ASUS Now Holds More Than 40% Market Share of Gaming Monitors

[Mr_Troll]

ASUS Now Holds More Than 40% Market Share of Gaming Monitors

 

ASUS is one of the leading manufacturers of gaming monitors on the market right now and according to a report published by Digitimes it gained significant market share in the last year and now holds more than 40% of the gaming monitor market. The PC market has continued its trend of becoming more niche-focused, with the high-end increasing and the low end evaporating. Companies like ASUS have benefited from this change greatly

 

 

 

ASUS gains market share in gaming monitor market – 34” 21:9 Ultrawide monitor arriving soon
 

 

Gaming monitor shipment reached a number of 800,000+ monitors shipped. The primary difference in the market of today is that end-users are now increasing focus on fast-monitors. Till a few years ago, the most a user would look at was a good resolution or a good panel. Now not only the response time is sought to be as low as possible but a wide plethora of features such as Free Sync, G-Sync and more have caused demand in these “Fast-monitors” to increase – diversifying them from the general purpose monitor market.

 

The 800,000 numbers accounts only for sales in US, Europe and Taiwan and out of these 800,000 units, at least 300,000 are accounted for just by ASUS. The company has been building its ROG swift lineup of monitors which offer a very wide variety of features – tailored to exactly what the gamer in question is looking for. If you lean heavily on resolution,

 

A lot of this could be down to the strong ROG Swift line of monitors. The company released its 4K flagship (the PG27AQ) this year which not only supports G-Sync but houses a 4k/60 panel on a beautiful 27 inch screen. Based on the ever so popular IPS panel technology, the display has incredibly accurate color reproduction and very wide viewing angles. The monitor stand features a wide range of adjustments including full tilt, swivel, pivot and height adjustment. Complimenting this beauty is the MG279Q – a 1440p WQHD 27 inch screen with 120 Hz refresh rate and a 5ms response time. There is also a PG278Q variant with refresh rate up to 165 Hz.

 

The ASUS ROG Swift PG348Q is expected to cost upwards of $1200

 

 

One of the caveats of the gaming monitor technology (even right now) is the fact that Twisted Nematic or TN panels provide far superior refresh rates and response times (As low as 1ms) whereas this is very difficult to achieve with an IPS panel design – something which is reflected in the price tag given by the manufacturers. A 34 inch 3440×1440 screen will also be arriving soon from ASUS – the ASUS PG348Q. It will feature a refresh rate of upto 100 Hz, will support G-Sync technology, and will ship for an expected MSRP above the $1200 mark! It was originally stated to arrive by January or February at the latest

800 000 monitors shipped?... impressive number Asus. Too bad that u mostly do overpriced Gsync monitors.

 

Source: http://wccftech.com/asus-40-market-share-34-inch-pg348q/

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20151215PD203.html?mod=2

 

 

 

[jurian123]

Old news , but its good for them. 

[ZetZet]

If Dell wasn't stupid they would have made gaming monitors too.  :mellow:

[Lays]

"overpriced g-sync monitors" you call them, yet people are buying em like hotcakes  :rolleyes:

[Paralectic]

They did a great job, but because there is a high demand they have a meh quality control.

[Will_Man_Dude]

If Dell wasn't stupid they would have made gaming monitors too.  :mellow:

 

Dell makes a 144hz, 1440p, G-Sync Gaming monitor that looks very professional and is cheaper than the rog swift.

[Guest Kloaked]

800 000 monitors shipped?... impressive number Asus. Too bad that u mostly do overpriced Gsync monitors.

 

Ah yes, Mr. Troll is being himself again.

[Majestic]

 

000 monitors shipped?... impressive number Asus. Too bad that u mostly do overpriced Gsync monitors.

 

They are not overpriced, FPGA's (the modules) are expensive to make. They are more expensive than Freesync monitors, sure. But Freesync also has a lower effective range, and an arbitrary one at that with absolutely 0 quality control. People paying extra for products that have a tightly controlled quality-control and produced by a reputable and succesful company, who would've thought huh.

 

 

So bizarre. 

 

Also, please don't project your bias into news reporting. It's disingenuous.

[Paralectic]

"overpriced g-sync monitors" you call them, yet people are buying em like hotcakes  :rolleyes:

Same thing with iPhones.

[Lays]

They are not overpriced, FPGA's (the modules) are expensive to make. They are more expensive than Freesync monitors, sure. But Freesync also has a lower effective range, and an arbitrary one at that with absolutely 0 quality control. People paying extra for products that have a tightly controlled quality-control and produced by a reputable and succesful company, who would've thought huh.

 

So bizarre. 

 

 

....economics 101.

 

 

I didn't say they were overpriced, OP did.  I have an ROG Swift and I fuckin love it, worth every penny I spent

[Prysin]

This explains why their product lineup is looking less and less impressive by the quarter, with blander and blander announcements

[Majestic]

I didn't say they were overpriced, OP did.  I have an ROG Swift and I fuckin love it, worth every penny I spent

 

Ill reqoute it then from the OP, misread that.

[ZetZet]

Dell makes a 144hz, 1440p, G-Sync Gaming monitor that looks very professional and is cheaper than the rog swift.

They do now. But they still don't have great value options. Most ASUS sales come from VG248QE.

[LokiFire]

They did a great job, but because there is a high demand they have a meh quality control.

Much like mobo's.

[don_svetlio]

Dell master race!

[Prysin]

They are not overpriced, FPGA's (the modules) are expensive to make. They are more expensive than Freesync monitors, sure. But Freesync also has a lower effective range, and an arbitrary one at that with absolutely 0 quality control. People paying extra for products that have a tightly controlled quality-control and produced by a reputable and succesful company, who would've thought huh.

 

So bizarre. 

 

 

....economics 101.

The latest freesync monitors are within 1fps Of Gsync at their lowest threshold. Couple that with AMD's recently frame duplication features, and even PcPerspective commended AMD for catching up to Gsync in terms of functionality and features.

However due to being an open standard monitor makers can choose to make a monitor so shit that AMD's drivers cannot compensate

[Guest Kloaked]

This explains why their product lineup is looking less and less impressive by the quarter, with blander and blander announcements

 

Yeah. They keep releasing fagbox material amirite?

[ThomasD]

Dell makes a 144hz, 1440p, G-Sync Gaming monitor that looks very professional and is cheaper than the rog swift.

Yes, but is it considered a "gaming monitor?"

 

Because if not, it's sales do not count for purposes of this press release.

 

This isn't so much news as advertisment for 2357.TW

[Ctown0812]

I had an Asus VG248QE.  Probably the best monitor I've ever owned. 

[Majestic]

The latest freesync monitors are within 1fps Of Gsync at their lowest threshold. Couple that with AMD's recently frame duplication features, and even PcPerspective commended AMD for catching up to Gsync in terms of functionality and features.

However due to being an open standard monitor makers can choose to make a monitor so shit that AMD's drivers cannot compensate

 

Those are probably not the cheapest Freesync monitors...

 

And yeah, like i said. It's the lacking quality control that makes people avoid it. Many people criticise Nvidia for making everything a closed system, but it's the only way you can guarantee a certain quality. Yes they can make their GPU's ready for Freesync, but they have no control over that market (and not in a nefarious way) so they can't guarantee their standard of quality. Much like not giving SLI certifications to 16x4x boards.

 

I understand their position, it's a smart position. It enforces consumer confidence (because nvidia is confident about their product), and is what makes Nvidia more succesful. Yes AMD does everything "open source" and "free". But tbh, open source is way overrated. It rarely goes anywhere and usually means the ones who want to put it onto the market have to invest the R&D, instead of AMD. With the G-sync monitors, companies can just simply create a plain monitor, add the module wholesale and put it onto the market.

 

And which person, wanting to shell out 600-800 euro for a monitor wants to run a risk of getting some 75-90hz panel. When 100 euro more would've gotten him a 1-144hz panel.

[That Norwegian Guy]

 

 

 

 

They are not overpriced, FPGA's (the modules) are expensive to make. They are more expensive than Freesync monitors, sure. But Freesync also has a lower effective range

 

 

 

You may want to stay up to date on AMD drivers if you're going to participate in discussions where you squirt out absolutist falsehoods.

 

Freesync now goes just as far down as G-sync

Overdrive works

Multi-monitor works

Crossfire works 

 

The only thing Freesync users don't get to enjoy compared to G-sync users is the joy of paying $80-£$150 for no additional features.

[Majestic]

You may want to stay up to date on AMD drivers if you're going to participate in discussions where you squirt out absolutist falsehoods.

 

Freesync now goes just as far down as G-sync

Overdrive works

Multi-monitor works

Crossfire works 

 

The only thing Freesync users don't get to enjoy compared to G-sync users is the joy of paying $80-£$150 for no additional features.

 

Not. All. Of. Them.

 

That's the problem. Read the whole fucking comment please. And again, the extra price is the FPGA, not the licensing.

[Maslofski]

i do like this monitor

[dragosudeki]

snip

I agree with what you are saying, but I'd like to add to that. The open source idea can potentially make businesses more competitive in terms of features. Nvidia's way definitely enforces a quality standard, however I'd like to see monitor companies try to compete with each other like that. Perhaps, competition like this can drive prices down? Additionally, I don't like how the GPU companies have to push out all the new technologies for other industries.

[Majestic]

I agree with what you are saying, but I'd like to add to that. The open source idea can potentially make businesses more competitive in terms of features. Nvidia's way definitely enforces a quality standard, however I'd like to see monitor companies try to compete with each other like that. Perhaps, competition like this can drive prices down? Additionally, I don't like how the GPU companies have to push out all the new technologies for other industries.

 

Which is exactly why G-sync was necessary, just like Mantle was. No company was willing to take the risk. And especially in a market where companies are this unwilling to deviate from what is "in" (look how every company follows MSI's colorscheme, or how everyone now uses RGB), i'm not really hopeful open-source will be picked up properly.

 

Only now are scalercompanies putting in effort to achieve g-sync level of quality. The first models were half-arsed to say the least.