Worlds First 360Hz Monitor Detailed & Launching in September 2020

[warmongerp]

1 hour ago, EnVii said:

There’s no MP game I have any issues getting 360+ on 1080p with a mix of Medium/High/Ultra settings. 
 

So pretty much all / any of them. 
 

 

Play tarkov.

[Kisai]

2 hours ago, valdyrgramr said:

Test arena shooters and bullet hells on it.  Also, Doom Eternal.

Don't confuse screen latency from input latency. Rhythm games have been around since 1998. The problem is that there is too much latency between input and output. Increased framerates do not improve that. Only removing things getting in the way does. We're not going back to the Playstation/SNES style input anytime soon.

 

So in the mean time the best way to deal with Rhythm games (eg Osu!) and Danmaku (Bullet Hell) type of games is to make monitors higher resolution with less latency (eg no software upscaling, no monitor-based upscaling)

https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/inputs/input-lag

 

Note how the latency varies from 10ms to 100ms in "game mode", versus 15ms to 150ms without game mode. 10ms = 100fps, that's the upper tier of what's possible right now.

[Dredgy]

I’ve just never got high refresh rate monitors. I used a 30hz generic monitor next to an Asus 144Hz for years and never could tell the difference outside of like the UFO benchmark. I still have 2 of the Asus ones and just don’t use them, I consider resolution/ppi/ colour/adjustability as wayyy more important metrics.

 

Likely my iPad is 120Hz and can’t tell any difference between that and my old one.

[Bombastinator]

3 minutes ago, Dredgy said:

I’ve just never got high refresh rate monitors. I used a 30hz generic monitor next to an Asus 144Hz for years and never could tell the difference outside of like the UFO benchmark. I still have 2 of the Asus ones and just don’t use them, I consider resolution/ppi/ colour/adjustability as wayyy more important metrics.

 

Likely my iPad is 120Hz and can’t tell any difference between that and my old one.

Different strokes for different folks.  Probably has to do with the way a persons brain or eyes are wired or something.  30-144 is pretty extreme.  I can tell 30 from 60 from 120 but I can’t tell 144 from 240. 
 

im actually having serious problems with some of the witcher3 boss fights at 60fps because stuff moves too fast and all I see are strobe shots of the avatar half way through a spin or something. I can’t go above 60fps with the hardware I got though.  Maybe I’ll buy a 144 screen and see if 90 helps.  I think I can hit 90 with my gpu.

[Moonzy]

$699 doesnt sound too bad

might get one for the hell of it, even though no games i play other than osu runs above 300fps

 

as for if 144hz and 240hz make a difference, it does for me, i can aim better with 240, and few ms sooner too (based on avg offset measured by the game)

 

but some of my friends cant even tell between 60 and 240 until i open nvidia pendulum test so -shrug-

 

one issue i have with high refresh rate is that the blur is still present when panning in FPS games, but that might just be my 240hz having a craptastic panel

[Kisai]

4 minutes ago, Moonzy said:

$699 doesnt sound too bad

might get one for the hell of it, even though no games i play other than osu runs above 300fps

 

as for if 144hz and 240hz make a difference, it does for me, i can aim better with 240, and few ms sooner too (based on avg offset measured by the game)

 

but some of my friends cant even tell between 60 and 240 until i open nvidia pendulum test so -shrug-

 

one issue i have with high refresh rate is that the blur is still present when panning in FPS games, but that might just be my 240hz having a craptastic panel

Osu can only be properly played with a touch-screen, the people I see playing it use cheap Huion display tablets or pen tablets that can't possibly be above 60hz. It's kinda strange really since it's a game designed around something you'd find on an iPad, but isn't available on the iPad itself.

 

[Moonzy]

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

Osu can only be properly played with a touch-screen

that's... a whole other topic on its own imo

arguably it's a different game if you play it on touchscreen

 

but yes, touch screen normally dont go above 60Hz since it's not meant for "gaming" _{i got yelled at by a wacom representative when i RMA my tablet}

 

but the flow of the cursor is important for aiming

so the smoother it is, the better your can train your muscle memory

 

as for people thinking it helps with high AR (approach rate, time of circle appearing before you are supposed to hit it)

some people read AR11 (300ms) on 60hz, but imo it doesnt help in that aspect that much from 144 to 240hz

Spoiler

 

given my reaction time to visual stimulus is ~180ms (measured here)

and typical mouse input to screen action latency of about 30ms (not sure if it's included in the test tho)

I have about 90ms to move my cursor to the circle

60hz to 240hz is a 12ms frametime difference, which is 13% of that time

but 144hz and 240hz is only about 3ms difference, which is like 3%

 

meaning you need to move your cursor way faster just to get there in time on 60hz, compared to 240, making chances of misaiming more likely to happen, but 144hz and 240hz doesnt have much differences in this regard

 

the numbers may not be accurate but you get my point

furthermore, osu is a RHYTHM game, meaning you can somewhat anticipate where the next circle will appear if you know the typical patterns and rhythm of the song

 

tl;dr imo it's the smoothness of the aim that helps, not the latency

as for how much it helps, probably not so much that it warrants sprinting out to buy the monitor immediately if you already have a 144hz

[Kisai]

14 minutes ago, Moonzy said:

that's... a whole other topic on its own imo

arguably it's a different game if you play it on touchscreen

I tried it with a display tablet, it's clearly not designed for it, yet Huion sells $25 pen tablet just for this game, that's cheaper than some game controllers.

 

Quote

but yes, touch screen normally dont go above 60Hz since it's not meant for "gaming" _{i got yelled at by a wacom representative when i RMA my tablet}

The Wacom rep probably didn't expect people to use their tablets for non-gaming purposes. Which yeah if you're paying for a cintiq that might be true, but the cheap tablets you just wear through the nibs like crazy anyway.

Quote

but the flow of the cursor is important for aiming

so the smoother it is, the better your can train your muscle memory

 

as for people thinking it helps with high AR (approach rate, time of circle appearing before you are supposed to hit it)

some people read AR11 (300ms) on 60hz, but imo it doesnt help in that aspect that much from 144 to 240hz

Indeed, even if you have a high refresh monitor, you're basically at the mercy of the audio synchronization.

 

Quote

  Reveal hidden contents

 

given my reaction time to visual stimulus is ~180ms (measured here)

and typical mouse input to screen action latency of about 30ms (not sure if it's included in the test tho)

I have about 90ms to move my cursor to the circle

60hz to 240hz is a 12ms frametime difference, which is 13% of that time

but 144hz and 240hz is only about 3ms difference, which is like 3%

 

meaning you need to move your cursor way faster just to get there in time on 60hz, compared to 240, making chances of misaiming more likely to happen, but 144hz and 240hz doesnt have much differences in this regard

 

the numbers may not be accurate but you get my point

furthermore, osu is a RHYTHM game, meaning you can somewhat anticipate where the next circle will appear if you know the typical patterns and rhythm of the song

 

tl;dr imo it's the smoothness of the aim that helps, not the latency

as for how much it helps, probably not so much that it warrants sprinting out to buy the monitor immediately if you already have a 144hz

I don't believe it would help above 100hz unless you're playing something that is intentionally 240bpm+, since there's a synchronization element to the bpm (eg 4 beats per second, requires 250ms to hit,) and unlike a keyboard or game controller, you have to actually see and move the mouse or fingers. By which then yes, you'd have to work from muscle memory.

[Moonzy]

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

cheap tablets you just wear through the nibs like crazy anyway.

thats why i put tempered glass_{for fablets} on my tablet

used to go thru 1 nib every month

now i only changed my nib once after a year of using it on TG, though it does make it very slippery

 

6 minutes ago, Kisai said:

I don't believe it would help above 100hz unless you're playing something that is intentionally 240bpm+, since there's a synchronization element to the bpm (eg 4 beats per second, requires 250ms to hit,) and unlike a keyboard or game controller, you have to actually see and move the mouse or fingers. By which then yes, you'd have to work from muscle memory.

i dont really understand your point

[straight_stewie]

I'm a little lost, what is the benefit of a monitor with a refresh rate that fast?

Does that benefit still hold if you can only generate frames at say, 75hz, for example?

[Moonzy]

3 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

Does that benefit still hold if you can only generate frames at say, 75hz, for example?

No at all if you have VRR

 

very little benefit if you don't, like almost negligible

[Tech_Dreamer]

at this rate 60hz is gonna be retro tech soon.

[FeIIex]

Very cool for the competitive space, though I am a filthy casual.

 

Ultrawide 144hz is adequate for my needs.

[EnVii]

10 hours ago, Escanor said:

Yeah i know but i much rather avoid lenovo i would rather sell my soul to Samsung and if mostly boycotted them since past experiences.

Was my first ever Lenovo product,

 

It was a solid, well built monitor, no issues with performance and imo, currently one of the best monitors you can buy. 
 

Idk where you’re based, but in the UK, it’s risk free to try pretty much any product bought online, however I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend it. 
 

9 hours ago, comander said:

 

You get diminishing returns VERY quickly... VERY. 

Panels only refresh so quickly, network latency becomes an issue... heck KEYBOARD latency can be an issue. 

So they say but in the real world, there is still a difference. 
 

My experience, countless videos showing performance improved, Nvidia’s research and yeah ok, a +4 difference might not be huge even if they spin it as Olympics was +1% of a difference between Silver & Gold, but, 

 

If my hardware can do it, I would rather see FIFTY PERCENT more frames, than not. 
 

I have zero issues in games getting that high, will only be easier with RTX 3000 series. 
 

Anyway, this is a good read if you think 240/360 is a “limit”:

 

https://blurbusters.com/blur-busters-law-amazing-journey-to-future-1000hz-displays-with-blurfree-sample-and-hold/

 

 

9 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

They did testing  many months ago with pro gamers using experimental monitors, who were the only ones that got any material benefit out of 240 over 144.  They couldn’t find any advantage in 360 over 240.  Remember 360 is only a 50% improvement over 240 and to get a material gain they needed a near 100% improvement to get from 144 to 240z. It went 24 to 30, 30 to 40, 40 to 60, 60 to 90, 90 to 144(or 120 depending on how you count it) and 144 to 240.  Diminishing returns.   The next step up wouldn’t be 360, it would be nearer 500.

If you watch any video of anyone on YouTube actually seeing the 360Hz monitors, they would disagree. 
 

Yes, small difference as it’s not 2x the increase, but difference there is. 
 

It’s still progress. 
 

It’s one step closer to 480Hz. 
 

Or even 1440p 360Hz. 
 

Technology like OLED & MicroLED can already achieve response times as low as 0.1ms. 
 

So higher refresh rates isn’t impossible beyond 360/480/960/1000+. 
 

The point is, if your system can push those numbers, why even limit to 120/144. 
 

It’s easy to see the difference between that and 240 - once people weren’t even accepting of this. 
 

The difference will be small, but everyone so far has concluded, smoother it is, clearer it is. 
 

More information is what you get, it either matters to you or “120/144 is good enough” in which this, this monitor isn’t aimed at you

 

3 hours ago, straight_stewie said:

I'm a little lost, what is the benefit of a monitor with a refresh rate that fast?

Does that benefit still hold if you can only generate frames at say, 75hz, for example?

 

Someone who can drive that screen, will get 360 frames per second. 
 

The previous Max was 240/280. 
 

So it’s progress, smoother image, lower latency, more precise aim & shoot. 

[Kisai]

27 minutes ago, EnVii said:

 

Technology like OLED & MicroLED can already achieve response times as low as 0.1ms. 
 

So higher refresh rates isn’t impossible beyond 360/480/960/1000+. 
 

The point is, if your system can push those numbers, why even limit to 120/144. 
 

 

Because the trade off is never worth it, and people barely care.

 

120fps can pass only because it's easy for monitors to frame-double if they have a 60hz input, but that goes out the window for everything above it. Only does a developer care about having a solid even factor-of-1000, because that means the micro-stutters can disappear by not having frames land on either side of a divisor fraction. 60hz output is 1000/60 or 16.666666666667ms per frame. So you end up with fractional frames that eventually lead to a micro-stutter.

 

But that's all beside the point. In some ways this is like having a V16 engine in a car, but only ever driving it inside the city limited to 35MPH when it's capable of 350MPH. There are other impediments to hitting a higher speed, and one of those is the driver of the car. Something more powerful tends to be more for style than substance.

 

So just because you have a 360hz monitor, doesn't mean you are playing any game that has a 360hz render loop. More than likely the variable frame rate will have the game averaging 120hz like any other monitor and only kicking 360fps to the monitor where the complexity from the GPU can deal with it. Relevant to now, in order to get a HD1080p360 output you would need oh probably a SLI dual RTX 2080 at the moment, and only because the bandwidth on each card isn't enough for a single card to do 360 as the highest performing card (2080Ti Founder) tops out at 290fps... in VRMark. And two 2060 Super's likely can't squeak by with the overhead needed. And G-sync tends to lower frame rates in SLI mode.

[CarlBar]

6 hours ago, Dredgy said:

I’ve just never got high refresh rate monitors. I used a 30hz generic monitor next to an Asus 144Hz for years and never could tell the difference outside of like the UFO benchmark. I still have 2 of the Asus ones and just don’t use them, I consider resolution/ppi/ colour/adjustability as wayyy more important metrics.

 

Likely my iPad is 120Hz and can’t tell any difference between that and my old one.

 

Speaking from experiance when i built my 970Ti system several years ago i went from around 30 FPS to 60 in a huge rnage of games and i noticed an immediate improvement in how well i did in game. I couldn't see the difference visually, but it improved my actual game-play.

 

@Kisai

 

1. They've done tests, (including LTT itself), it actually matters to have refresh rates over 144hz in some games for some people. It varies with the individual and the game, but it's absolutely a benefit under some circumstances. 

 

2. The kind of games this monitor is aimed at can and do routinely put out the neccessery frame rates.

[Senzelian]

Cool.

So whens relevant technology like OLED and micro LED coming to monitors?

[EnVii]

2 hours ago, Kisai said:

Because the trade off is never worth it, and people barely care.

 

120fps can pass only because it's easy for monitors to frame-double if they have a 60hz input, but that goes out the window for everything above it. Only does a developer care about having a solid even factor-of-1000, because that means the micro-stutters can disappear by not having frames land on either side of a divisor fraction. 60hz output is 1000/60 or 16.666666666667ms per frame. So you end up with fractional frames that eventually lead to a micro-stutter.

 

But that's all beside the point. In some ways this is like having a V16 engine in a car, but only ever driving it inside the city limited to 35MPH when it's capable of 350MPH. There are other impediments to hitting a higher speed, and one of those is the driver of the car. Something more powerful tends to be more for style than substance.

 

So just because you have a 360hz monitor, doesn't mean you are playing any game that has a 360hz render loop. More than likely the variable frame rate will have the game averaging 120hz like any other monitor and only kicking 360fps to the monitor where the complexity from the GPU can deal with it. Relevant to now, in order to get a HD1080p360 output you would need oh probably a SLI dual RTX 2080 at the moment, and only because the bandwidth on each card isn't enough for a single card to do 360 as the highest performing card (2080Ti Founder) tops out at 290fps... in VRMark. And two 2060 Super's likely can't squeak by with the overhead needed. And G-sync tends to lower frame rates in SLI mode.

 

What??

 

Like I said, 2080 Ti, easily with the right settings get to 360+ at 1080p...

 

I will be taking full advanatge of this monitor for sure.

 

In a few weeks when I have it, I'll do a video with my thoughts, I'm sure many other reviewers will too.

 

Each one said it was smoother, clearer to the eye than even 240Hz, from the few videos of this back in CES 2020.

 

 

 

"I took an early Asus 360Hz monitor for a whirl at the Las Vegas show in January—which feels like a strange dream at this point in 2020—and I can confirm the refresh rate is great in practice. This is definitely not your everyday panel, however, so stay tuned for our full Asus ROG Swift PG259QN review"

 

"“This new ROG Swift 360Hz PG259QN has created a noticeable improvement in my performance," says Bugha, the 2019 Fortnite World Cup champion. And he definitely wasn't coached into saying that by his sponsors."

 

https://www.pcgamer.com/uk/asus-to-launch-360hz-gaming-monitor-next-month-for-dollar699/

 

[EnVii]

1 hour ago, Senzelian said:

Cool.

So whens relevant technology like OLED and micro LED coming to monitors?

 

OLED probably not happening, 

 

MicroLED probably within 5 years.

[Bombastinator]

24 minutes ago, EnVii said:

 

What??

 

Like I said, 2080 Ti, easily with the right settings get to 360+ at 1080p...

 

I will be taking full advanatge of this monitor for sure.

 

In a few weeks when I have it, I'll do a video with my thoughts, I'm sure many other reviewers will too.

 

Each one said it was smoother, clearer to the eye than even 240Hz, from the few videos of this back in CES 2020.

 

 

 

"I took an early Asus 360Hz monitor for a whirl at the Las Vegas show in January—which feels like a strange dream at this point in 2020—and I can confirm the refresh rate is great in practice. This is definitely not your everyday panel, however, so stay tuned for our full Asus ROG Swift PG259QN review"

 

"“This new ROG Swift 360Hz PG259QN has created a noticeable improvement in my performance," says Bugha, the 2019 Fortnite World Cup champion. And he definitely wasn't coached into saying that by his sponsors."

 

https://www.pcgamer.com/uk/asus-to-launch-360hz-gaming-monitor-next-month-for-dollar699/

 

Like several people already have done.  Years ago.  You think because you’re the first person trying a consumer device that no one has tried the technology before? It’s been tested a long time ago.  It’s worthless.  Just because it’s worthless doesn’t mean someone won’t sell it to you though.  This thread reminds me of the one on cancer and radio waves. 

[Blademaster91]

The difference from 144hz to 240hz is noticeable in some situations, but I don't get what the benefit of a 360hz monitor would be.

And $800 for a 1080p  monitor? An  IPS/VA 1440p 144hz or 240hz monitor would definitely be a better buy for most people.

[Benjamin22044]

Already a fan of this for its features. I can hardly imagine how good it would be for the gaming nerds. Just keeping my fingers crossed for the price of the device and waiting for it to launch. 

[Bombastinator]

19 minutes ago, Benjamin22044 said:

Already a fan of this for its features. I can hardly imagine how good it would be for the gaming nerds. Just keeping my fingers crossed for the price of the device and waiting for it to launch. 

I can.  They aren’t good imaginings though.  The worry I have is people are going to treat 360hz the way some wine connoisseurs  treat wine or some audiophiles treat $2,000 earphones: pretending they can detect a difference to make them seem less stupid. 

[CarlBar]

1 hour ago, Bombastinator said:

I can.  They aren’t good imaginings though.  The worry I have is people are going to treat 360hz the way some wine connoisseurs  treat wine or some audiophiles treat $2,000 earphones: pretending they can detect a difference to make them seem less stupid. 

 

Some people can detect the diffrances in that though. Remember when LTT did their high refresh rate tests, from memory all but one person benefited from the jump from 60hz to 144hz, but only 1 person benefited from the jump from 144hz to 240hz. I'd expect the 240hz to 360hz jump to be significantly more rare for people to benefit from That dosen't mean no one will benefit.

[Bombastinator]

1 hour ago, CarlBar said:

 

Some people can detect the diffrances in that though. Remember when LTT did their high refresh rate tests, from memory all but one person benefited from the jump from 60hz to 144hz, but only 1 person benefited from the jump from 144hz to 240hz. I'd expect the 240hz to 360hz jump to be significantly more rare for people to benefit from That dosen't mean no one will benefit.

But 144 to 240 is a much bigger jump.  If it was 240-450 you might get that “significantly more rare” thing, but this is just 240-360 a mere 50%. I suspect “none-almost none” would be more likely.  Which is in that wine connoisseur /audiophile range.