The World's First 300hz GAMING Laptop

[JonoT]

 

[Princess Luna]

Because 240hz wasn't enough of a marketing gimmick

[WereCat]

6 minutes ago, Princess Luna said:

Because 240hz wasn't enough of a marketing gimmick

I'll just copy paste what I said on Anandtech... 

 

300Hz vs 240Hz seems impressive but...

240Hz is 4.16ms per frame
300Hz is 3.33ms per frame

so a 0.83ms improvement which is ridiculously small difference and very likely unnoticeable, especially when considering the fact that there is likely no game that matters which will run at perfectly locked 300FPS with no frame time variance as that will make the 0.83ms "advantage" null.

It's nice to see refresh rates going up but in this case it's nothing but a marketing gimmick.
It's a waste to have this kind of display on a laptop where you will be CPU limited most of the time before you can reach 300FPS.

Really the only advantage as of right now is that this will make tearing even less noticeable... if you don't have adaptive sync for some reason.

 

 

I haven't seen the LTT video yet, I'll check it out later. 

[Jurrunio]

Make more than esports titles run above 144fps with laptop hardware first plz

[Princess Luna]

1 minute ago, WereCat said:

.

My main upset is that all the flagship laptops are either 4k60hz or 1080p240hz and now 300hz much wow, and not a single one has settled for the true sweetspot in-between at 1440p144hz.

 

We don't even know if the screen GTG and response time can handle 300hz, and yeah it gets to a point the frametime is just so narrow it hardly matters any more, for anyone wondering this Gamer Nexus video explains well our point:

 

Cheers!

[Radium_Angel]

It said "300Hz" and I was thinking CPU speed and this was going to be some kind of retro review...

[kameshss]

I'll show you a laptop with 4100 MHz

[porina]

Absolutely worthless. If only it was 301 Hz, then it'll be great  

 

25 minutes ago, WereCat said:

I'll just copy paste what I said on Anandtech... 

I saw that comment, didn't realise it was you  BTW that was on an Acer, this is an Asus. They're all at it...

 

25 minutes ago, WereCat said:

so a 0.83ms improvement which is ridiculously small difference and very likely unnoticeable

Agree in the limited context, but I also wonder if there is a scenario of "every little helps". Shave a ms off the display, shave a ms from high poll rate peripherals, get better network condition. Those individually insignificant ms start to add up.

[Akira Shimazu]

300HZ? like CS:GO 2080ti? Harvard marketing graduated

[WereCat]

24 minutes ago, porina said:

Absolutely worthless. If only it was 301 Hz, then it'll be great  

 

I saw that comment, didn't realise it was you  BTW that was on an Acer, this is an Asus

Wow... I really haven't even noticed 

[displayname147]

it is just me or this last 7 days are full with sponsored content?

from Mophie showcase to 3 sponsored asus videos of their own product that somehow are not a "showcase" with 1 more video of asus monitor..

love ltt project videos. dont like the sponsored clickbaity ones.

how reviewing a sponsored battary pack is a showcase but reviewing a sponsored laptop is not?

[Guest]

There's no physical way for a single human being to detect the difference between 300Hz and 240Hz. It's just not scientifically possible. People have done measurements on the responsiveness of the human eye and it's barely close to 240Hz. (in fact, the common agreed upon value is 150fps)

It's a gosh darn gimmick and nothing else. Linus Media, I understand you probably get some nice money from Asus but is it really worth spreading misinformation?

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

I'll be honest here.  When I read that title, I thought they were referring to clock speed instead of refresh rate.  I was like "dude, you're a couple decades late".

[SolarNova]

Pointless increase over 240hz.

 

HOWEVER

 

If the constant race for higher refresh rates results in a drive to speed up pixel response times. I'm all for it.

 

That said, im very interested to see if any1 bothers to thoroughly test the panel.

 

Linus mentions that the panel is 300hz 3ms.

 

3ms is fast enough BUT

and its BIg BUT

 

Manufactuers have a very well known tendency of stating response times that a VERY unrealistic and cherry picked using Massive amounts of overdrive and almost always being MINIMUM response times, and on very very rare occasions 'average' response times.

At no point have i EVER seen a manufacture state 'maximum' response times, nor have i ever seen a response time figure that ends up being accurate to competent and trusted 3rd party review sites like rtings.com.

 

So, while they say 3ms , and thats fast enough (4.16ms being the target figure or lower), i HIGHLY doubt that ALL pixel transitions are going to be fast enough. Simple reason being, there is currently no known LCD display that is fast enough even for 240hz without significant levels of overdrive that result in massive amount of inverse ghosting / haloing artifacts. Even at 144hz the story is pretty much the same, with only a couple monitors capable of handling 144hz legitimately , but at the cost of terrible image quality.

[Mnky313]

"They were first to 120hz in 2016"

No, no they absolutely were not... Workstation laptops had 120hz displays for YEARS (even my M6700 from 2012 had an option from the factory for a Nvidia 3D Vision 1080p 120hz display, Info in my signature about the panel). If you want to go off purely gaming laptops, the Alienware 17 R5 (2014) had an option for a 120hz panel as well...

[an actual squirrel]

One of the interesting things are the implications for playing without adaptive sync. At 300hz, the tearing is on screen for so little time, that freesync/gsync may not really be necessary anymore. The benefit of playing at a fixed refresh rate is that you can really tune the overdrive to squeeze the absolute best pixel transitions out of the display, since you know exactly how long you have to transition.

[pApA^LeGBa]

"Back in the 120, 144hz days" Seriously? I mean 144hz might be the majority right now. But i am not even sure about that. I am still FHD 60hz. All my friends execpt one also are. Some people are on WQHD or 4K with 60HZ.

 

I´d say 50% are on 120/144hz, 10% higher, the rest on 60/75hz.  Propably even to optimistic there.

[Streetguru]

10 hours ago, JonoT said:

 

Guys old source games run at 1000fps, I am disappointing to not see CS 1.6 benchmark here.

Shoulda whipped out the edzel and made him play 1.6 on it.
 

 

[Granular]

Symbols for units named after people start with a capital letter. Have some fucking respect for Heinrich Hertz.

[FlappyBoobs]

44 minutes ago, Granular said:

Symbols for units named after people start with a capital letter. Have some fucking respect for Heinrich Hertz.

The rental car guy? /S