Asus Rog Swift PG278Q

[Subyman]

Some people are saying the Swift will look just like an IPS with respect to color accuracy and vividness. This is incorrect. The viewing angles distort the color even when facing it head on. The angle between your eye and the top of the screen, even when facing the screen head on, is enough to cause a perceptible color shift. This is my main issue with TN panels.

No matter the color gamut or 8-bit this-and-that read by a sensor placed directly against the screen, we will be viewing the panel from several feet back causing a shift in color from left to right and, worse, top to bottom.

It is a trade off with this monitor. It may be worth it for some people, I am certainly interested in buying this monitor for gaming. But to say it is no longer an issue because is this an uber-TN or whatever, is not giving people the information they need to make a good choice.

 

[Grooveriding]

There is a great deal of compensatory function in the brain to process input from the eye. If there weren't using our vision would be a nightmare and it would not feel anything like it does for us without those compensations.

My guess would be subtle differences between individuals with these compensatory functions are what leads to the subjectivity of what we 'feel' when it comes to situations like this when playing games on different monitors.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

You don't really "see" blur. Rather you dont see any detail on an object you're tracking with your eyes. I'm sure you'd see the difference between a high hz crt and a high hz ips screen grooveriding.

 

[Grooveriding]

You don't really "see" blur. Rather you dont see any detail on an object you're tracking with your eyes. I'm sure you'd see the difference between a high hz crt and a high hz ips screen grooveriding.

Like I said earlier I do see the difference. There is a stark difference between 120hz and 60hz in fluidity of motion. But when I hear blur, I think actual blur like you experience when you are on a roller coaster and moving so quickly you can't process your visual input quickly enough leading to everything smearing together. I've seen some gamers say as much here, that they see a similar blurring - albeit to a lesser degree than being on a roller coaster I would guess - when gaming on slower monitors. We can call it 'seeing' or 'experiencing' but we're referring to the same thing with how you perceive the use of the monitor in front of you.

Using the roller coaster example above I'd suggest that some individuals experience that effect at a lower threshold of increased speed of motion than others do and is why this is all subjective.

 

[Mand]

There is a great deal of compensatory function in the brain to process input from the eye. If there weren't using our vision would be a nightmare and it would not feel anything like it does for us without those compensations.

This is also really important.

People talk about the off-axis color shift on the edges of the display, but in reality if you're looking toward the center of the display, your eye's color accuracy toward the edges of the display is already far below even a crappy TN. Your brain is filling in the rest, so I'm not sure you can really make a claim to how valid that perception is.

If you change where you're directly viewing to a corner, then you'll see the true, shifted colors, but for most gaming activity where you're looking roughly toward the middle of the screen you literally won't see the color shifts.

 

[beginner99]

I would buy it if it wouldn't look me into nv gpus for as long as I have it. Yeah I know it will run with AMD cards but you loose the features that make it so costly. And given that AMD cost almost half of nv...no brainer to buy an AMD gpu.

 

[Mand]

Like I said earlier I do see the difference. There is a stark difference between 120hz and 60hz in fluidity of motion. But when I hear blur, I think actual blur like you experience when you are on a roller coaster and moving so quickly you can't process your visual input quickly enough leading to everything smearing together. I've seen some gamers say as much here, that they see a similar blurring - albeit to a lesser degree than being on a roller coaster I would guess - when gaming on slower monitors. We can call it 'seeing' or 'experiencing' but we're referring to the same thing with how you perceive the use of the monitor in front of you.

Using the roller coaster example above I'd suggest that some individuals experience that effect at a lower threshold of increased speed of motion than others do and is why this is all subjective.

There are two kinds of blurring, spatial and temporal. Spatial blurring is caused by things in the optical system that don't change with time: not wearing your glasses, an anti-glare coating, high spatial frequency objects. Temporal blurring is caused by any sort of a changing signal, whether it's something changing position or pixels changing over time.

Your eye impacts temporal blurring rather substantially, because of how your eye integrates the input into an image. Your eye is not a camera - it does not have a discrete sampling interval, it samples continuously and updates the result continuously. Motion blur on a camera is caused by an object moving during the discrete sampling time, and so the same location on the object is laid over multiple pixels, and hence blurring. Motion blur for your eye is caused by anything at all that changes, from the pixels to what's being displayed on them to the motion of your head. Your eye does the best it can to interpret the changing signal.

The big impact this has for high refresh rates is that the continuous nature of the eye's temporal response has an impact on the tech we use to present images to it. If something changes, you see a blur - always. So when a pixel flips to a new pixel, your brain is still interpreting that with the previous state of the pixel, and for a brief moment you get a mix of the two. Then you have a "dwell time" on the new pixel, where it's interpreting just that one pixel's input, and then the pixel changes and the process repeats.

Blur reduction technology makes it so that the display goes dark during pixel transitions - so that you have only the dwell time with any luminance, not the transition time. This has a pretty dramatic effect on our perceptions, because now we just see a series of static, disconnected images, rather than one image that is smeared from one state to the next. If you make the flicker high enough frequency, we lose the ability to track that the luminance is going up and down as well, and everything looks great (with a reduction in average luminance, since the display is off part of the time).

If our eyes didn't work the way they did, blur reduction tech wouldn't work the way it does. Interesting things to think about.

Temporal blurring is also an issue for high-frequency IPS. IPS has a slower pixel transition time, and if this takes up more of the refresh interval, then you get more blurring because there's not as much dwell time. The sharpness and quality aren't blurred necessarily, but you're in effect blending one frame with the next frame if your eye doesn't have enough time to sit on a frame before the pixel starts switching to its next state.

 

[BrightCandle]

The scary thing is that even the best IPS monitors in the worst case take nearly 25ms to change a pixel. They can on average achieve 13ms but they almost never reach the spec sheet and the claims of the manufacturers of 5ms. Even at 60hz IPS screens aren't even done changing by the time the next screen comes along, which its why its not uncommon to have 2 screens worth of information bleeding into the current one. We do see those after images, we perceive the poor blur. Its well within the eyes tolerances, everyone can see it just not everyone cares. Blind trials on high speed panels have repeatedly shown that people can absolutely tell the difference. Its not really that some people don't notice, everyone does, its just that some people never saw better than what they are using.

All the reviews have mentioned the colour shift and said it does not impact at central viewing position, that isn't a concern with this particular model.

 

[Subyman]

This is also really important.

People talk about the off-axis color shift on the edges of the display, but in reality if you're looking toward the center of the display, your eye's color accuracy toward the edges of the display is already far below even a crappy TN. Your brain is filling in the rest, so I'm not sure you can really make a claim to how valid that perception is.

If you change where you're directly viewing to a corner, then you'll see the true, shifted colors, but for most gaming activity where you're looking roughly toward the middle of the screen you literally won't see the color shifts.

I don't believe that is true. The cone of vision, even if blurred, can tell a color shift. Many games do not have your eyes dead-locked on the center of the screen either. Any game with a HUD is an example.

FWIW, you can use optical/neural science to try to mitigate the negatives of a TN, but in the end, if people complain then that's all that matters. We could write a dissertation on how the TN should look fine because of chromatic aberration of the eye, optical corrections in the brain, yadda yadda. Or, I could simply look at the screen and say, yup I can see a color shift.

 

[Mand]

I don't believe that is true. The cone of vision, even if blurred, can tell a color shift. Many games do not have your eyes dead-locked on the center of the screen either. Any game with a HUD is an example.

FWIW, you can use optical/neural science to try to mitigate the negatives of a TN, but in the end, if people complain then that's all that matters. We could write a dissertation on how the TN should look fine because of chromatic aberration of the eye, optical corrections in the brain, yadda yadda. Or, I could simply look at the screen and say, yup I can see a color shift.

You only have good color vision in a 2 degree region directly where your eyes are looking. Everything else is done by your brain 'remembering' what good color looks like. A typical display angular size is at least 30 degrees, which means that by the time you get out to the corners your color perception is incredibly poor. At that point, it becomes impossible to separate the 'true' color of the display from what color your brain thinks the display is.

Education can change people's perceptions, you know. I'm not telling you that it should look good and you're wrong if you don't think so, I'm saying that there are very real psychophysical effects that play a significant role in our perception.

"All TN is bad" is an oversimplification. The effects are present, but it's much more complicated than is described in the typical discussion.

It's made even more complicated in that because of all the brain processing involved, people will see what they expect to see.

 

[Subyman]

You aren't taking into account the rapid movement of the eye. I don't dead-span stare at the center of my screen. My eyes rapidly fluctuate around the screen and can easily notice shifts of color.

I never, ever said "All TN is bad." I'm pointing out that there are inherent trade offs that are made. There were some that straight up said the 8-bit color makes this TN practically on par with IPS and I believe that is disingenuous for those looking to make a decision. I'm very interested in the Swift, but I am properly educated on the trade offs.

 

[Mand]

I never said you said that. Other people most certainly have, and I was attempting to address the more general complaint. My apologies if I came across as more directed toward you.

8-bit color makes an enormous, huge difference. "But there's still angular shift!" is true, but I have found too often that people saying that downplay the impact 8-bit color makes. The color shifts for direct viewing over the angular subtense of the display are fairly minor compared to that. So it's not invalid for people to say that it makes this TN practically on par with IPS. It is very close. Much of the time, the action is in the middle of the screen, where this display really does have performance on par with a good IPS.

There are always tradeoffs, but emphasizing the negative while downplaying the positive can give a skewed perspective. 8-bit is a huge improvement, and not everything about TN color has been fixed. Those are the basic facts, but it's an enormous difference between this TN and a typical TN because of 8-bit, rather than a slight difference between this TN and a typical TN because they still haven't fixed angular color shift.

 

[3DVagabond]

Given that Overlord was/is in talks with nV to develop a g-sync model, I wouldn't count out the idea of an IPS G-sync potentially with 120Hz as an option. With proper backing and R&D, there have to be folks trying to engineer that kind of panel. And if not IPS, then VA. While TN has advantages for FPS gaming, more options would certainly be better for everyone.

This^^^ is worth checking out.

True. I think Overlord even stated that g-sync was possible on their panels, but i'm not sure if that's in the works.

However, I don't think any IPS panel is capable of low motion blur technology such as lightboost or ULMB. That might not be a sticking point for some, though. But if you see the difference lightboost/ULMB makes, it is tremendous. I think this is a big selling point for the ROG swift - if you've seen lightboost, it really is a game changer if you have a game with super high framerates. (while g-sync covers lower framerates) Very noticeable difference. The only thing I don't like is that it [lightboost] lowers brightness a lot when lightboost is active but on the swift you can switch from ULMB to normal with a button press.

Wouldn't mind seeing it in action, although i'm hesitant in buying the swift just yet.

Seeing as how you can't use ULMB with Gsync, which is the feature that you are paying $100's more for, I find it's usefulness marginalized.

 

[jackstar7]

I never said you said that. Other people most certainly have, and I was attempting to address the more general complaint. My apologies if I came across as more directed toward you.

8-bit color makes an enormous, huge difference. "But there's still angular shift!" is true, but I have found too often that people saying that downplay the impact 8-bit color makes. The color shifts for direct viewing over the angular subtense of the display are fairly minor compared to that. So it's not invalid for people to say that it makes this TN practically on par with IPS. It is very close. Much of the time, the action is in the middle of the screen, where this display really does have performance on par with a good IPS.

There are always tradeoffs, but emphasizing the negative while downplaying the positive can give a skewed perspective. 8-bit is a huge improvement, and not everything about TN color has been fixed. Those are the basic facts, but it's an enormous difference between this TN and a typical TN because of 8-bit, rather than a slight difference between this TN and a typical TN because they still haven't fixed angular color shift.

Which 8-bit TN model have you seen/used? I have been primarily using IPS for a few years now (except for my BenQ), so I'd like to make that comparison.

 

[Mand]

Seeing as how you can't use ULMB with Gsync, which is the feature that you are paying $100's more for, I find it's usefulness marginalized.

ULMB and G-Sync are the same feature...they're both on the G-Sync module. You can't get one without the other.

jackstar7, most of the newer 4k TNs are 8-bit, so they should be representative. Beyond subjective experiences though, the numbers for the Swift are really quite good, especially if you compare them to a range of IPS panels like the reviewers have done. Color gamut, delta-e, gamma, that sort of thing. The shifting inherent to TN with viewing angle does remain, and if you're sensitive to it you will notice it. So far, reviews haven't shown much improvement over existing TN in this regard.

 

[jackstar7]

ULMB and G-Sync are the same feature...they're both on the G-Sync module. You can't get one without the other.

Not correct.

 

[Mand]

Not correct.

Which monitors have ULMB without G-Sync? I have never once seen them mentioned separately, not in any review or article or product.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

I find the large differences in opinion on what appears blurry fairly interesting. I use an IPS and don't see any blur and the one game genre where you would expect blur to actually even be a problem because of its fast paced nature; fps games - is also one where I don't see any blur. I definitely notice more fluid motion at 120hz than 60hz, but I don't see more or less blur using one or the other. Then on the other hand you have individuals who would see blur in that case and then those who wouldn't.

It's an interesting difference. I wonder if the increased susceptibility to perceived blur is a difference in brain activity and its ability to process the input from the eyes, a difference that for those susceptible can be overcome by a faster monitor. This would of been something interesting to explore in school.

There are definite advantages to a high refresh rate though, you get more updates to the screen in the same amount of time so you will see actions taking place in the game more quickly than someone at 60hz. Sitting down to game and having a blurry view as a result of a slower refresh rate and/or response time apparently is not a universal experience though and is down to an individual's personal susceptibilities.

what I find interesting is how deeply embedded your opinion appears to be despite not having any experience with LMB LCD (or at least you've never claimed to, and have only hinted at having just some experience handling a 120Hz IPS).

There are easy tests/tools to show just how poor LCD is when it comes to blur (PixPerAn's scrolling text test is a good one that immediately comes to mind, can be found here: http://www.blurbusters.com/motion-tests/tools/, along with others), even at 120Hz. Of course the problem is that one needs a monitor faster than a plain 120Hz LCD to see just how poor LCD is, and with enough time one can become acclimated to the difference, i.e. people who "don't notice the blur" don't know that what they're seeing should be any different and thus don't think twice about it. The real test is whether or not one can truly experience LMB LCD and can then bring themselves to go back to anything less without regret.

when it comes to less motion blur, 120Hz strobed LCD >>> 120Hz LCD > 60Hz LCD

at the end of the day, I am a little disappointed we still have to settle for compromised LCD tech rather than have something that can bring back all the glory of CRT (color better than IPS, blacks/contrast better than VA, and speed faster than TN) but in the convenience and consistency of flat panel displays. But when it comes to it, I'm glad we at least now have a fast (ie 144Hz/120HzLMB) LCD option at a resolution higher than 1080p, and for now the Swift is the only choice, so I don't really have any reason to complain.

 

[kasakka]

Some people are saying the Swift will look just like an IPS with respect to color accuracy and vividness. This is incorrect. The viewing angles distort the color even when facing it head on. The angle between your eye and the top of the screen, even when facing the screen head on, is enough to cause a perceptible color shift. This is my main issue with TN panels.

No matter the color gamut or 8-bit this-and-that read by a sensor placed directly against the screen, we will be viewing the panel from several feet back causing a shift in color from left to right and, worse, top to bottom.

It is a trade off with this monitor. It may be worth it for some people, I am certainly interested in buying this monitor for gaming. But to say it is no longer an issue because is this an uber-TN or whatever, is not giving people the information they need to make a good choice.

Coming from an IPS panel, the TN viewing angles on the PG278Q are a minor annoyance at best. Yes, there is slight color shift at the top but it's so slight that I don't think it's anything to worry about unless you are really anal about such things.

Otherwise the display is very nice for sRGB colorspace, can't notice any tint with stock calibration and the viewing angle issue is not the dealbreaker some of you seem to think it is. I was skeptical about the same thing at first but sitting here typing on the screen I'm glad I bought it.

There still isn't a perfect display for everything and we will probably need a whole new display tech for that to happen (or OLED to become truly viable in desktop screens), but for now unless you're doing color critical work like print graphics or something then the ASUS is a pretty solid choice.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Which monitors have ULMB without G-Sync? I have never once seen them mentioned separately, not in any review or article or product.

I think he was only objecting to how you basically describe them as the same thing, as they aren't really the same feature like you claim.

ULMB is a feature included into G-Sync monitors, but it isn't necessarily a feature that will always be included. For instance, I doubt we'll see it included in the 4K G-Sync monitors as we're currently limited to 60Hz at that resolution due to the bottleneck with DisplayPort (would need DP1.3 to get 4K120), unless they can get those monitors to run at 85-120Hz if they are run at 1080p (which would be a pretty awesome feature)

There still isn't a perfect display for everything and we will probably need a whole new display tech for that to happen (or OLED to become truly viable in desktop screens), but for now unless you're doing color critical work like print graphics or something then the ASUS is a pretty solid choice.

at this point I don't really have much confidence in OLED anymore, QD LED seems to have more promise, but there really isn't an obvious front runner to replace LCD. What's more is that with the unnecessary death of Plasma in the HDTV realm thanks to 4K LCD, I've got a bad feeling that we're going to be stuck with LCD even longer.

 

[blackened23]

For $899 you can get the Dell 27" IPS 1440p Ultrasharp, which blows the swift right out of the water apart from responsiveness if you are sensitive to it. For the quality of image delivered, that Dell will make the swift look like a turd.

That's actually hilarious because if you read the monitor forum at HardOCP, nearly every user that buys a Dell these gets a unit with backlight bleed and uneven color. In fact I was reading about the 2713H and it seemed like 8 out of 10 users had to return their unit because of backlight bleed. Dell isn't what it used to be, but I will give them this: Their CS is excellent. If you get a dud, even 5 in a row, they'll ship you another monitor. Furthermore, washed out grainy image is not inherent to TN, not sure where you pulled that out of the hat. IPS gives you better color accuracy than MOST TN panels (but not the swift) and better viewing angles, worse response times, and more noticeable blur.

IPS has its place but no panel type is perfect. TN isn't perfect, IPS is far from perfect, VA isn't perfect, anyone stating any panel is perfect is nuts. It's ALL ABOUT trade-offs.

I said it before but Linus from linustechtips is one of the biggest IPS panel junkies on the planet. Before the swift, he was using the 3440x1440 Lg panel which was his favorite. He stated in his Swift review that the Swift looks excellent even by IPS standards, but of course the viewing angles issue which isn't an issue if you're a single monitor gamer. IIRC he even said he was considering using the Swift as his daily monitor, it was that good.

 

[Subyman]

Coming from an IPS panel, the TN viewing angles on the PG278Q are a minor annoyance at best. Yes, there is slight color shift at the top but it's so slight that I don't think it's anything to worry about unless you are really anal about such things.

That is exactly what I'm talking about. There is a perceptible color shift, which potential buyers should know about. I'm sensitive to those things and can easily notice them, so for someone like me, that description is very important.

Thanks for letting us know that you can, indeed, notice a color shift even if you aren't anal about screen quality.

 

[jackstar7]

What Mr. Fubbles said, and additionally, ULMB is just the latest iteration of the Lightboost tech, which was initially hacked for LMB experiences by users. ULMB specifically (under this branding) is basically new in name only. The Eizo monitor with their Turbo240, and BenQ's Blur Reduction also exist and are not tied to nV's tech.

You can get a blur-reduced experience without also having a g-sync monitor.

 

[Grooveriding]

I haven't seen anyone here say any panel is perfect, you need a re-read before you wind up qualifying for your label.

I've also seen Linus' review and he said exactly what I've been saying; you can still tell it's TN and it's still not as good as IPS in the metrics IPS excels at, regardless of all the hype. It's good at what it's marketed on; response times, gsync, high refresh rate and less blur as a result of those metrics for those susceptible to it.

 

[blackened23]

Seeing as how you can't use ULMB with Gsync, which is the feature that you are paying $100's more for, I find it's usefulness marginalized.

Any competitive gamer that has experience with it, will attest to it being excellent. It works. I assume that AMD won't be getting anything equivalent to motion blur reduction technology since they've said nothing about it. G-sync covers the low framerate area, lightboost/ULMB covers high framerates.....Anyway, so if AMD doesn't get it, you won't get it on an official basis. (I assume, since nvidia poured their R+D dolloars into it) Maybe hacks will still work, I don't know.

But if you don't need it or don't want it, it's just another vote with your wallet issue. It's really that simple. There's nothing inherent about IPS that prevents g-sync from being used, but being that it's being targetted to gamers right now...it seems natural that the initial monitors are being tied in with gamer-centric features like 144hz and ULMB. IPS can happen for both g-sync and free-sync, there is nothing preventing it. But with IPS you get a worse experience at super high framerates, although should be comparable at low framerates.