The only concern I have with this is that ASUS is one of the only companies yet to actually mention input lag in their monitors. Other manufacturers e.g. BenQ, LG, Viewsonic, AOC, Iiyama have all at some point implemented a feature to reduce it. That's not to say that ASUS monitors have had high latency previously, just that it would be nice to see a bypass additional processing feature just to confirm they see it as a real requirement for gamers.

G-Sync support should mean that it's low anyway, but I'll wait for reviews from PCMonitors & TFTCentral before buying myself.

Why there can be concern about input lag?
It's native 240Hz panel. I saw ASUS fucked up only once and it was with some their mouse firmware that caused high input latency.

cool story bro, anyway tests are cool and surely better to see results before buying

Refreshrate just tells how many images get drawn per second, while input delay tells how long one of those images needs to travel from your gfx-card to being visible on the screen:
You can have a 1000Hz monitor that draws insane 1000 images in one single second, but it will be worthless when the stuff it shows is delayed by 1 minute behind your actual mouse movement.

I know what is refresh rate and input lag. I made tons of tests with 1200fps camera, g100s with LED at mouse button and several monitors. And from these tests BenQ XL2411T, ASUS PG278Q and this prototype have almost equally input lag.
May be he knows some arguments or facts about modern monitors. That's why I asked.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_9c3INVKQY

Ah ok, in this case I misinterpreted

Why there can be concern about input lag?
It's native 240Hz panel.

as if you assume that high input lag would be excluded by a high refreshrate. Second sentence still seems random to me.

Is there a link to your test results and test conditions? Was it a relative comparison of monitor_a versus monitor_b or an absolute measurement in [ms]?

I'm sure that ASUS aren't rookies at monitors production.
And since that I highly doubt their new premium and fastest in the world 240Hz monitor on newest panel (since it's 24.5") will have high input lag.

Setup:
quakelive with stable 250fps and huge hud crosshair with shape of big rectangle at full height of screen.
left mouse button binded to change crosshair to white one and right mouse button to black one. LED connected to right mouse button.
mouse is g100s. it's 500Hz (2 ms) mouse with a low button lag.
camera captures all screen and LED and records 1200fps.
number of frames between LED lights up and start of crosshair color changing is latency on my setup (1000ms/1200fps = 1 frame is 0,8333ms).

xl2411t avg 9.61 ms. min/max is 6.67/12.5 - 43 measurements
prototype avg 9.74 ms. min/max is 7.5/11.67 - 52 measurements
pg278q avg 10.42 ms. min/max is 7.5/12.5 - 53 measurements

sample video of test https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp9TxZMKK-4

nihongo wakarimasen

N1.

He is right. You can have 144hz and 25ms input lag, which is still shitty. I'd rather have 120hz with 5ms input lag than 240hz and 15ms input lag. Hopefully it's 240hz with low input lag but it would be incredible on TN. Some new tech like OLED would be less suspect :)

Yup. It's low on the newest PG279Q (IPS), low(ish) on the PG278Q (TN) and VG248QE (TN). In theory it will therefore be low on the PG248Q (TN) and PG258Q (TN) too, but since they don't actually talk about it we won't actually know for sure until someone tests for it!

In ASUS I trust

Right in time for all those tense and demanding Overwatch battles.

what's the expected cost ?
does it need a G-sync graphics card :?

no information given about price.
nvidia card needs for g-sync. at regular mode no nvidia card needed.
just look at this:


with this shit it must cost $400+

could be really fucking expensive actually:

https://www.scan.co.uk/search.aspx?q=g-sync

Sounds very promising.

Anyone remember the tech speeches about how TN panels would never be able to exceed 75 or something Hz? :D

pecka i dont have money for this shit man

anyone know the release date for this?

2017 minimum

Q3-Q4 2016 expected.

nice, I keep checking the asus site to see release but can't find it!

better check big online stores

Are there much benefits if my pc cant handle >240 fps anyway?

i think not

in ql or any "old" quake game like quakeworld etc, where you can get 250+fps, 240hz seems promising. For Reflex too.

otherwise i don't see the point of playing for example DOOM or Overwatch at 120-150fps with a 240hz monitor.

Because u can. :D
On a more serious note, it will be closer to crt in feel. Tho tbh I play on 2233rz first generation 120HZ and it's good enough for me.

Since this monitor is actually available in austria since the beginning of july. Does anyone already have one and can share any experience on this?

Edit: Ah bullshit ... mistook it for the ASUS ROG Swift PG248Q, 24" which got 180Hz *doh* Anyone got this one?

PG248Q (180Hz) is available.
https://pcmonitors.info/asus/asus-pg248q-180h...c-monitor/
http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2945

Thanks man, that is what i was looking for.

I can't recommend it for upgrade of current 144Hz panel for regular players because 180Hz isn't great with this moire and PG258Q (native 240Hz on new 25" TN panel) coming in 2-6 months.

Would be pretty sweet to see a 1080Ti and 240hz monitor around the same time, then QC? :D

then 120fps limit at QC? xD

"The game can reach 120Hz if your computer can support it and it also sports an uncapped frame rate" - Willits

His word can be taken with a very large cup of salt though ;)

With a humongous bowl of donuts and 3 bricks of coke rather.

gl hf

will give my thoughts in a few days

Nice!

okay, so firstly I'm not really into rockets and prefer hitscan weapons so I feel I'm the target audience for this monitor.

With three 240hz monitors all hitting the market at loosely the same time (Zowie, Asus Rog (hereon referred to as 'Roggy', AOC AGON) I spent a decent amount of time reading the various tests on TFTcentral , the forums on Blurbusters and basically anything I could find on the internet to aid my decision. Naturally I found a dizzying amount of contradictory experiences and technical analysis - usually resulting in prolonged arguments about whether 240hz would (a) be perceptible over 144 (b)suffer from input lag issues (c) have any advantage of 140hz with ULMB.

I based my decision to buy the more expensive Roggy over the others as it seemed to have more favorable reviews and I already owned a G-Sync GPU (the Zowie utilizes freesync)

Unpacking thoughts:

Looks a bit gay with the stand, the light that is also emitted from the bottom of the stand looks gay too. I'm comfortable with who I am but my computer is located in my bedroom and I don't want to be perceived as being a hardcore Asus Republic of Gamers Rogger style-gamer by others.

Another worry is that the led from the stand will (over a long period) effectively tattoo the ROG logo onto my wooden desk, making it aesthetically and sentimentally worthless.

Compatibility issues:

Throughout all of my research I had never read this once but the 240hz mode is only functional on specific Nvidia graphics cards (GTX 745, 750, 770, 780 +). Unfortunately I own a 760 and despite it being more fundamentally capable than the 745/760, doesn't support 240hz so runs a maximum of 200hz.

Performance:

For basis of comparison my previous monitor was a Benq XL2411T (~3 years of use)

During unboxing I was careful to leave everything intact as some forum arguments had made me dubious as to whether I'd notice a difference or not, in which case I intended to return the monitor back.

After setting 200hz G-Sync and joining a QL server I knew this wasn't the case, movement seems dramatically smoother, crisper with zero tearing, zero ghosting and even the crosshair/mouse feels more responsive/sharp. The colours also are much more vivid and lack the 1987 VHS home camcorder style over-saturation that was present on the Benq.

There is an inbuilt 'OD' function with three settings, normal, icantremember and extreme. At 200hz the extreme setting showed artifacts and some trails. On all of the other settings no trails/artifacts were noticeable.

I've yet to try 200hz without G-Sync so I can't objectively say how much effect this has.

After 5~ hours of playing I switched to 144hz which seemed obviously less smooth. It's possible my eyes are more perceptive to these changes than other people who claim no possible difference.

I've just ordered a GTX1060 so I can enjoy this monitor at the intended 240hz.

It's an expensive monitor but initially it's impressed me.

FUCK YOU MAN

Somebody hide my wallet.

Can we come over and try it out sometime buddy?

yeah sure, I live in the city center in Manchester

nice one jb

Imo there's no real reason to switch from your nice LG. Except maybe better colors, but still.

agreed, the colours on other weapons in QL are really nice but you should never switch from LG, this monitor is perfect for a hitscan aimer like yourself

I have the same 24GM77 and it really is perfect for hitscan. Best performance / value monitor for gayming imo.

What do you think of the ViewSonic XG2401?

Competent, but I seriously doubt that it worths that extra ~60 bucks - and the colors of the LG are still probably better, so as the OSD.

Even more connectivity options with the LG, which is hands down the best 144Hz TN imo. The 3 day factory pixel warranty over the 3 year standard warranty is also a nice addon.

I'd say he's exagerating a bit on the benefits. I reviewed the benq on here a few months back. A updated benq is coming soon with blur reduction. who knows if it will be worth using though.

it's just my opinion, it'd be interesting to compare it IRL with the Zowie

gsync works fine at middle-low fps (40-60), for mp games is useless (all -sync add little lag, so disable it when you play).
Tell your impression when you will able to try at 240hz :)

G-Sync doesn't add input lag. Only if you can output higher FPS than 238 will it have higher input latency, because naturally feeding quicker frames = lower latency.

Ye, you're right, maybe a couple ms not in all situations, so nothing/marginal.
And freesync?

Although the idea of having more than 200 frames outputted on the screen per second, I just don't see the benefit of it if you're a casual gamer since most people cannot really tell the difference between a 144Hz monitor and a monitor with more than 200Hz refresh rate.

I think we're talking about MP games not SP :>

is there a monitor being made that can do ulmb at 144hz? i prefer a slight increase in refresh rate with near perfect blur reduction than a 240hz monitor with high motion blur.

have you tried a 240Hz monitor before saying u prefer 144?

yes, the benq xl2540 at 240 and before that acer z35 at 200hz, both very blurry and nothing like using a crt. that's why i'm stuck using xl2720z along with blur busters strobing tool. 0.5 persistence and changing vertical total to 1502 gives a clear, crisp image at the expense of colors and some input lag (roughly 2 ms more delay)

would love to try a CRT to see what it's like vs the rog!

k, played @ 240hz with the gtx1060 now for a few days
it's even smoother.
there's a few times I've started ql and presumed I was @ 240 when it was @ 144hz and I've noticed instantly, it's really obvious

I don't know how anyone could say there's not a big difference, it's just that much smoother

also been testing ULMB @ 144hz vs 240hz gsync,
the blurbursters ufo test shows it compartively cleaner but there's absolutely no doubt that 240hz gsync is much smoother

My understanding of G-SYNC is that if your FPS reach the same as your refresh rate, it changes to V-SYNC and adds input lag.

I assume that this means the 240Hz monitor allows up to 238 FPS (as per NVC's comment, below) in G-SYNC before going into V-SYNC at 239 and above.

By Descent nvc - Reply to #41
G-Sync doesn't add input lag. Only if you can output higher FPS than 238 will it have higher input latency, because naturally feeding quicker frames = lower latency.


I've always been cautious of this and forcibly set most games to 120 FPS whilst using my 144Hz g-sync AOC monitor but being able to use a 240Hz monitor with FPS over 200 would be pretty sweet!

thats only people talking out of their ass... whoever tested this out can easily notice differences between 120 or 140, or160 and 200 hz

Using 144hz on this benq 240hz monitor feels like it has added input lag compared to a normal 144hz monitor. So comparing it that way isn't a good way to compare them. idk about the asus one though. Yeah the difference is pretty noticable but I wouldn't overstate it.