VGA? A VGA port? in 2020?!? I get that this is supposed to be an upper mainstream rather than premium product, but is there even a single GPU ever made that supports both VGA and FreeSync? Not that you could use FS over VGA no matter what, but that should be plenty of evidence as to why this port is completely out of place.
Even my CCTV DVR has HDMI lol. I agree the VGA port is pointless on this model. Anyone using VGA would probably be looking at a lower-end office and/or business monitor for that
The highest pixel clock I've seen referenced on VGA is 300 MHz. The highest I've personally ever been able to push on hardware I've owned is 165 MHz. 1080p165 would need 342 MHz, so I would be shocked if VGA transmitters and receivers could actually link at the native resolution and refresh rate, even if there was a valid timing configuration.
They're trying to appeal to people who have an old device lying around that they need to connect to something once a month. If this device has a vga port it means it can replace that flaky old monitor they are having trouble with, and use it both with the new computer and that old thing.
The only old devices with VGA ports are computers, in which case a new computer would likely replace it, no? VGA has pretty much never been used outside of PCs.
Also a friggin 1200p at that screen size. What is this ugly monstrosity. It'll fit perfect for a life support system monitor on an old age home. Come on guys, 4k should be the bare minimum at these panel sizes.
While I do think that 1080p is a bit low, 4K is definitely not a good fit for this monitor. High refresh rate displays are often intended for users who want to maximize performance. Such users usually care about framerate over image quality, and often play at low graphics settings and reduced resolutions if necessary to maintain the framerate. 4K is not what such users would want. Not to mention it would significantly drive up the cost of the display.
If you're a gamer who wants high refresh rates and 4K, there are other displays to choose from.
No, no there aren't. There is no 40", curved, true-4k, 120hz panel on the market. Anywhere. The 4k lovers have been snubbed over and over and over and over while the speed-freaks keep getting all the attention.
Why not? A 1440 display is more expensive than a (near) equivalent 1080 one (e.g. VG279Q vs. PG279Q). Also, a higher resolution means you need a more powerful, hence more expensive, card to sustain the same frame rate.
Yes, 1440 looks better, but I'm quite ok with 1080's pixel density and personally see no reason to spend the extra money.
I'm not thrilled with 1080p pixel density on a 24" display, let alone a 27". It looks like garbage. They need to make 24" 1080p IPS displays with 144hz+ and 1ms. 27" 1440p for an expensive upgrade.
My god, use something in the 30"+ range, and you'll be mortified by the pixel density on a 1080p display. 27" is barely any better. 1080p has been a trainwreck and the bane of the PC market ever since it was force-punched down our throats as a mandatory DOWNGRADE from the 1920x1200 or even 1920x1440 screens. I'm sick and tired of everyone who keeps touting it as "superior". 1080p needs to DIAF. NOW. It's not even good enough resolution for a smartphone, FFS!
27 inches with 1080p? 2020? This PPI is quite low and blurry, and I'm not seeing progress here. As someone else said 1440p should be the minimum now for these gaming panels.
Not everyone Are willing to pay what Asus ask for 1440p monitors. Similar 1440p by asus is $150 more expensive at least... I would go bigger and sharper, but there Are people who don`t have money to 1440p Gaming.
Completely missing, even the shot of the rear "silkscreen" shows markings for only one port (unless if that single marking denotes 2 HDMI ports, somehow).
You shut your cakehole. There's a litany of 100% flat monitors out there...and a crapload of those that have these stupidly high refresh rates.
Even people that use 2 or more monitors--don't set them up completely parallel. They're always slightly angled towards each other; because it's more comfortable for the user. We need MORE curved, not less...but we also need FULL 4K, not the ultra-wide-yet-still-1080-vertical crap.
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
28 Comments
Back to Article
Valantar - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
VGA? A VGA port? in 2020?!? I get that this is supposed to be an upper mainstream rather than premium product, but is there even a single GPU ever made that supports both VGA and FreeSync? Not that you could use FS over VGA no matter what, but that should be plenty of evidence as to why this port is completely out of place.AshlayW - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
Even my CCTV DVR has HDMI lol. I agree the VGA port is pointless on this model. Anyone using VGA would probably be looking at a lower-end office and/or business monitor for thatwillis936 - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
The highest pixel clock I've seen referenced on VGA is 300 MHz. The highest I've personally ever been able to push on hardware I've owned is 165 MHz. 1080p165 would need 342 MHz, so I would be shocked if VGA transmitters and receivers could actually link at the native resolution and refresh rate, even if there was a valid timing configuration.http://www.tinyvga.com/vga-timing
surt - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
They're trying to appeal to people who have an old device lying around that they need to connect to something once a month. If this device has a vga port it means it can replace that flaky old monitor they are having trouble with, and use it both with the new computer and that old thing.Valantar - Tuesday, March 31, 2020 - link
The only old devices with VGA ports are computers, in which case a new computer would likely replace it, no? VGA has pretty much never been used outside of PCs.milkywayer - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
Also a friggin 1200p at that screen size. What is this ugly monstrosity. It'll fit perfect for a life support system monitor on an old age home. Come on guys, 4k should be the bare minimum at these panel sizes.inighthawki - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
While I do think that 1080p is a bit low, 4K is definitely not a good fit for this monitor. High refresh rate displays are often intended for users who want to maximize performance. Such users usually care about framerate over image quality, and often play at low graphics settings and reduced resolutions if necessary to maintain the framerate. 4K is not what such users would want. Not to mention it would significantly drive up the cost of the display.If you're a gamer who wants high refresh rates and 4K, there are other displays to choose from.
inperfectdarkness - Monday, April 6, 2020 - link
No, no there aren't. There is no 40", curved, true-4k, 120hz panel on the market. Anywhere. The 4k lovers have been snubbed over and over and over and over while the speed-freaks keep getting all the attention.Dug - Tuesday, March 31, 2020 - link
4k and 165hz? With what video card?No, 4k doesn't make sense and shouldn't be the bare minimum.
inperfectdarkness - Monday, April 6, 2020 - link
It absolutely does make sense. Every panel should be 4k and 120hz. You can easily down-render to 1080p from a 4k. I want the OPTION of 4k and > 60hz.Ninhalem - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
Why do manufacturers still insist on putting 1080p in a 27" monitor? The minimum should be 1440p.eddman - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
Why not? A 1440 display is more expensive than a (near) equivalent 1080 one (e.g. VG279Q vs. PG279Q). Also, a higher resolution means you need a more powerful, hence more expensive, card to sustain the same frame rate.Yes, 1440 looks better, but I'm quite ok with 1080's pixel density and personally see no reason to spend the extra money.
pocketdrummer - Tuesday, March 31, 2020 - link
I'm not thrilled with 1080p pixel density on a 24" display, let alone a 27". It looks like garbage. They need to make 24" 1080p IPS displays with 144hz+ and 1ms. 27" 1440p for an expensive upgrade.eddman - Tuesday, March 31, 2020 - link
They do. Asus has two 24.5" models, VG259Q and QM.inperfectdarkness - Monday, April 6, 2020 - link
My god, use something in the 30"+ range, and you'll be mortified by the pixel density on a 1080p display. 27" is barely any better. 1080p has been a trainwreck and the bane of the PC market ever since it was force-punched down our throats as a mandatory DOWNGRADE from the 1920x1200 or even 1920x1440 screens. I'm sick and tired of everyone who keeps touting it as "superior". 1080p needs to DIAF. NOW. It's not even good enough resolution for a smartphone, FFS!drexnx - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
TUF is just ROG with a dumber name and uglier logo at this pointmilkywayer - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
Also sh****t panels. 27 inch and 1080/1200p Wth is this ugly thing.AshlayW - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
27 inches with 1080p? 2020? This PPI is quite low and blurry, and I'm not seeing progress here. As someone else said 1440p should be the minimum now for these gaming panels.haukionkannel - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
Not everyone Are willing to pay what Asus ask for 1440p monitors. Similar 1440p by asus is $150 more expensive at least...I would go bigger and sharper, but there Are people who don`t have money to 1440p Gaming.
Mccaula718 - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
Where is the second hdmi port hiding in the pictures?jeremyshaw - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
Completely missing, even the shot of the rear "silkscreen" shows markings for only one port (unless if that single marking denotes 2 HDMI ports, somehow).mode_13h - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
Premium and 1080p don't really go together.milkywayer - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
Yup. These guys should be forced to put a big "poor ugly" sticker on any monitor / laptop that is 1440p/1080p in 2020 ffs. This is just lameSttm - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
250 cd/m²That is just insane to me. Why are they still making such dim monitors? 300 should be the very minimum and what you get on the super cheap stuff.
A5 - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
If it wasn't curved, I'd say this is just 1/4th of a 55" 4K TV panel that they need to get rid of some overstock on.With the curve, I'm just totally lost on what niche they're going for here.
Kamen Rider Blade - Monday, March 30, 2020 - link
UGH! More Curved Monitors.STOP putting Curves in Monitors!!!
inperfectdarkness - Monday, April 6, 2020 - link
You shut your cakehole. There's a litany of 100% flat monitors out there...and a crapload of those that have these stupidly high refresh rates.Even people that use 2 or more monitors--don't set them up completely parallel. They're always slightly angled towards each other; because it's more comfortable for the user. We need MORE curved, not less...but we also need FULL 4K, not the ultra-wide-yet-still-1080-vertical crap.
ballsystemlord - Tuesday, March 31, 2020 - link
That's an amazing monitor!