ASUS 27-inch ROG Swift PG27AQ 4K Gaming Monitor with NVIDIA G-SYNC and IPS

[patrickjp93]

Ultra yes, no AA.

 

Who buys a 4K monitor only to play at low graphical settings?

 

Edit: Ninja edit.

You don't need AA with 4K, and yet some people refuse to believe that...

 

Shadows from high to ultra don't offer any better fidelity, but the solver is 12 iterations deeper, so big performance hit. 

[cae]

I'd love to be wrong, but I can't help but think that most of these "gaming" IPS monitors coming out are going to disappoint when compared with the "professional" IPS monitors from a color & quality standpoint.

 

I'd still like a smooth and automatic G-Sync to ULMB transition; maybe in 2016. 4K and 60Hz sounds fine for what we have now, like PhillBert says, it'll take a lot of graphical horsepower to try and max that out.

[Real_PhillBert]

You don't need AA with 4K, and yet some people refuse to believe that...

 

Shadows from high to ultra don't offer any better fidelity, but the solver is 12 iterations deeper, so big performance hit. 

I said nothing about needing AA on 4K, I was correcting your assessment that the benchmarks I linked used 4x AA; but you edited that out of your post.

 

I stand by my statement that if you have to sacrifice graphical fidelity down to low settings, your machine is not really ready for 4K. People often just buy 4K monitors for their gaming machines prematurely for the epeen.

[patrickjp93]

I said nothing about needing AA on 4K, I was correcting your assessment that the benchmarks I linked used 4x AA; but you edited that out of your post.

 

I stand by my statement that if you have to sacrifice graphical fidelity down to low settings, your machine is not really ready for 4K. People often just buy 4K monitors for their gaming machines prematurely for the epeen.

Sorry that particular bit wasn't aimed at you, just people who still exist thinking you will always need AA.

 

That's fine, but I'm saying the difference between high and ultra for a number of things is negligible for the performance hit you will take to move up to ultra. It's a sort of "pick your battles" idea I'm trying to get across.

[Real_PhillBert]

Sorry that particular bit wasn't aimed at you, just people who still exist thinking you will always need AA.

 

That's fine, but I'm saying the difference between high and Ultra for a number of things is negligible for the performance hit you will take to move up to ultra.

 

I would 100% agree with that There is always a point of diminishing returns. 

[elevul]

Too small.

[Speedbird]

Asus be like "Bro, do you even display?"

[miyabwah]

this will be a really expensive monitor. :}

[McMurderMonkey]

Cool, if I was one of those people who spends like $10,000 on a gaming setup.

[freemini]

If they don't overprice this, I might consider it over the P2715q. Considering the 1440p Swift is insanely expensive, I'm not keeping my hopes up at all.

[Mooshi]

Dropping the "ROG" name and "For Gamers" fluff will probably drop the price tag a few hundred alone.

[TroubleKlef]

WOW!

 

WANTTTTT!!!

[godsarmy]

epic

[infamous_last]

Personally would like to see 4K gsync/freesync screens pop up in around the 40" size.

Would retain good pixel density while being a great gaming experience.

[That Norwegian Guy]

Gsync with no 144hz = useless 

 

Most dimwitted thing I read all day.

[matin94]

hmm im confused, i thought g-sync monitors had to be 144hz to be effective. i know it can be 60hz but youd get stutter if u dip below 60

 

also they say IPS. but while back AUO came out and announced working on AHVA panels ((Advanced Hyper Viewing Angle). which is basically TN with advanced viewing angles. so im not sure what if will look like in real life. ROG SWIFT has pretty amazing colours for TN, but we'll see.

[PerfectTemplar]

Most dimwitted thing I read all day.

Although G-sync isn't really useful below like 40 fps. That was a stupid thing to say indeed. If one could maintain 40-60 fps @ 4K G-sync would be great.

[Si3Rra_7]

Most dimwitted thing I read all day.

Gsync was supposed to eliminate stutter AND tearing , like this is just a better adaptive-vsync. It's just my opinion , that monitors with gsync thay dont support higher refresh rate than 60 are not worth putting possibly huge amounts of money into

[OlekKing]

All we need now is 4K, IPS, 144Hz with g-sync/free sync.

No, no we don't.

Two 980s still won't max out every recent game in 4K at a solid 60 fps, once the top single GPU is able to do that, then maybe we should start looking at 120hz+ 4K.

[freemini]

No, no we don't.

Two 980s still won't max out every recent game in 4K at a solid 60 fps, once the top single GPU is able to do that, then maybe we should start looking at 120hz+ 4K.

Or in a parallel world where 3-way SLI actually works as well as 2-way.

[sweenytodd]

32 inch, 4K, ips, 144hz, almost no bezel = let's have a deal, next year maybe?

[Nit3Rid3R]

Now please give me a nice 1080p 24inch IPS G-Sync monitor. 

[MrSuperb]

even 120Hz would need at least Displayport 1.3

[GrimNeo]

I doubt this will do 1440p at 144Hz because my ROG Swift does not even do 1080p over 60Hz. Only 1440p does that for the 1440p version of rog swift.

[cubercaleb]

Who gives a shit about 144hz at 4k, your games won't run that well at that res. Since this is 4k it should easily scale down to 1080p without interpolation, making it better than a 1440p monitor. If it can do 120/144Hz at 1080p then I will be happy.