much for my eyes to handle. So when working in Excel, Word, and web browsing...
When gaming, it was plain awesome. But I felt 24inch/1080 was too small for my taste. When I heard the Swift ROG was coming out at 27inch/1440 i almost pulled the trigger on getting one. With all the QA issues, I was hesitant. I will wait awhile until the dust settles to get one. I saw one on display at the local Microcenter and I was quite impressed with it. I think if they had one in stock at the time I would've bought it and hope I win the lottery on getting a non-defective one.
I've been watching inventory of online stores in Canada. Very little if any movement in their stock for this monitor in the last few weeks. Looks like people have caught on better things are coming out soon for high res/high refresh rate monitors with g-sync. Unfortunately, those stores are stubbornly holding their prices ($950+ CAD). They should have no choice soon to cut those down though.
For the overclockable displays, "80-90Hz" isn't often achievable. The models that can be overclocked, are guaranteed to hit at least 105Hz, and 99% will hit 110Hz and above. And it's important to note that monitors like the Qnix that you mentioned, cost just $300 with free shipping, and are PLS (Samsung version of LG's IPS tech).
You also made no mention of the fact that this supposed gaming enthusiast monitor has a fairly aggressive anti-glare coating on it which further deteriorates image quality, on top of it being a TN display.
This "article" seems like a last attempt paid sales pitch from ASUS before the new Acer XB270HU comes out and dominates it with superior image quality and a lower price point. This is what I was afraid would happen to AnandTech when they announced being bought out.
One of the other issues that you run into with 4K gaming and G-SYNC is that you will frequently drop below 40 FPS in demanding games. At that point, the on-screen pixels begin to decay and you can see a noticeable flicker.
Can you please clarify? Are you saying that you notice flickering when below 40fps with this monitor?
for a long time my trust has dwindled in Anandtech. Now I have finally lost all value in your reviews. Seriously, this review is pathetic! Did you actually do what this monitor was meant to do, and actually PLAY A GAME? Or did you just measure color values? Else you would surely notice and advise your loyal readers accordingly! How much money has Asus PAID YOU to cover up the HUGE, gaping FLAW this monitor has? The pixel inversion that affects the ENTIRE series is very significant and there are hundreds of posts on the Asus forum about it.
I play games and edit photos (not professionally, just a hobby). I have no space for two 27" monitors. So I'm disappointed with this display, hoping the future will bring something better.
I pulled the trigger on this monitor after all. For gaming it's absolutely awesome, you've got to see it to believe, not so good for everything else. Although I'm getting another computer for my photo editing so that's why I decided to get this one after all.
I like anandtech but come on.. this is an embarrassingly bad and shallow review. No mention of ULMB AT ALL when it's one of the core features of the monitor? No input lag tests? No image blur tests?
Sorry but this type of review may be sufficient for your typical, run of the mill 60hz IPS panel, but it completely misses the point of the entire purpose of this display.
TFTCentral's review is what you should read if you're considering this monitor.
I've been using this monitor with 2x970's for a few months. I came from high end 27" IPS monitors and have been stunned by the performance. Sure the colors aren't as deep, but the game in motion completely makes up for it. Playing Mordor at 110fps with Gsync and high settings was a treat. I never knew what tearing and hitching did to the experience, but I could never go back to non-gsync monitors (or a similar technology.) Definitely worth it if you can afford it. I lucked out and got a perfect unit from newegg open box for only $599 :)
I have one purpose in mind with my gaming rig: gaming. I don't need 100% color accuracy to shoot enemies - or die - in BF4.
For many years, I've gone with ATX builds in full tower cases and ran with 2 or 3 video cards to keep framerates up to make tearing less noticeable which also eliminates my need for V-sync and the associated input lag.
With this Asus monitor and a single flagship video card (GTX 980), I get a smooth tear-free lag-free video experience at full details and ultra video settings. I've noticed that if the frame rates stay in the high 20s or above (which they do 100% with most titles), the video stays smooth.
Because of the G-sync tech, my next gaming build will be with be a micro ATX or mini ITX scale build with my single 980 and whatever high-end enthusiast or high-end mainstream processor is out at the time. I no longer need a giant case with a ton of fans in it to get a high-end gaming experience. I no longer need more than one video card.
I can't wait until free sync monitors start hitting the market more as this competition should reduce the prices of monitors with dynamic sync technologies.
I own this monitor. Its perfect for my 980ti sli setup. Again like with my 670 OC GTX setup I will enjoy future like performance before it can be had single card style. My 670 GTX was compairable to a 980 GTX. Sometime you cant thave all the features you want from the product right away and its a trade off to wait and see like everyone says. But if you have the money and are willing to upgrade on a cycle this setup would be perfect for you.
Hi there, Great review by the way. I have the same gamma distorsion on my monitor out of the box (average 2.0 gamma) and i'm interested in this review calibration (osd params and icc profile). It would be great if you can provide them especially that a lot of people are having the same gamma distortions.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
101 Comments
Back to Article
RandomUser13 - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Friday the 13th and this is the first comment, great!Great review by the way.
TerdFerguson - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
C'mon, the review started with "The ASUS Republic of Gamers (ROG) line includes everything you want for building a high-end gaming." How can anyone trust a review that contains drivel worse than a press release?Jaaap - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
Yes. For building *a* high-end gaming PC.Not for building the best or the cheapest or whatever.
It's a statement about the completeness of the line-up.
Antronman - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
Because it's true since it's ASUS' top-end product line?Anon Zero - Friday, November 27, 2015 - link
And the winner for "Most Asinine Comment IS...(drumroll)QuantumPion - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
I tried buying an ROG Swift and really liked the panel's speed, color, and g-sync. However I went through 4 monitors, all defective, before finally giving up. One monitor was utterly damaged (cracked LCD panel). The other 3 had extremely bad color calibration with gamma as low as 1.6, making everything extremely washed out and looking worse than a low end budget LCD from 2005. The gamma was so far off that attempting to calibrate it caused terrible color banding and white/black crushing.Inglix - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
It took me four months and 5 monitors to get a non-defective one.I've since had a nightmare where it fails with red lines down the middle. Asus RMA support reportedly ships them back in a back in a normal cardboard box with one piece of crushed paper to protect it.
cknobman - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Pay the Nvidia tax, lolNo thanks G-SYNC is not worth an extra $400 for a crappy TN panel.
PlugPulled - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
i got to agree with you. But its the best TN panel out there for 144hz with 3d vision and Gsync. Can't get lower response time on IPS.yefi - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
No longer the case. Acer XB270HU - 144Hz IPS.tanooki - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Unfortunately you're misinterpreting refresh rate for response time.The ASUS monitor has 1ms response time while the
Acer: "one of the world’s first IPS monitors with a response time of only 4ms G-to-G"
DiHydro - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
If it is 4 ms Gray to Gray, that means it should be able to achieve 144 Hz if the screen is refreshing at that. Required response time for 144 Hz is 6.944... ms. 4 ms on the dot would get you 240 Hz, and of course 1 ms should equal 1000 Hz.That does not mean these displays will not have input lag, another issue for FPS and fast paced games, or terrible picture quality, an issue for everyone and movies especially.
doggghouse - Tuesday, February 17, 2015 - link
If they advertise "4ms GtG," it is most likely closer to a 6ms average transition time. If you read the reviews on TFT Central, when they measure actual pixel response times, they are often about 2-3ms higher than the reported value. For example, the Swift is a supposed "1ms GtG" panel, but in practice the average transition time was about 3ms.In reality, the ghosting effect of slow pixel response times could be a minor problem for an IPS running at 120+ Hz, however... I'd take an IPS running at 120Hz over one at 60Hz any day... the blur caused by ghosting is minimal compared to the blur caused by 60Hz persistence compared to 120Hz persistence.
The one thing that incredibly fast pixel response times allow for is strobing, which makes LCD behave practically like a CRT display, meaning practically 0 motion blur. For now, IPS doesn't look like it can transition fast enough for a clean strobe.
yefi - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Sorry, I misread low for lower. TN is still the quickest to be sure, though as DiHydro points out, IPS should now cleanly manage transitions at 120 and 144Hz.theunwarshed - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
that's advertised, the true response time is closer to 3ms on "normal" OD settings for the Swift per: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_rog_swift...theunwarshed - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
if we're talking total input lag (signal processing+response time) than BenQ's XL2720Z is actually a little faster. it's a TN 144hz, 3d vision w/o g-sync @ $450. a better deal imo than the Swift.mackanz72 - Monday, February 16, 2015 - link
27" @ 1080p? And i thought 24" @ 1200p was bad.How in the world is that a better deal?
I'm not saying the Swift is a good deal, since it is really a crappy piece of junk seeing all the quality issues it has. Online shops are stockpiling refurbished units from Asus that few wants to touch with a ten foot pole.
But 27" and only 1080p in 2015? No way.
FlushedBubblyJock - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
One hopes that AMD can finally deliver it's freesync vaporware, but no one should hold their breath.I think Asus and their ROG is hoopla is half the tax.
Next we'll get a $300 over normal price 1nf1n1ty gamerz gsync so all the drooling ad controlled robotic braggers can forum it up.
Well at least it's not quite as bad as apple fans.
D. Lister - Thursday, March 12, 2015 - link
AMD will indeed deliver FreeSync. They've got a bunch of monitor manufacturers onboard for this (who admittedly would just need to add a few extra lines of code to their firmware for this, but still), so they can't just back out now.<speculation > The problem is with the way FS works. When the framerate is reasonably consistent, it would work fine, but if the framerate is jumping around, there would probably be some stuttering. Ultimately I suppose, as per AMD's MO of late, it would be another compromise between price and quality.</speculation>
Raphash - Wednesday, February 18, 2015 - link
I paid the nVidia tax... I was one of the lucky folks that got this monitor when it first came out. Boy was that an adventure!!! Constantly trying to find someone that had a stock of it. Anyways, I was also fortunate enough to get a great display in terms of backlight bleed etc. I have had ZERO issues with mine. Now that I have seen G-Sync in motion... I would have gladly paid $1,000 for this monitor. Fortunately, I got mine for $800. This monitor is truly the best gaming monitor I have ever owned!!! For me, it even beats out my old trusty Sony GDM-500 display and that's saying something!!Zak - Tuesday, March 17, 2015 - link
I paid the nVidia tax too and I love it too but haters will hate. I only spent one evening with it but I gotta say GSync is the best thing that happened to gaming since the SSD. You have to see it to believe it. No tearing, no lag, no sync issues. Perfectly smooth. I was sitting there looking at the Unigine Valley demo for minutes running buttery smooth at around 100fps with my jaw on the floor. Then I fired up Skyrim and OMFG!!! Gaming heaven!But... Yes, the color quality leaves something to be desired, though I'm picking up a used iMac for my photo editing and will strip this PC down to gaming only. You wouldn't want to use this display for photo editing. But for gaming this is huge. I want to play all my games all over again.
Calista - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
I'm still stunned how hard it seems for the manufacturers to get the USB ports right, especially since Dell was spot on more than ten years ago. Two or more in the back for static equipment, be it a webcam or similar, two along one of the sides for easy access when using a USB memory stick, attaching a camera or what not. http://www.anandtech.com/show/1193/2 Its larger siblings like the 3007WFP made it even better by adding a sd- and cf-reader.Sivar - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
I've wondered this as well.My Dell 2001FP, which is still in use today despite being 14 years old, was their first to get this right. It's as if other manufacturers don't recognize the value enough to even copy Dell's design, let alone design something as nice themselves.
tential - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
My dad wanted a new monitor and this was the HARDEST requirement to fill for him. The amount of monitors with 4 USB ports, positioned correctly, is terribly low.Zak - Tuesday, March 17, 2015 - link
Buy a tiny USB hub and attach it under the edge of the monitor with dual-sided sticky tape. I've done on many monitors. Not perfectly pretty but works.bebimbap - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
The issue with having those kinds of things on the side of the monitor, is you require a thick bezel or one with more depth or both. currently most monitors are going with a thin bezel design both on the edge and in depth. I own the dell 3007 3011 and 2005fpw and they are about 3x as thick around the edge and 2x the depth of the pg278q. The asus "feels" much smaller than other 27" that i have experienced just because of the bezel size. also the screen part of it is much shallower than any other monitor i have used. usually from the edge of the Bezel to the surface of the screen is about 2-7mm depending on the size of the screen but, on the asus i would say 1mm.you can always get a usb hub on your desk, or strapped to the back of the monitor.
as monitors get thinner you'll have a much harder time finding ports in the future.
sf101 - Wednesday, February 18, 2015 - link
This ^^^^^^^^^^Things manufactures are trying to get away from are.
-Side mounted USB's
-Side Mounted Buttons
why?
Thin /slim bezel's for Multi monitor use.
piroroadkill - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
The 24" have had an SD reader on the side for a while too. Got a U2410.Dell has always nailed inputs and layout for buttons and so on.
Wardrop - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
I wouldn't rave too much about dells button layouts, especially on the U2410. Having a button form the corner of the bezem (or any edge) can cause frustrations. At work I use three of these monitors, and anytime they got bumped, one of them gets switched off because the corner button is inadvertantly pressed in the process.Rolphus - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
I've got one of these, as part of a big gaming machine update I've been doing. I'd say the assessment is spot on.Colour quality and especially consistency are clearly not in the same league as any halfway reasonable IPS display, but the smoothness you get from a high-refresh panel is lovely, and fast-paced games feel superbly solid. G-Sync is something I'm completely sold on, and having a ULMB 120Hz option for 3D Vision is also really handy for stable images. Sadly you can't mix the two - I'd love for "3D Vision 3" / "G-Sync 2" to be able to vary frame rates and store left and right eye frames on-display so lower frame rates can be doubled up properly, but that's probably wishful thinking, and a niche atop a niche. That's to say nothing of my theory that 3D Vision will probably die a death once there's a consumer desktop VR solution out there.
I also agree that it's a high-priced (perhaps overpriced), niche item - but it doesn't really have any competition at the moment.
Antronman - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
The picture quality still won't be hugely impressive with IPS, because the color palettes used in games have saturation gradients, and the areas of a map or character that should be noticeable will be extremely heavily oversaturated, whereas the less important, insignificant parts will have very, very little saturation and less polys than the important parts that the saturated colors will be on.bznotins - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Currently still rocking a 3007WFP from 2006. Best $1100 I ever spent on electronics. Love the zero input lag and 16:10 resolution.Once we see a 60hz+ 32" 4K monitor, I will finally upgrade. GSync would be awesome.
I just can't bring myself to go down to 27" now, GSync or not.
zodiacsoulmate - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Linus just reviewed a 31 inch 4098x2160 LG 31UM97, seems very niceyefi - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Ditto that. I'd love gsync on a 30" 2560x1600 monitor, but these gamers are apparently satisfied with tiny little monitors and their 16:9.Antronman - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
A large monitor just means I have to move the monitor farther back and move my chair farther back.rtho782 - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
I went from a 3007WFP-HC, to a RoG Swift. The size drop was a little annoying, but when my 2nd Swift failed last week the 3007 seemed weird because of the aspect ratio, and I missed 144hz.TheEkorn - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
I`m wondering where the input lag graph on page 6 is?JarredWalton - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
"Like the other G-SYNC displays I have tested, the ASUS ROG has no inputs aside from a single DisplayPort. Because I have no CRT monitor that can run at the same native resolution as it, nor a DisplayPort compatible lag tester, I can’t produce an accurate input lag measurement for the display. Obviously this is not an ideal result for a gaming display, but any number I could produce I would have zero faith in."TheEkorn - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Thanks :)i4mt3hwin - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
No talk about the inversion issue this monitor has? Between this:http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?50004-PG2...
and
http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?52705-PG2...
This monitor clearly has some issues at the panel level. http://gyazo.com/ff54f6a888ded6aac5472ac3d480ffba
The vertical lines going through the grey part of the rifle (looks like a crosshatch) appears on all bright colors when the monitor is in motion.
JarredWalton - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
I wonder if they have overdrive (or whatever it's called on this LCD) enabled? I know I've seen on a lot of LCDs that the overdrive modes often end up being worse than running without -- the Acer XB280HK has that issue for sure.JarredWalton - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
So I just spent a while looking for this phenomenon, and either my display doesn't have it or my eyes simply can't see it. In a pathological test like this (http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/inversion.php#invpatt... I can see flickering when scrolling, but then I get that same flicker on every LCD I've tried today. Also odd: the pattern turns green if I resize the window past a certain point; not sure what's causing that. Anyway, I'm not sure what exactly I'm supposed to see that I'm missing -- I don't notice vertical lines, but then I won't say that I'm the most picky of LCD consumers.Xenonite - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
First of all, I would like to apologise for the extreme length of this post.After anxiously waiting for more than a year since the announcement of this monitor and spending a not insignificant amount of time and mony on it, I have quite a strong opinion that I would like to share with you.
I currently own 2 ROG Swift monitors and have also gone through 5 returns (12 monitors in total). On most of them the monitor would randomly begin flickering to black and sometimes recover with every second column of pixels being vertically out of position, which caused text to become unreadable and images to appear like an incorrectly deinterlaced frame with vertical interlacing. This issue could only be resolved by completely powering down both the monitor AND the pc; merely reconnecting the monitor would not solve it. It was quite interesting to me that a monitor could affect the host pc it was attached to, but after confirming the same problem on multiple systems, I finally got a pair of monitors that did not exhibit such debilitating flaws.
Before I move on to the "pixel inversion" issue I would also like to point out that the "1ms pixel response time" is purely a marketing term and in no way gives any quantitative measurement of how fast the pixels will actually transfer between states during real-world usage. Please have a look at the pixel response graphs over at http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_rog_swift... to visually see what I am describing here: With the ROG Swift already being short on processing power, the RTC (Response Time Compensation) mechanism got tied to the monitor's refresh rate, which means that any set brighness change will take a minimum of 2 frametimes to complete (i.e. one frame with the brightness set higher than wanted and then another frame with the brightness set at the actual wanted value). This is the same system that you can use with any monitor via, for example, the display overdrive feature in AMD's Catalyst software and is not even close the same quality as a higher sample rate dedicated hardware control loop would be. Here, Asus have simply assumed that 144Hz is "faster than the eye can see" (a myth / misunderstanding about the flicker fusion threshold that everyone seems to repeat as being anywhere between 24Hz and 100Hz) so that these brightness steps will become masked and merge into one instantanious transition. The only problem is that there is a large chunk of the population, myself included, to whom 144Hz is not anywhere near the limit of perception and consequently perceive this implementation to result in an excessive amount of ghosting. Unfortunately, as I will explain a bit later, this blur is not simply a residual of the original image as in most lcd monitors, but rather takes the form of a highly coloured comb-like fringe.
The main issue that I have encountered with the monitor is the fact that 144Hz is just not fast enough to give an illusion of smooth motion to my eyes (when I tested with, amongst other things, a high tickrate 288fps-locked local counter-strike server, where panning the screen still caused the farmiliar "frame jumping" behaviour, which makes it quite hard to complete a successful saccade to quickly focus on a moving object). Therefore, with each frame onscreen for a relatively long amount of time the infamous "pixel inversion" issue became painfully obvious. Unfortunately, after numerous RMAs spaced out over a period of 3 months it has become quite clear that this is not recognised as a fault by ASUS as they have purposely engineerd the product this way.
Let me explain: That green discoloration you are seeing is a side effect of the alternate row rendering technique they use to draw the image. Every frame, each alternate vertical column only gets either its green subpixel or its red and blue subpixels (hence the purple colour occurring next to eachother) refreshed. This is what causes the greenish "ghosting" trail to follow window dragging on a Windows 7 desktop that people are reporting, because if you sit far enough away from the monitor (or, I suppose, have bad eyesight), those green lines start to merge into a homogenious blur. The reason that that many people don't seem to notice it at a 'normal' distance of about 2 meters (where the individual pixel colums are still clearly visible) is that this rendering technique seems to be controlled by some type of adaptive image segmentation algorithm. Large high-contrast areas containing mainly primary, unsaturated colours seem to reliably trigger the behaviour, which explains why so many DOTA2 players have reported seeing the issue, as well as why entire sections of the screen becomes either green or purple on the lagom pixel inversion test (alternating white and black pixels with no chroma information and no well-defined object boundaries). Another side-effect of this technique is that any straight-lined object moving in only the vertical direction will exhibit a fine comb-like pattern on its leading edge as every second pixel has to wait for the next frame to be updated.
Now I can only speculate as to why Asus would have done this, on what is supposed to be a "premium" monitor, but I believe it to be the result of a combination of two factors:
1) Insufficient processing power or bandwidth to render QHD at 144 fps (originally the ROG Swift was only capable of 120Hz operation, but community feedback caused Asus to very quickly change that spec to 144Hz). Doing some sort of chroma subsampeling by only updating alternating sets of subpixels would enable Asus to use a narrower or lower clocked LVDS bus as well as requiring less processing power since all subpixels' overdriven values don't have to be calculated every frame.
2) The panel itself only being designed for 120Hz operation and not fully supporting the higher currents and faster switching that 144Hz requires. This would explain why the "pixel inversion" effect is confined to entire columns at a time (instead of hiding the unupdated subpixels by dynamically and randomly changing the update mask for every frame) and would also explain another effect that I have witnessed while investigating the "pixel inversion" issue, i.e. the amount by which a given number of pixels at the start of the same row changes, influences the pixel response times of the other pixels in the same row. This shows up as, for example, the desktop background having faintly darker lines extending from the end of the interface between the blue desktop and a bright window border. It also shows up as random darkening/lightening of backround pixels, that resemble FRC dithering of solid colours on other 120Hz TN monitors, when the mouse cursor is rapidly moved nearby (but never actually touching the region you are staring at).
If true, this would also explain why there have been so many more reports of customers experiencing reliability issues with this monitor than normal (since the monitor is working at the edge of its limits).
At the end of the day though, I still own 2 of these monitors, because despite their flaws, the upgrade from a 120Hz monitor is still very significant and this is the "fastest" 144Hz monitor currently available.
Again I do apologise for the length of this comment; if you actually did read through all of it and have also owned a ROG Swift I would love to hear your opinions on these issues. Also, do you think it's okay for Asus to resort to these kinds of quality compromises to try to get away with using cheap hardware in an expensive, "premium" product?
JarredWalton - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
Hi Xenonite,Clearly you're passionate about this subject, and if you can really detect flicker at 144Hz you've got better eyes than most -- certainly better than I do. Anyway, there's a lot of guess work and supposition involved in your theories as to what ASUS did with this monitor, and honestly I couldn't tell you whether you're correct or not.
What I do know is that the pixel inversion testing stuff on that site I linked shows problems on all of the other displays I've looked at, and in fact they're generally worse than the "problems" with the PG278Q. Which sort of makes me think that what they're showing is just a problem inherent with LCDs -- that you have to invert the polarity in order to avoid causing damage and that certain patterns will have issues when you do this -- and if so there's nothing to be done about it. I've looked at the site with TN and IPS displays, and all the displays behaved at least as bad as the PG278Q I think.
If ASUS truly skimped on some parts to save a few pennies, that would be pretty lousy for a nearly $800 LCD that uses a TN panel, but I don't know what their actual BoM looks like. I also think it's a lot more difficult to make a display that can handle 144Hz at QHD than most people realize -- that the tolerances need to be tighter and thus the price goes up. I'll be very curious to see what the FreeSync stuff looks like when it ships, as well as how much it ends up costing.
Ultimately, this is a bit of a niche product, and when something is niche it means price will go up. ASUS probably will sell a decent number, but compared to the $150 1080p stuff on the market the volumes on the PG278Q are going to be much lower. Such is the life of being an enthusiast.
ppi - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
I am wondering what your colleagues playing on the same 288fps server use, that they do not have the same issues.theunwarshed - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
look for slightly darker trailing image of something moving across the screen.theunwarshed - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
TFT Central reports running this display in "Normal OD (overdrive)" is the best setting with minimal overshoot (ghosting) and very little total (signal processing+response time) lag (in the 4ms range).3ricss - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Hmm, I don't know. I think I'll stick to my search for a decent 1080p 144hz 24" monitor. GSync would be nice, but I'm just not quite sold on it yet (due to price).Murloc - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
also it's probably better to wait for adaptive sync monitors to come out, that should kill the prices, right now G-sync is early adopter stuff.hapkiman - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Just can't see the added benefit of Gsync and higher refresh worth the high $ when its still just a TN panel. I have the ASUS PB278Q 27" 2560x1440 monitor and it is a PLS [IPS]! 5ms, 60Hz and it looks stunning. I have no dead pixels, no backlight bleed and I absolutely love it. Viewing angles are a non issue. Yes I would like 144Hz refresh but I can play BF4 with my single GTX 980 at 60Hz and stay around 90-100 FPS on Ultra with no noticeable ghosting. The detail is awesome. I have a very decent Samsung 23" 1920x1080 TN monitor setting next to the ASUS for monitoring apps, and the difference is huge. Not just the pixels, I'm talking the diff. between PLS and TN. I going to make the jump to 4k next year probably (got to be around a 32" IPS/PLS), but I won't go back to a TN panel unless the tech somehow changes significantly.This ROG Swift just seems too little too late. Not to mention I see a lot of post about QC issues.
cheinonen - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
As this is my final review here at AnandTech, I just wanted to thank everyone that read them and commented on them over the past few years. I've always enjoyed my work and hope most of you enjoyed it as well, and I'm sure whoever handles displays next will continue to be excellent.kyuu - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Thanks for the great work Chris, and good luck with whatever has stolen you away from us!Essence_of_War - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
It was a pleasure to read your reviews, I'll keep following your work at WC, best wishes going forward!wyewye - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
Good riddance noob. L2 measure response time and input lag without a CRT next time.cheinonen - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
I'm sure I can look forward to your reviews that address all the deficiencies in mine soon.SpeedyTheTurtle - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
I set up monitor arrays and I have found it very difficult to find the right information on monitor bezels. Would it be possible to measure the distance from the outer most pixel to the edge of the monitor on future reviews? This information seams to be distorted or misleading from a lot of the manufacturers.ExarKun333 - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
Seems like this would have been a good monitor 1-2 years ago. For this price, it just isn't worth-it with UWD and 4k panels in the same price range.ssddaydream - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
People talk a lot of smack on this monitor it seems or try to justify why it doesn't suit their needs. I own one and a GTX 980 and I can tell you that it is far superior in terms of motion than any LCD I've seen and it is about on par in terms of motion with my retired Sony GDM-C520K. The Asus has a much higher refresh rate than the Sony, not to mention resolution and size.My unit hasn't had any QC issues, so I'm happy about that.
Hopefully the future will bring 4K or greater color-calibrated OLED desktop displays. Until then I'll wait it out to see if IPS becomes worth a damn for motion and in the meantime enjoy the next best thing to CRT.
shonferg - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
I thought the main point of the GSync module was that, unlike standard monitors, it has an internal frame buffer to enable self-refresh. Am I remembering incorrectly?The reason I ask is that I would not think that a self-refresh capable monitor would need the video card to actually re-send the previous frame over HDMI or DisplayPort in do a refresh to keep the pixels lit up in low-framerate situations. I would think that, theoretically, even though the interconnect is limited to 60hz, if the panel itself were capable of 144hz then self-refreshes could still be done at that speed internally to the monitor.
Or perhaps the connection between G-Sync and the panel itself becomes the bottleneck at that point?
JarredWalton - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
I don't think the G-SYNC module does a self-refresh like you're describing. I could be wrong, but if it decided to start a refresh just before a new frame got sent, there would be either more latency or tearing, and neither is desirable. Anyway, whatever is happening, I know at 30FPS (e.g. in certain cut scenes where the FPS is locked at 30), flicker is more evident to me on the Acer than on this one, but I think there's still flicker here so I don't believe the PG278Q is refreshing the display twice (e.g. at 90 Hz) when the frame rate is 45 FPS.shonferg - Monday, February 16, 2015 - link
I found the article here on AndandTech that gave me the impression that G-sync can do self-refresh:http://www.anandtech.com/show/7582/nvidia-gsync-re...
"You can only do so much with VBLANK manipulation though. In present implementations the longest NVIDIA can hold a single frame is 33.3ms (30Hz). If the next frame isn’t ready by then, the G-Sync module will tell the display to redraw the last frame."
"Game/hardware/settings combinations that result in frame rates below 30 fps will exhibit stuttering since the G-Sync display will be forced to repeat frames"
Of course, that article was about first gen, pre-release hardware, and I don't know if things have changed since that initial article.
But if that's still the way it works, it sounds like it will only kick in if the frame rate is below 30 fps, and even then it's kind of dumb in that it waits the full 33 ms before re-showing the previous frame. So if the next frame is ready moments later, it will have to wait for the next refresh, causing a stutter.
Unfortunately, it sounds like it wasn't doing anything smart like noticing frame rate is falling lower than a certain threshold and then doubling the frame rate to prevent the possibility of flicker and stutter. Seems like it needs the ability for the GPU to send a "redraw the last frame now" command for situations like that so that frame refresh can be doubled without doubling bandwidth requirements.
GameLifter - Friday, February 13, 2015 - link
I got this monitor at launch and I'm still loving it. G-Sync is incredible, ULMB is incredible, the higher refresh rate makes a noticeable difference, and the color quality is very good for a TN panel. Heck, better than any TN panel I've seen.However, I did notice a dead pixel towards the top of the screen recently. It's not bad but I hope more don't start to show up. Back light uniformity is sub par but it's not very noticeable to me unless I have my lights off and the screen is black or a darker color.
Overall I'm very pleased with this monitor and hopefully higher refresh rate panels and VRR technology become the norm.
pandemonium - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
May as well remove the Input Lag from the reviews until you can produce some results for that. Every time I see that I get disappointed because that's a key metric for me.cheinonen - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
It's only missing on monitors that are DisplayPort only, which has only been the G-Sync models to this point. If we left the section out without the explanation, it would cause far more comments.wyewye - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
Why are you reviewing an year old stuff?What do you have to add compared to the other gazillion reviews of ROG Swift out there?
Apparently nothing.
Nothing about latency or input lag on a gaming monitor review.
Really pathetic.
Whats going on with you AnandTech? Severe budget cuts?
cheinonen - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
Input lag was addressed in the piece. Since the ROG Swift runs at a resolution beyond a CRT, and has no HDMI input for a lag tester, there is no way to generate a reliable number for lag. I've seen numbers for it that indicate under 5ms when using SMTT, but SMTT stopped issuing licenses and ours expired, so I cannot use it to test anymore. If you have a way to measure the input lag that is reliable and accurate and works with DisplayPort, we'd love to know.Slowking - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
"Why are you reviewing an year old stuff?"I clicked on the article half hoping it contained more information on a forthcoming cheaper version of the Swift.
Achaios - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
Honestly, I cannot see a difference between 60 Hz and 144 Hz, which leads me to assume that: 1. Either my eyes are defective or 2. Those who claim to see a difference between 60Hz and 144 Hz are lying.snuuggles - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
It's not your eyes, it's your brain. I guess it could be like being colorblind or something. In a way, it's an advantage to you because you'll never need to bother spending money on something like this :)Murloc - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
it's like being an audio peasant, you spare lots of money if you're content with desktop speakers.I've never tried a 144Hz monitor so the jury is still out for me.
OrphanageExplosion - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
You know what - I own this monitor and I see where you're coming from. Initially I was quite disappointed. Then I played Battlefield 4 with a decent gaming mouse and you quite literally *feel* the difference then.doggghouse - Tuesday, February 17, 2015 - link
I think if you saw the two side-by-side, you would recognize the difference. But some people really can't tell much of a difference between the two, regardless. One area that really is impacted by higher frame rates is motion blur; if you track the movement of an object on a 60Hz display, it gets blurry due to image persistence (see blurbusters site for more info), but on a 120Hz display the blur is reduced significantly due to the image changing faster to match where it should be relative to your eye movement.nos024 - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
Monitor is still on high demand, despite being high priced and QA issues.redmist77 - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
I got one of the first ones many months ago. No issues and worth every cent.OrphanageExplosion - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
"Even when falling down to 25-30fps, the G-SYNC displays manage to remain smooth when compared to a standard 60Hz display."G-Sync doesn't work under 30fps, or rather it doesn't do anything when frame render time is over 33ms, so not sure where this comment comes from.
I own this monitor and it's stunning for gaming. Sub-60fps though, there's a tight window where the G-Sync illusion (if you can call it that) works. Below 50fps and things start to look a bit wonky. I tried it with 980 SLI where frame-rate zooms up to 90-140fps, and it does a great job there.
Aikouka - Saturday, February 14, 2015 - link
I have a ROG Swift, and I must have been quite lucky to not have any issues... I think. The only weird thing that I ever see with the monitor is that there are times when I'll touch something on my desk or just my desk itself, and the monitor's picture goes black for a second. I've never really figured out exactly what's going on, but it seems like a harmless issue so far.The only complaint that I really have about the monitor is probably the lack of inputs, but I knew that going into it. I had been using my desktop setup with my work laptop where I'd just switch inputs on demand. Well, unless I feel like swapping cables, that's not an option anymore. Although, I did swap from 2x 1080p to 2x 2560x1440, so using a single monitor isn't too bad.
bebimbap - Tuesday, February 17, 2015 - link
I used to have that issue, it was from the DP plug not being in all the way on my vid card.sometimes the case where the vid card sits gets in the way of the DP plug because the housing for the DP cable is thick and needs to be plugged in all the way.
the plug on the monitor side or power plug might have fallen out since most people would plug up their monitor first, then move it back, which might cause unexpected tension on the cables.
yeah, i must have been lucky too, i can't find any dead, stuck pixels and it's been working great. same with my vg248qe, but i did "pray" that my monitor comes without issues for the pg278q
redmist77 - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
This is the best monitor I've ever used but only after color calibration. If you can borrow an I1 Display Pro, you'll be in heaven. If you're a full-time desktop publisher you'll probably still want an IPS until OLED monitors become a reality but for anyone else, this is the monitor to own....especially if you appreciate smooth motion, no blur and virtually zero input lag.Hlafordlaes - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
I have no issue with mine, except I also had wonderful EU VAT taxes to pay. Well, the USB ports on the back do seem buggy, so I've stopped using them, but otherwise, so glad I chose this monitor for gaming. Unless you really nitpick, movies look fine, too.entrecote - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
I am mainly gaming.Before reading further than the headline I scroll down to the stat table and read it is a TN panel. I read no more.
Unless it is a pure LAN machine on a budget I rather look elsewhere than TN.
Antronman - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
There's really no reason to use IPS for gaming as the colors are still heavily saturated so you just get even richer, more saturated colors that are gross.Death666Angel - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
Color satuartion has no direct link with the panel tech. I've had oversaturated TN panels (HP w2408h) and I've had undersaturated IPS panels (Qnix 2710LED). The difference between IPS and TN that makes IPS more desireable for me personally are the viewing angles. With TN, I need my head to be pretty much in the right spot (like the old Nintendo 3DS) in order to have a good picture. If I move around the colors get inverted or washed out and if I want to show someone something on the monitor, they have a shitty picture or they need to be in my spot. With IPS, colors are the same from almost any angle.doggghouse - Wednesday, February 18, 2015 - link
The saturated colors have more to do with the type of backlight used. A lot of the earlier monitors with IPS panels were designed for professionals (photographers etc) so they used a special bulb in the backlight to give an extended gamut to better match the color spectrum available for print. But you can find IPS displays that cover the standard RGB gamut.oobga - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
I was looking at the PG278Q, but as soon as I was thinking of getting one the prices jumped another $50+ everywhere in Canada which totally turned me off. Then started to read about the Acer XB270HU which might end up being a superior monitor. At the least that should make ASUS compete a bit with their ridiculous pricing.gostarkgo - Monday, February 16, 2015 - link
Honestly BenQ has been making monitors like this for a while now and they cost much less. I've got one that has almost identical spec's and it is three years old now. Didn't even come close to costing that much. Hilarious article.oobga - Monday, February 16, 2015 - link
I think you're missing how this monitor has g-sync, but still, that should only be a ~$200 premium. ASUS is very obviously taking advantage of having the only monitor with these resolution/refresh rate specs with g-sync. That should change later this year though. If you can wait for g-sync, you really should. This monitor is very close to being a low end 1440p/144hz +g-sync monitor.nos024 - Monday, February 16, 2015 - link
I owned the ASUS VG248qe for a year before selling it off to a friend. It was the best monitor for gaming I've ever used...for gaming. The so called not-so-accurate colors, and not-so-great viewing angle of a TN panel is irrelevant for gaming IMO. What bothered me was when using it as an everyday panel for productivity because the panel uses PWM lighting. On white backgrounds, it was just too much for my eyes to handle. So when working in Excel, Word, and web browsing...When gaming, it was plain awesome. But I felt 24inch/1080 was too small for my taste. When I heard the Swift ROG was coming out at 27inch/1440 i almost pulled the trigger on getting one. With all the QA issues, I was hesitant. I will wait awhile until the dust settles to get one. I saw one on display at the local Microcenter and I was quite impressed with it. I think if they had one in stock at the time I would've bought it and hope I win the lottery on getting a non-defective one.
bebimbap - Tuesday, February 17, 2015 - link
If you get the gsync board for the vg248qe it gets rid of the pwm lightingmilkod2001 - Monday, February 16, 2015 - link
If not in rush it might be better to wait for IPS/PLS monitors with Gsync/Free Sync enabled. Q2/q3/15$790 for TN + Gsync is a bad ,very bad joke
oobga - Tuesday, February 17, 2015 - link
I've been watching inventory of online stores in Canada. Very little if any movement in their stock for this monitor in the last few weeks. Looks like people have caught on better things are coming out soon for high res/high refresh rate monitors with g-sync. Unfortunately, those stores are stubbornly holding their prices ($950+ CAD). They should have no choice soon to cut those down though.Socius - Monday, February 16, 2015 - link
For the overclockable displays, "80-90Hz" isn't often achievable. The models that can be overclocked, are guaranteed to hit at least 105Hz, and 99% will hit 110Hz and above. And it's important to note that monitors like the Qnix that you mentioned, cost just $300 with free shipping, and are PLS (Samsung version of LG's IPS tech).You also made no mention of the fact that this supposed gaming enthusiast monitor has a fairly aggressive anti-glare coating on it which further deteriorates image quality, on top of it being a TN display.
This "article" seems like a last attempt paid sales pitch from ASUS before the new Acer XB270HU comes out and dominates it with superior image quality and a lower price point. This is what I was afraid would happen to AnandTech when they announced being bought out.
3DVagabond - Tuesday, February 17, 2015 - link
Can you please clarify? Are you saying that you notice flickering when below 40fps with this monitor?
cars10 - Tuesday, February 17, 2015 - link
for a long time my trust has dwindled in Anandtech. Now I have finally lost all value in your reviews.Seriously, this review is pathetic!
Did you actually do what this monitor was meant to do, and actually PLAY A GAME? Or did you just measure color values? Else you would surely notice and advise your loyal readers accordingly!
How much money has Asus PAID YOU to cover up the HUGE, gaping FLAW this monitor has?
The pixel inversion that affects the ENTIRE series is very significant and there are hundreds of posts on the Asus forum about it.
Shame on you, Anandtech.
Hxx - Sunday, February 22, 2015 - link
This is at the end of the day someone's opinion. He pointed out what he thought is important. Get over it.Zak - Tuesday, February 17, 2015 - link
I play games and edit photos (not professionally, just a hobby). I have no space for two 27" monitors. So I'm disappointed with this display, hoping the future will bring something better.Zak - Tuesday, March 17, 2015 - link
I pulled the trigger on this monitor after all. For gaming it's absolutely awesome, you've got to see it to believe, not so good for everything else. Although I'm getting another computer for my photo editing so that's why I decided to get this one after all.Sancus - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
I like anandtech but come on.. this is an embarrassingly bad and shallow review. No mention of ULMB AT ALL when it's one of the core features of the monitor? No input lag tests? No image blur tests?Sorry but this type of review may be sufficient for your typical, run of the mill 60hz IPS panel, but it completely misses the point of the entire purpose of this display.
TFTCentral's review is what you should read if you're considering this monitor.
Subyman - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
I've been using this monitor with 2x970's for a few months. I came from high end 27" IPS monitors and have been stunned by the performance. Sure the colors aren't as deep, but the game in motion completely makes up for it. Playing Mordor at 110fps with Gsync and high settings was a treat. I never knew what tearing and hitching did to the experience, but I could never go back to non-gsync monitors (or a similar technology.) Definitely worth it if you can afford it. I lucked out and got a perfect unit from newegg open box for only $599 :)Ubercake - Wednesday, March 11, 2015 - link
I have one purpose in mind with my gaming rig: gaming. I don't need 100% color accuracy to shoot enemies - or die - in BF4.For many years, I've gone with ATX builds in full tower cases and ran with 2 or 3 video cards to keep framerates up to make tearing less noticeable which also eliminates my need for V-sync and the associated input lag.
With this Asus monitor and a single flagship video card (GTX 980), I get a smooth tear-free lag-free video experience at full details and ultra video settings. I've noticed that if the frame rates stay in the high 20s or above (which they do 100% with most titles), the video stays smooth.
Because of the G-sync tech, my next gaming build will be with be a micro ATX or mini ITX scale build with my single 980 and whatever high-end enthusiast or high-end mainstream processor is out at the time. I no longer need a giant case with a ton of fans in it to get a high-end gaming experience. I no longer need more than one video card.
I can't wait until free sync monitors start hitting the market more as this competition should reduce the prices of monitors with dynamic sync technologies.
MyNuts - Sunday, July 19, 2015 - link
I own this monitor. Its perfect for my 980ti sli setup. Again like with my 670 OC GTX setup I will enjoy future like performance before it can be had single card style. My 670 GTX was compairable to a 980 GTX. Sometime you cant thave all the features you want from the product right away and its a trade off to wait and see like everyone says. But if you have the money and are willing to upgrade on a cycle this setup would be perfect for you.Halgren - Tuesday, September 8, 2015 - link
Hi there, Great review by the way. I have the same gamma distorsion on my monitor out of the box (average 2.0 gamma) and i'm interested in this review calibration (osd params and icc profile).It would be great if you can provide them especially that a lot of people are having the same gamma distortions.