ASUS Announces the ROG PG259QN Monitor: 1080p IPS, 360 Hz, 1 ms, G-SYNC

[phanbuey]

Lol what a terrible comment. They didn’t stop pushing higher resolutions because of competitive players bud. There’s not much demand because a) to play 4k and 60+ fps, you need at least a 2080, which is $600 more than a gtx 1660 super. And b) 4k on 24” and 27” brings diminishing returns. You’re really giving up the smoothness of your gameplay, just to play at 4k and barely notice the difference over 1440p.

Also, what more do you want. There are 4k120hz monitors, out there. Right now there’s no need for 4k240hz since current, flagship cards can’t even push 4k120.

There are no 'true' 4k panels out there at 120Hz right now, they all have to use some sort of color compression due to DP 1.2 limitation. We should have some full 4k 120/144 out next year.

 

[mtcn77]

but TN is still faster and has less overshoot, right?

Hard to believe, I know. I am very studious about the stuff I say with stupendous amount of emphasis on every word, so I don't judge the startling effect it has on people...

im not entirely sure what you're talking about.

I must have enthralled you with my unpopular ideas about our new IPS overlords. Sorry to say, I am a very uncompliant fellow with strong opinion of one's own.
I don't want to be prejudiced, but it seems to me, you guys are rooting for the eye scourge that is TN, not picking on you personally for it. It just happens to be not suited to land animals like what a fresnel lens is to a lighthouse. Also, tftcentral and blurbusters have rectifying still images of reverse ghosting effects on TN monitors showing on more occasions than IPS panels, so forgive me for being so broad-minded.

me a tftcentral review showing that and I'll believe you.

Forgive me for replying in sections, but this turned into a quiz.
I can point whole swaths of tftcentral reviews. All you have to do is scroll down until you see the section with lag counters and look for the RTC error color code on the right hand of the table chart. Good IPS monitors have it in deep green which they always have...

 

[Animalpak]

Lol what a terrible comment. They didn’t stop pushing higher resolutions because of competitive players bud. There’s not much demand because a) to play 4k and 60+ fps, you need at least a 2080, which is $600 more than a gtx 1660 super. And b) 4k on 24” and 27” brings diminishing returns. You’re really giving up the smoothness of your gameplay, just to play at 4k and barely notice the difference over 1440p.

Also, what more do you want. There are 4k120hz monitors, out there. Right now there’s no need for 4k240hz since current, flagship cards can’t even push 4k120.

Not 4K not 4K, i mean less than 4K but not 1080p ! Stop with 1080p !

I understand games are smoother with lower resolution, i want the manufactures giving us something better than 1080p.

The 1920x1080 has become so mainstream and damn boring.

And btw you just joined TPU to reply to my comment ? ....

 

[mtcn77]

I understand games are smoother with lower resolution, i want the manufactures giving us something better than 1080p.

People have been underscaling the resolution in overwatch to make things look like minecraft.
I don't see things from where you are standing. It is funny as heck to even try.
Sure high res is good, but it isn't retro.

Here's what Overwatch looks like running at 100x100 pixels, for some reason

Squint or you will literally miss it.

www.pcgamer.com

MinorVidsPC wrote in the comments of his video. He also showed what Overwatched looked like at 300x300 pixels, which gave me flashbacks to mid-90s 3D graphics. There's a lot of shimmery aliasing going on—it feels like watching Netflix or Youtube at 144p on an HD screen—but hey, it's unmistakably still Overwatch. It's playable.
At 100x105, not so much.

 

[Vayra86]

Hard to believe, I know. I am very studious about the stuff I say with stupendous amount of emphasis on every word, so I don't judge the startling effect it has on people...


I must have enthralled you with my unpopular ideas about our new IPS overlords. Sorry to say, I am a very uncompliant fellow with strong opinion of one's own.
I don't want to be prejudiced, but it seems to me, you guys are rooting for the eye scourge that is TN, not picking on you personally for it. It just happens to be not suited to land animals like what a fresnel lens is to a lighthouse. Also, tftcentral and blurbusters have rectifying still images of reverse ghosting effects on TN monitors showing on more occasions than IPS panels, so forgive me for being so broad-minded.


Forgive me for replying in sections, but this turned into a quiz.
I can point whole swaths of tftcentral reviews. All you have to do is scroll down until you see the section with lag counters and look for the RTC error color code on the right hand of the table chart. Good IPS monitors have it in deep green which they always have...

So point me to one, and we can contemplate the ifs. Its all I asked for

 

[mtcn77]

So point me to one, and we can contemplate the ifs.

I'm sure you will play the *not enough sample size* card...
You can go to blurbusters, too. I'm pretty well covered. I cannot claim I'm not a reptilian, but when my eyes see luminance, it bugs me more than the pixel trails - common side effect of having pit organs in the form of nostrils, I guess...

 

[Dave65]

I refuse ASUS!

 

[watzupken]

I feel this high refresh rate race is getting overboard. Sparing us of the theoretical benefit, I wonder what is the actual benefit of running 360Hz refresh rate? Even if there's any tangible benefit, its going to be negligible. And for the negligible benefit, you are paying a significant benefit for it. In my opinion, if I am able to run a game at 1080p @ 360Hz, I rather step up the visuals to 1440p, and be happy with a 144hz refresh rate.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Not 4K not 4K, i mean less than 4K but not 1080p ! Stop with 1080p !

Why? 1080p is a solid standard for a reason. It is a resolution that provides excellent definition for the vast majority of visual needs from Video and TV to gaming. People who whine that 1080p is not good enough are generally also people who do not appreciate the substance of things. And while there is nothing wrong with striving for better, GPU's are only just now able to push 1440p/1600p resolutions at a solid 120hz to say nothing of 240 or 360 in games. However, streaming 4k content is still out of reach for most of the planet as internet connections are just not fast enough to supply the needed minimum for even a 4k/30 stream.

So can we stop with the whining? If you don't want 1080p don't buy it.

 

[Vayra86]

I'm sure you will play the *not enough sample size* card...
You can go to blurbusters, too. I'm pretty well covered. I cannot claim I'm not a reptilian, but when my eyes see luminance, it bugs me more than the pixel trails - common side effect of having pit organs in the form of nostrils, I guess...

You picked the wrong one to make your point. Because the right one doesn't make it:
Note how TN is on the bottom end of the best IPS panels. And that's going off a similar green > orange overshoot color in your graph just as well.
TN is generally about 1-3ms lower, with much lower minimum (as low as marketed 1ms) and a slightly lower average. The difference is tiny. But IPS is not faster. In fact, IPS is still reporting its G2G response quite fairly. All (non-gaming) IPS panels are marketed as 4-5ms panels and if you look below, that's pretty accurate. Not a single one will average below 4. The gaming ones deploy overdrive modes to be faster, and only a tiny selection is high refresh native. That last category is what gets the green overshoot bar along with maintaining its 3-6ms G2G. But even so, something's gonna give - the peak G2G is still pretty high and substantially higher than TN, often closing in on 8-10ms.

Technology doesn't suddenly work differently. IPS's limitations haven't changed. Its still basically a 1000:1 static contrast, color accurate, great viewing angle technology. Everything else around it, is trickery, a balancing act and whichever you prefer best is the panel you'll love.

TN is also still a less accurate, slightly faster, slightly worse in static contrast (900:1 typical) and worse viewing angle technology. And will be for as long as the sun comes up in the morning.

The same goes for VA. Its limitations haven't changed: it will smear in darker hues as it always suffers a low 0-55 grayscale G2G response time, while the other metrics are strong: higher static contrast usually starting at 3000:1, vivid colors though not necessarily accurate (due to contrast) & the lowest black point of any non emissive display tech. Many VA panels come out with some visible DeltaE errors that you can calibrate away in most. Viewing angles are not as good as IPS.

This will echo in reviews forever, make no mistake. Any panel doing better, does something unique and has ditto price tag. Be it FALD, strobing tech, or highly optimized cabinet design.

You say you study these things... but I question your judgment.

Here's another one...

that matches with this overshoot table:
Green > orange in both TN and IPS but TN is still a hair faster. The trend is clear and your statement is false. Both TN and IPS can produce low G2G without overshoot issues. The fact that many don't (both in TN/IPS camps) is of course attributable to differences in panel, price, quality, calibration.

You can step off the high horse now - you're not smarter than the rest.

As for the rest of your text... a lot of fluff, but nobody ever said they were rooting for TN if I recall... but let's call a spade a spade. There is no battle to fight here, really.

 

[medi01]

Is it G-Sync as "NVidias proprietary crap" or just rebranded FreeSync/Standard VRR?

 

[Animalpak]

Why? 1080p is a solid standard for a reason. It is a resolution that provides excellent definition for the vast majority of visual needs from Video and TV to gaming. People who whine that 1080p is not good enough are generally also people who do not appreciate the substance of things. And while there is nothing wrong with striving for better, GPU's are only just now able to push 1440p/1600p resolutions at a solid 120hz to say nothing of 240 or 360 in games. However, streaming 4k content is still out of reach for most of the planet as internet connections are just not fast enough to supply the needed minimum for even a 4k/30 stream.

So can we stop with the whining? If you don't want 1080p don't buy it.

Is not whining, is asking for more, for better.

Its because the type of users like you that the tech is not going further in a large scale. Because you dont buy new tech you regret you just want to step back instead go forward.

"Not appreciate the substance of things"... WTF is this ? What improving visuals and technologies have in common with substance of things ????

I avoid monitors at 1080p because is old tech is mainstream tech. i invest in higher resolution monitors because i want to SEE MORE of games. of videos and visual content in general improving my experience with personal computers.

Hey you like to stick to old tech ? Good for you, no one cares.

 

[Vayra86]

Is not whining, is asking for more, for better.

Its because the type of users like you that the tech is not going further in a large scale. Because you dont buy new tech you regret you just want to step back instead go forward.

"Not appreciate the substance of things"... WTF is this ? What improving visuals and technologies have in common with substance of things ????

I avoid monitors at 1080p because is old tech is mainstream tech. i invest in higher resolution monitors because i want to SEE MORE of games. of videos and visual content in general improving my experience with personal computers.

Hey you like to stick to old tech ? Good for you, no one cares.

Aren't you the one saying people should stop with 1080p? You're contradicting yourself. @lexluthermiester is precisely saying that HE thinks 1080p is enough and that you can fully enjoy the experience on it, you're the one saying he shouldn't

And it is true, if you NEED a higher res to appreciate a game, which is what you are really saying, (re-read your text), you DO have an issue appreciating the substance of things. Apparently seeing the same image with a lower pixel count cannot satisfy you. This is strange, to say the least. How did you even survive pre-4K? Did you not enjoy the content then?

 

[mtcn77]

You picked the wrong one to make your point.

I couldn't let you pick my arguments, you cannot have your cake and eat it, too, unfortunately.

You say you study these things... but I question your judgment.

At least, you know your limits... haven't decided beforehand for me which is nice.

Green > orange in both TN and IPS but TN is still faster.

Good job hitting the nail on the head. I still don't understand how they can share the title. You really turned it on its head.
I'm not even up for mental gymnastics, just pointing the finger straight across. No jumping through hoops to follow the line of thought.
You could look at the blurbusters trademark image, too. It is all the same, a blurry still image can still be corrected with a shorter strobe while an overshoot cannot.

 

[Vayra86]

I couldn't let you pick my arguments, you cannot have your cake and eat it, too, unfortunately.

At least, you know your limits... haven't decided beforehand for me which is nice.

Good job hitting the nail on the head. I still don't understand how they can share the title. You really turned it on its head.
I'm not even up for mental gymnastics, just pointing the finger straight across. No jumping through hoops to follow the line of thought.
You could look at the blurbusters trademark image, too. It is all the same, a blurry still image can still be corrected with a shorter strobe while an overshoot cannot.

Ah, you're including strobing in your equation. Then yes, you can eliminate overshoot this way.

But strobe also increases input lag and it is not widely available, even in Gsync panels you have to deep dive to find it.

Additionally, a percentage of people experience flickering images with strobe and cannot use it proper. And I know what they mean - it is definitely more tiresome to look at strobing backlights for a long time. Its a choice of evils.

 

[Animalpak]

Aren't you the one saying people should stop with 1080p? You're contradicting yourself. @lexluthermiester is precisely saying that HE thinks 1080p is enough and that you can fully enjoy the experience on it, you're the one saying he shouldn't

And it is true, if you NEED a higher res to appreciate a game, which is what you are really saying, (re-read your text), you DO have an issue appreciating the substance of things. Apparently seeing the same image with a lower pixel count cannot satisfy you. This is strange, to say the least. How did you even survive pre-4K? Did you not enjoy the content then?

Tell me how is strange to asking for more FPS in games, yes im all about better tech is not strange ! The issue are you that thinks sticking with old poor tech like lower res monitors is fine.


EVERYBODY will APPRECIATE HIGHER RES !!!!

You do not want to improve your experience. And the main reason is in fact that you cant afford better tech, that is your frustation when you see new tech release

But i get it its fine.

 

[mtcn77]

But strobe also increases input lag and it is not widely available,

Wait... now what?
However, I like challenges. Especially those I can own so easily. Would you mind, if I invited you over to another thread? @John Naylor

Been thinking of jumping on the hdr gsync 120hz bandwagon, but hesitant due to potential ghosting, motion blur, imperfections

What about this https://www.newegg.com/red-dark-gray-asus-rog-strix-xg35vq-35/p/N82E16824236855

www.techpowerup.com

Gone to 165 HZ what's the difference.

The biggest distinction for me at 165 Hz is that w/ a 165 Hz AUOptronic panel (as opposed to 144 hz) , I can turn G-Sync off and switch to ULMB at 120 Hz @ 1440p. At 144 hz, 100 Hz was max w/ ULMB. Took a long hard look at the G-Sync / Freesynsc stuff back in the day, and came away with this...

www.techpowerup.com

 

[Vayra86]

Wait... now what?
You're such a pickle. However, I like challenges. Especially those I can own so easily. Would you mind, if I invited you over to another thread? @John Naylor

Been thinking of jumping on the hdr gsync 120hz bandwagon, but hesitant due to potential ghosting, motion blur, imperfections

What about this https://www.newegg.com/red-dark-gray-asus-rog-strix-xg35vq-35/p/N82E16824236855

www.techpowerup.com

Gone to 165 HZ what's the difference.

The biggest distinction for me at 165 Hz is that w/ a 165 Hz AUOptronic panel (as opposed to 144 hz) , I can turn G-Sync off and switch to ULMB at 120 Hz @ 1440p. At 144 hz, 100 Hz was max w/ ULMB. Took a long hard look at the G-Sync / Freesynsc stuff back in the day, and came away with this...

www.techpowerup.com

Nah, I've been there and am already way past it. Nobody agrees with you even there Not going to repeat myself.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Is not whining, is asking for more, for better.

No, it's just whining. Everyone wants better.

Its because the type of users like you that the tech is not going further in a large scale. Because you dont buy new tech you regret you just want to step back instead go forward.

Making accusations like this is the act of a person with limited perspective and no understanding of the past. Progress will happen. Until then we make the most of what we have. That is the way it has always been and the way it will always be.

"Not appreciate the substance of things"... WTF is this ? What improving visuals and technologies have in common with substance of things ????

What I'm saying is that you do not need resolutions of 3840 x 2160 to enjoy a game, a movie or anything else. Example you ask? The game Crystalis for original Nintendo 8-bit console. It was a game rendered on a 240i NTSC TV screen. Very good quality and much enjoyable game. It does NOT need to be rendered in 4k to be enjoyed. The substance of the game itself is enough. The PC game Doom, regarded by many to be a masterpiece, best ran at 400 x 300 resolution. I can keep going like that.

I avoid monitors at 1080p because is old tech is mainstream tech. i invest in higher resolution monitors because i want to SEE MORE of games. of videos and visual content in general improving my experience with personal computers.

That is a choice. Yours. For the record, I have dual 1440p screens attached to my RTX2080. I've tried 2160p. It just isn't doable for my taste of high frame rate gaming. There are some games that I run at 1080p to maintain high frame rates. High frame rates are NOT possible in 2160p with the current hardware on the market. Even next gen hardware isn't going to cut it for high frame rate 2160p. Also for the record, when I say high frame rate, I mean 120fps+. 60hz is not good enough, for me anyway. However, that desire for high performance NEVER stops me from enjoying the substance of a game.

 

[mtcn77]

Nobody agrees with you even there

I would disagree since you haven't read the material. There is quite an instance where strobing steals the show, but have it your way.
I'm not caught up in your beef.

 

[ObiFrost]

ASUS! RELEASE YOUR 32" 4K 144HZ MONITOR ALREADY!

Who cares about 4K when garbage console ports kneel 2080Ti before 1080p.

 

[mtcn77]

Nah, I've been there and am already way past it.

It is striking you say that.

Winston Churchill Quotes

"Man will occasionally stumble over the..." - Winston Churchill quotes from BrainyQuote.com

www.brainyquote.com

 

[Vayra86]

I would disagree since you haven't read the material. There is quite an instance where strobing steals the show, but have it your way.
I'm not caught up in your beef.

But I don't disagree on the fact that strobing can eliminate overshoot and the like. I don't think anyone is, because its clear to see. I use a 120hz panel with 240hz BFI myself... VA, at that. Its a major difference in clarity to use strobe.

But. It is also tiresome to look at, much more so than non-strobing, there is a loss (halving) of luminance, and input lag increases. (Doubles)

I also know that John is a strobe advocate as well. And I do agree, in a general sense, strobe is a big advantage that eliminates bad IPS/VA monitor qualities, to an extent. But it does not speak of the general state of IPS, VA, or TN tech. Its an addon and it is not common.

 

[mtcn77]

I don't think anyone is, because its clear to see. I use a 120hz panel with 240hz BFI myself... VA, at that.
But. It is also tiresome to look at, much more so than non-strobing, there is a loss (halving) of luminance, and input lag increases. (Doubles)

Oh, so you hit me with,

You can step off the high horse now - you're not smarter than the rest.

You presume you have better discretion than the rest of the people, just for using an Eizo Foris 2421 while distinguishing its downsides? Talk about holding yourself to a different standard than the rest of the people...

but let's call a spade a spade. There is no battle to fight here, really.

I agree. It is self explanatory. You are arguing in circles.

 

[Vayra86]

Oh, so you hit me with,

You presume you have better discretion than the rest of the people, just for using an Eizo Foris 2421 while distinguishing its downsides? Talk about holding yourself to a different standard than the rest of the people...

I agree. It is self explanatory. You are arguing in circles.

It seems you're just keen to hold on to a failed argument that IPS is faster while producing less overshoot. It only does so when you use a strobing backlight, and that in itself is full of drawbacks and advantages. Spade = spade. A monitor with and one without strobe is not that. Its something else, and it usually has a price tag to match it.

In addition, strobe will do the same thing for a TN monitor as it does for an IPS. It has no weight on your statement that IPS is faster.

I don't presume to have better discretion, I am providing you with the arguments to see it from another angle. Do with that as you like, but I'd stay clear of the blanket statements regarding display tech. Those blanket statements are unchanged for over a decade. TN was always a little faster, IPS always more accurate, and VA always more contrast rich with a smear and higher G2G. In the other topics you are also advocating that something major has changed in displays. No, it hasn't. The marketing has gotten better, and things have become more refined. But that goes for all three monitor tech variants.

You can spend sixteen topics on that but it won't change.