Thursday, April 14th 2016

ASUS Announces the MG248Q, MG28UQ and MG24UQ Gaming Monitors

ASUS, the No.1 gaming monitor brand, today announced MG248Q, MG28UQ and MG24UQ, the latest gaming monitors in the ASUS MG Series. MG248Q is a 24-inch Full HD monitor featuring an ultra-fast 1 ms response time and an incredible 144 Hz refresh rate. MG28UQ and MG24UQ are 28- inch and 24-inch displays respectively, both featuring a 4K UHD (3840 x 2160) resolution.

All MG Series monitors include Adaptive-Sync technology for smooth gaming visuals, while the new ASUS-exclusive DisplayWidget utility gives users easy access to various display settings.
MG248Q: Incredible 144 Hz refresh rate with lightning-fast 1 ms response time
Designed for intense, fast-paced games, ASUS MG248Q is a 24-inch Full HD gaming monitor with an ultra-fast 1 ms response time that lets users react instantly to what they see onscreen. The incredible 144 Hz refresh rate eliminates frustrating lag or motion blur, while Adaptive-Sync technology helps eliminate screen tearing and choppy frame rates to give users seamless visuals and smooth gameplay.

MG248Q is compatible with the NVIDIA 3D Vision 2 kit to open up a world of 3D gaming. It has extensive connectivity options, including dual-link DVI-D, DisplayPort 1.2, and an HDMI (v1.4) port, so users can hook it up to a wide array of multimedia devices.

MG28UQ & MG24UQ: 4K UHD monitors for highly-detailed cinema-quality visuals
Designed for graphics-intensive gaming, these monitors are the first in the MG Series to feature 4K UHD (3840 x 2160) panels for highly-detailed visuals. The 28-inch MG28UQ has a pixel density of 157ppi, while the 24-inch MG24UQ boasts 186ppi for incredibly photo-realistic visuals and sharp, crisp text. Both monitors have Adaptive-Sync technology for seamlessly-smooth gameplay that gives gamers the upper hand in the latest gaming titles.

These new MG Series monitors are designed to fulfill the visual needs of all types of gamers. MG28UQ features a 1 ms response time so it is ideal for fast-paced games such as first-person-shooters; while MG24UQ uses an IPS panel for wide 178° viewing angles for lifelike gaming visuals with minimal distortion and color shift.

MG28UQ and MG24UQ allow users to enjoy smooth 4K UHD content playback, thanks to a 60 Hz refresh rate and native 4K UHD support via DisplayPort 1.2 and HDMI (v 2.0). In addition to its array of connectivity options, MG28UQ also features two USB 3.0 ports that can quick-charge mobile devices while the user is gaming.

New ASUS-exclusive DisplayWidget for quick access to display settings
The exclusive ASUS DisplayWidget is an intuitive software utility that lets users tweak display settings or configure the ASUS GameVisual, App Sync, and Ultra-Low Blue Light technologies. While these adjustments can be done via the On Screen Display (OSD) settings menu or navigational joystick and buttons, ASUS DisplayWidget makes accessing and using these various settings much faster and easier.

ASUS-exclusive GameVisual technology provides up to six preset display modes (Scenery, Racing, Cinema, RTS/RPG, FPS, and sRGB) to suit different game genres. This unique feature can be easily accessed through a hotkey or the OSD settings menu. Each mode can be user-customized, with an additional User mode available for saving these settings. In addition, all customized GameVisual settings can be saved in an AXML file format that can be applied to any identical monitor, for example by another user.

App Sync lets users assign specific ASUS GameVisual modes to individual applications, and makes sure the monitor is in the right mode when these programs are displayed in the foreground. Users also have the option of changing these assigned settings.

DisplayWidget also lets users access different blue-light filter settings. ASUS Ultra-Low Blue Light technology reduces the amount of blue light emitted by the display and features four different filter settings to suit the task at hand. In addition, DisplayWidget provides picture orientation shortcuts, making it easy for users working on long documents to rotate onscreen images to portrait mode.

Gamer-centric enhancements: ASUS GamePlus technologies
MG248Q, MG28UQ and MG24UQ feature the ASUS-exclusive GamePlus hotkey for in-game enhancements, including a crosshair overlay, onscreen timer, a frames per second (FPS) counter, and a display alignment function.

The crosshair overlay provides four different crosshair options, and there's also an onscreen timer that users can position on the left of the display to keep track of the elapsed gaming time. The FPS counter lets users know how smoothly the game is running. Activating the display alignment function gives users three alignment lines on all four corners of the monitor to take the guesswork out of multi-display set-ups.

Ergonomically designed and wall-mountable
MG248Q, MG28UQ and MG24UQ are specially designed for marathon gaming sessions. All three monitors have ergonomically-designed stands with full tilt, swivel, pivot, and height adjustment so gamers can find their preferred comfortable viewing position. MG24UQ and MG28UQ can be easily detached from their stands thanks to a quick-release latch, and all models can be VESA wall-mounted to save on desktop space.

ASUS MG28UQ and MG24UQ are available immediately worldwide. MG248Q will be available later in April 2016.
Add your own comment

18 Comments on ASUS Announces the MG248Q, MG28UQ and MG24UQ Gaming Monitors

#1
Prima.Vera
Some more ridiculous overpriced monitors from Asus...
Posted on Reply
#2
xxthe_remedyxx
Another set of useless ASUS monitors. For God's sake they can't even deliver the PG348Q to Amazon to fulfill orders. ASUS is going South fast.
Posted on Reply
#3
deemon
Prima.Vera said:
Some more ridiculous overpriced monitors from Asus...
+1. Was about to say the exact same thing :D
Next in line are ASUS 8" 8k curved monitors with 240Hz refresh rate and 0ms response time with async AND g-sync.
Posted on Reply
#4
happita
Display industry is still a bit stale so I'm waiting until DP 1.3 and HDMI 2.0a monitors start coming out. I like my refresh rates to be HIGH with HDR!!!!!!!!
Wake me up when they're here....*snooze button pushed*
Posted on Reply
#5
atomicus
Why release stale DP 1.2 4K monitors 2-3 months before new GPU's are out which will offer DP 1.3 connectivity? Why focus AT ALL on anything BUT faster 4K technology to take advantage of the swathes of gamers out there chomping at the bit for faster 4K monitors?? Asus are nuts. NO ONE on planet earth is going to recommend a 60Hz DP 1.2 4K monitor in a few months time, no one should even be recommending them now... it's dead end tech!
Posted on Reply
#6
shilka
Am i the only one that think 4K on a 24 inch is a stupid idea?
Really 4K on such a small size whats the whole point then?

4K on a 24 inch is the same thing as 1080P on a 6 inch screen.
4K should be on at least a 30 inch.
Posted on Reply
#7
Parn
This is kind of misleading as you can't do 4K@144Hz with DP 1.2. There is not enough bandwidth for that. If Asus mean users can only benefit from adaptive sync up to 144Hz at non-native resolution, I'd say "no, thanks".
Posted on Reply
#8
PP Mguire
Parn said:
This is kind of misleading as you can't do 4K@144Hz with DP 1.2. There is not enough bandwidth for that. If Asus mean users can only benefit from adaptive sync up to 144Hz at non-native resolution, I'd say "no, thanks".
That one is not a 4k panel, it's a 1080p panel.

These monitors are pretty much rebranded ROG monitors to get rid of stock. The stand says it all, and I'm ok with this. I actually plan to get one of the 4k panels for Quakecon.
Posted on Reply
#9
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
shilka said:
Am i the only one that think 4K on a 24 inch is a stupid idea?
Really 4K on such a small size whats the whole point then?

4K on a 24 inch is the same thing as 1080P on a 6 inch screen.
4K should be on at least a 30 inch.
If scaled properly it's probably excellent. Which is why we have apps in Windows 10.
Posted on Reply
#10
MxPhenom 216
Corsair Fanboy
I just want 4k, 120-144hz, w/ g sync or by that time nvidia gives up on it and just supports VESA standard adaptive sync through the dp port, and IPS panel on at least 32-34" screen.
Posted on Reply
#11
Brusfantomet
shilka said:

4K on a 24 inch is the same thing as 1080P on a 6 inch screen.
4K on a 24" is the same as 1080P on a 12", at that pixel pitch the need for AA is greatly reduced.
But UI scaling becomes a problem.

Would also like to know the frequency range for the adaptive sync here.
Posted on Reply
#12
erixx
Too much "elitist" e-pinion. Seriously do you think mankind or a significant part of it cares about the next "DP 1.3 connector" and GPU to buy a matching monitor? Haha!

Not that I like everything Asus does, but... ;)
Posted on Reply
#13
trog100
Frick said:
If scaled properly it's probably excellent. Which is why we have apps in Windows 10.
definitely.. the only snag being it takes 4 x the gpu power to run it relative to 1080.. a high price to pay for the extra hardly noticeable eye candy on smaller monitors .. :)

trog
Posted on Reply
#14
droopyRO
I`m confused are those monitors made for nVidia cards or AMD with "adaptive vsync" ?
Posted on Reply
#15
PP Mguire
trog100 said:
definitely.. the only snag being it takes 4 x the gpu power to run it relative to 1080.. a high price to pay for the extra hardly noticeable eye candy on smaller monitors .. :)

trog
When using architectures made for 1080p and 1440p, yes, but Pascal will make this moot. I don't think I can go back to a lower res than 4k for my main rig and it's very noticeable.
droopyRO said:
I`m confused are those monitors made for nVidia cards or AMD with "adaptive vsync" ?
Says on the top all MG monitors come with adaptive sync.
Posted on Reply
#16
droopyRO
PP Mguire said:
Says on the top all MG monitors come with adaptive sync.
So what is the difference ? Freesync = adaptive sync ?
Posted on Reply
#17
trog100
"When using architectures made for 1080p and 1440p, yes, but Pascal will make this moot. I don't think I can go back to a lower res than 4k for my main rig and it's very noticeable."

###

yes but the smaller the screen or the greater the viewing distance the less noticeable it all becomes.. the higher power needs and lower frame rates remain the same..

its like the difference between ultra and high settings in modern games.. on close inspection its all "noticeable".. but it all takes more power to maintain the same frame rates..

the plus factor is more eye candy.. the negative factor is it all needs more gpu power which is also very noticeable.. it also costs more money.. he he..

i am into still photography.. which is also obsessed with mega pixels.. i know one thing for sure.. below a certain size or beyond a certain viewing distance its impossible to tell the difference between an image made up of 10 million pixels and one made up of 40 million pixels.. i simply apply the same logic to PC gaming resolutions and game settings..

the next generation of high ends cards (when they arrive) should make higher resolutions and higher frames rates more viable.. but by the time viable 4K gaming arrives the push will be for 8K and yep folks will still say the difference is "very noticeable" which i am sure to some it will be.. :)

one other thing that is never mentioned.. the amount of detail (visual quality) that can be added to any game is directly related to "frame rates" the push for higher resolutions works against better quality visuals in the average game.. looking at crap graphics (fall out 4 for example) at higher resolutions dosnt ring any bells for me.. it just makes it more obvious just how crap the graphics really are.. he he

dare i ask a simple question.. which looks best.. witcher 3 at 1080 or fallout 4 at 4K.. ??

both of the above would produce similar frame rates for a given amount of gpu power..


trog
Posted on Reply
#18
PP Mguire
droopyRO said:
So what is the difference ? Freesync = adaptive sync ?
Yes.

trog100 said:
"When using architectures made for 1080p and 1440p, yes, but Pascal will make this moot. I don't think I can go back to a lower res than 4k for my main rig and it's very noticeable."

###

yes but the smaller the screen or the greater the viewing distance the less noticeable it all becomes.. the higher power needs and lower frame rates remain the same..

its like the difference between ultra and high settings in modern games.. on close inspection its all "noticeable".. but it all takes more power to maintain the same frame rates..

the plus factor is more eye candy.. the negative factor is it all needs more gpu power which is also very noticeable.. it also costs more money.. he he..

i am into still photography.. which is also obsessed with mega pixels.. i know one thing for sure.. below a certain size or beyond a certain viewing distance its impossible to tell the difference between an image made up of 10 million pixels and one made up of 40 million pixels.. i simply apply the same logic to PC gaming resolutions and game settings..

the next generation of high ends cards (when they arrive) should make higher resolutions and higher frames rates more viable.. but by the time viable 4K gaming arrives the push will be for 8K and yep folks will still say the difference is "very noticeable" which i am sure to some it will be.. :)

one other thing that is never mentioned.. the amount of detail (visual quality) that can be added to any game is directly related to "frame rates" the push for higher resolutions works against better quality visuals in the average game.. looking at crap graphics (fall out 4 for example) at higher resolutions dosnt ring any bells for me.. it just makes it more obvious just how crap the graphics really are.. he he

dare i ask a simple question.. which looks best.. witcher 3 at 1080 or fallout 4 at 4K.. ??

both of the above would produce similar frame rates for a given amount of gpu power..


trog
Going a bit off on the deep end here. The difference is noticeable going from 1080p to 4k on both a 28" and 48" screen at PC viewing distance. It's 4x the resolution which makes a definite difference in clarity to picture. I can't see reducing by 4" making this fact any different. When you up the rendering resolution by that much in a game it greatly reduces the need for AA in a lot of instances. At most I ever use is 2x MSAA to top off the hard edge jaggies and it makes for a nice experience. In games like TW3 turning AA on doesn't even make a difference. When you're playing games at 1080p and require to crank the AA up that eats up most of your performance. Moving to 4k does the same thing but at least AA isn't required half the time.

Comparing TW3 to Fallout 4 regardless of resolution is moot. TW3 will always look better because it's not a Creation engine shit port. I can say both games still look better in 4k because I've played both games at 4k.

The argument will come and go with each iteration of viewing tech. People with CRTs hung on to those because of response time ect, now people with TN panels are whining about everything needing to be 144hz and IPS. Later when we are all rocking 4k 144hz people will scream 8k is pointless and on and on. It's rather moot, and guys like me like to stay on top of tech. No sense in arguing over it.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment