ASUS ROG SWIFT PG278Q

[CannedLobster]

So I saw Linus' review of the amazing ultra-wide 34" LG screen and I thought it was just as amazing as he seemed to think it was. I love having a lot of "physical" space on my screen (as opposed to 4k which I would consider "virtual space" because it's not a bigger screen but just more in the same screen. I don'tk now if "physical" and "virtual" space are the correct terms in this case -- Anyway...) so I was so sold on getting getting it but after also seeing his opinion on the ASUS ROG Swift PG278Q and making a thread about that and seeing the responses. I figured that 27" was big in and of itself, the 2560x1440 added more "virtual space" on top of that, and then of course the 144hz Gsync. So I've decided on the ASUS I'm hoping it's as good as people say it is, because it certainly has a price tag on it.

My question though, (I have no idea why I wrote that entire first paragraph, it's not relevant to my asking the question, haha) it's 2560x1440 *and* 144hz, that's obviously going to impact performance.

In the future, assuming I can't upgrade at the time. A: Can you toggle it down to 60hz and regain some of that performance? And B: Can you downgrade to 1080p without the resolution getting 'muddy' because it's non-native?
 

[Jodomcfrodo]

60hz has no performance hit. Scaling down to 1080p seems worthless. 

 

FINAL ANSWER: If you don't have the hardware to drive it, don't buy it.

[Toddwjp]

you cannot toggle down to 1080p its not a perfect scalar, yes you can toggle down to 60hz (doesn't matter with g sync though). what's your current rig?

[MrGoat]

I was having a hard time deciding between those monitors as well. I went with the Swift over the 21:9 screen simply due to the fact that I for the most part play PC games, and I feel I certainly made the right choice. Once you go 144hz + G-sync it is almost impossible to go back now. Also, the "IPS glow" of those 34" 21:9 screen scared me away.

 

Yeah, it takes a little more horse power to run, but less than the 1080p @ 16x AA I was using before. Yes you can toggle down to 60hz (there's also options for like 85hz and 120hz) but I really don't see the point of ever doing that, especially on a g-sync capable monitor (that is if your GPU supports that feature). You can downgrade the resolution, but it will look muddy, that just happens on ANY monitor when you run less than the native resolution.

 

Either monitor is fantastic, I've seen all the LG 21:9 monitors in person and they really do look great. But, me personally, the advantages you get in games is worth it for the Swift.

 

Also, I am pretty sure the 34" 3440x1440 will be a pretty hard to drive resolution as well if you do go the 21:9 route for gaming.

[CannedLobster]

60hz has no performance hit. Scaling down to 1080p seems worthless. 

 

FINAL ANSWER: If you don't have the hardware to drive it, don't buy it.

No, 60 has no hit, but I always hear people saying "if you have the hardware for 120hz+ do it" so running 120 or 144 must have a hit?

Scaling down to 1080p wouldn't be worthless if the MS is struggling though. Just like 1080 to 720 wouldn't?

But right now I most definitely have the hardware. My PC has a GTX 980, 16gb 2133 ram, i7 4790K, etc. I'm just thinking of the 'future'.

[CannedLobster]

you cannot toggle down to 1080p its not a perfect scalar, yes you can toggle down to 60hz (doesn't matter with g sync though). what's your current rig?

GTX 980, 16gb 2133 ram, i7 4790K, etc.

I wasn't asking the OP question to see if I can do the ROG, I most definitely can. I'm just saw a recent benchmark (http://static.gamespot.com/uploads/scale_medium/1444/14441398/2384284-bf4-fr.png) between 1080p and 1444(p?) and the performance hit was pretty heavy and I'm thinking of how bad that would be in the future for games like Witcher 3 and even better looking games, you know?

[Toddwjp]

GTX 980, 16gb 2133 ram, i7 4790K, etc.

I wasn't asking the OP question to see if I can do the ROG, I most definitely can. I'm just saw a recent benchmark (http://static.gamespot.com/uploads/scale_medium/1444/14441398/2384284-bf4-fr.png) between 1080p and 1444(p?) and the performance hit was pretty heavy and I'm thinking of how bad that would be in the future for games like Witcher 3 and even better looking games, you know?

dont worry about that bench mark you will be fine, you can just turn aa down since you have more pixels, plus its g sync so it wont matter at all.

[Jodomcfrodo]

No, 60 has no hit, but I always hear people saying "if you have the hardware for 120hz+ do it" so running 120 or 144 must have a hit?

Scaling down to 1080p wouldn't be worthless if the MS is struggling though. Just like 1080 to 720 wouldn't?

But right now I most definitely have the hardware. My PC has a GTX 980, 16gb 2133 ram, i7 4790K, etc. I'm just thinking of the 'future'.

It doesn't have a hit on performance. It is harder to run yes, but has no performance hit. If you can run the game at 75 fps while on a 60hz monitor, you can run 75 fps on a 144hz monitor. 

 

EDIT: I meant 144hz has no hit in my original post. 

[CannedLobster]

I was having a hard time deciding between those monitors as well. I went with the Swift over the 21:9 screen simply due to the fact that I for the most part play PC games, and I feel I certainly made the right choice. Once you go 144hz + G-sync it is almost impossible to go back now. Also, the "IPS glow" of those 34" 21:9 screen scared me away.

 

Yeah, it takes a little more horse power to run, but less than the 1080p @ 16x AA I was using before. Yes you can toggle down to 60hz (there's also options for like 85hz and 120hz) but I really don't see the point of ever doing that, especially on a g-sync capable monitor (that is if your GPU supports that feature). "

 

Either monitor is fantastic, I've seen all the LG 21:9 monitors in person and they really do look great. But, me personally, the advantages you get in games is worth it for the Swift.

 

Also, I am pretty sure the 34" 3440x1440 will be a pretty hard to drive resolution as well if you do go the 21:9 route for gaming.

IPS glow?

But yeah, people seem so amazed by 144hz and I'm definitely an "FPS whore" so I can imagine how much I'll enjoy the smoothness. G-sync obviously just sounds great, to be able to have vsync on without a performance hit? Yes please.

"You can downgrade the resolution, but it will look muddy, that just happens on ANY monitor when you run less than the native resolution."

Yeah, that's what I figured. I just had this crazy idea (hope) that for some reason, with this odd 1444 resolution and all the g-sync and 144hz "stuff" it would be able to run 1080p natively as well, haha.

 

[CannedLobster]

It doesn't have a hit on performance. It is harder to run yes, but has no performance hit. If you can run the game at 75 fps while on a 60hz monitor, you can run 75 fps on a 144hz monitor. 

"It doesn't have a hit on performance. It is harder to run yes, but has no performance hit."

I'm sorry but this makes no sense to me? How is it harder to run then? Do you mean that it just requires newer hardware but doesn't actually hit performance, you just need new hardware the same way you need new motherboard sockets for CPUs?

"If you can run the game at 75 fps while on a 60hz monitor, you can run 75 fps on a 144hz monitor."

100%? All games?

[CannedLobster]

Also, jsut to anyone..

What's the difference between 120 and 144 from a personal point of you (I ask because google is just going to tell me it's "more amazing" because sales)
120 delivers the smoothness. 144 just seems redundant?

[MrGoat]

Also, jsut to anyone..

What's the difference between 120 and 144 from a personal point of you (I ask because google is just going to tell me it's "more amazing" because sales)

120 delivers the smoothness. 144 just seems redundant?

 

Not much. Some people may disagree. Although it makes me feel better in games like Quake Live (capped at 125fps) because I get to see the extra 5 frames on screen as opposed to just 120. I personally can't tell much a difference, but I do like the option.

[Jodomcfrodo]

"It doesn't have a hit on performance. It is harder to run yes, but has no performance hit."

I'm sorry but this makes no sense to me? How is it harder to run then? Do you mean that it just requires newer hardware but doesn't actually hit performance, you just need new hardware the same way you need new motherboard sockets for CPUs?

"If you can run the game at 75 fps while on a 60hz monitor, you can run 75 fps on a 144hz monitor."

100%? All games?

I don't think you understand what hz means. Think about it as FPS. If your monitor is 144hz it can refresh 144 per second. So if you get 144 fps it will display it. But if you have a 60hz monitor, the monitor can only refresh 60 times a second. So anything above 60 fps is useless because the monitor can't display it. To take advantage of a 144hz monitor, you need get 144 fps. (It will work with less fps but why use a 144hz monitor if you only can get 60 fps in games?) That's why it is technically harder to run but won't hurt your performance. Hopefully this makes sense to you now.

[CannedLobster]

I don't think you understand what hz means. Think about it as FPS. If your monitor is 144hz it can refresh 144 per second. So if you get 144 fps it will display it. But if you have a 60hz monitor, the monitor can only refresh 60 times a second. So anything above 60 fps is useless because the monitor can't display it. To take advantage of a 144hz monitor, you need get 144 fps. (It will work with less fps but why use a 144hz monitor if you only can get 60 fps in games?) That's why it is technically harder to run but won't hurt your performance. Hopefully this makes sense to you now.

No, I do know what the hz are but I admittedly do not know the "science" behind it all I've ever heard though is people who always keep talking about "if you have the hardware to back it up" - Pretty sure I've heard Linus say that as well. So I assumed that was because it has a performance hit.

"But if you have a 60hz monitor, the monitor can only refresh 60 times a second. So anything above 60 fps is useless because the monitor can't display it."

Oooh, this I didn't know, though.

"(It will work with less fps but why use a 144hz monitor if you only can get 60 fps in games?)"

Right exactly, I guess this is what they mean when they say "if you have the hardware to support it" because it's literally useless if you don't have a PC that can get you to that kind of FPS.