hello guys, i would like to ask if the the ROG swift is worth its price? I am running 2 970s atm , and i am planning to get a 1440p moniter ,i like its features but the reviews aren't promising , any advices? Thank you!
ROG swift
The Swift is good but it's overpriced, you're practically paying for the ROG logo, much like Corsair stuff, Acer sells cheaper G-Sync 144Hz 1440p TN monitors and they also sell 144Hz 1440p IPS monitors which go about the same price as the Swift, they're also just as good. But I don't think you'll be able to achieve 144 FPS at 1440p with SLI GTX 970s especially considering they practically have just 3.5GB of VRAM which will make VRAM a problem in games like GTA V, going with 144Hz 1440p means lowering settings in games and maybe even lowering textures a bit. If you really want a 1440p monitor, get the cheapest 60Hz 1440p IPS monitor you can find.
Thanks for the reply bro , i would like to know what is the recommended screen size for such resolution? And are viewsonic screens good?i saw QHD viewsonic monitors at pcandparts so that i skip the shipping part but if they aren't good or their price here is skyhigh i prefer shipping.
At 1440p the best screen size is 27", both 24 and 25" are good too. Viewsonic are and alright manufacturer, their screen aren't this great, and I think the price on PCandParts may be a little expensive. Shipping from outside might be the only good choice. Get the ASUS PB278Q or the BenQ GW2765HT.
6 days later
@Bahij.M
List of G-Sync-enabled monitors - 144 Hz / 1440p
Acer XB270HU 2560x1440 27" 144 Hz IPS
Asus ROG Swift PG278Q[9] 2560x1440 27" 144 Hz TN
Acer Z35 2560x1080 35" 144 Hz VA
Asus PG279Q 2560x1440 27" 144 Hz IPS
List of FreeSyn-enabled monitors - 144 Hz / 1440p
Acer XG270HU 27" 2560x1440 (QHD) 16:9 144Hz TN
Benq XL2730Z 27" 2560x1440 (QHD) 16:9 144Hz TN
A Side Note:
"When your game’s FPS dips below the minimum refresh rate. Say 39 FPS
while using the Acer or BenQ monitors G-Sync and
FreeSync deal with the situation quite differently. With FreeSync the
monitor would simply revert back to a fixed refresh rate that matches
the lowest refresh rate that the panel is capable of. So 40Hz in the
case of the Acer and BenQ monitors and 48Hz in the case of the LG
monitor. At this point you will have to choose whether you want to run
V-Sync to mitigate tearing in exchange for input latency or run without
V-Sync and get tearing. And because the monitor’s running at its
minimum refresh rate rather than its maximum both the input latency and
the tearing become more pronounced.
G-Sync was setup in earlier G-Sync monitors to deal with the
situation not very differently than FreeSync, the monitor would simply
fix at the maximum refresh rate resulting in increase of input latency.
However it isn’t as severe as with the FreeSync behavior, as the monitor
would be fixed at the maximum rather than the minimum refresh rate. But
unfortunately with G-Sync, Nvidia doesn’t give you the option of V-Sync
off or on, it would always stay on so you can’t get rid of that latency
in exchange for tearing. However I would still consider that fixing the
monitor to the maximum refresh rate rather than the minimum to be a
superior solution. Fortunately this would only require a driver update
to change the current behavior of FreeSync below the minimum refresh
rate, which I do hope AMD seriously considers.
G-Sync employs a very clever trick in its latest iteration. Unlike
the previous G-Sync behavior below the minimum refresh rate G-Sync now
wouldn’t simply fix the panel at the maximum refresh rate. Instead the
panel will display the frame at a refresh that’s twice the FPS.
Let’s say your game FPS falls down to 25 FPS (40ms per frame), the
display panel can’t simply go down to 25Hz for reasons tied to
brightness and pixel longevity. So what G-Sync does is display the frame
twice at a rate of 50Hz (20ms per frame twice = 40ms ). So the frame
stays on the screen for the exact length of time that it needs to. This
effectively extends the benefits of G-Sync below the minimum refresh rate
providing an experience that’s identical to a panel that’s capable of
25Hz. The only downside to this technique is that it can cause a
perceptible change in brightness on some panels i.e. flickering. So
it’s certainly not a perfect solution but it’s still a viable and more
satisfying alternative to the current FreeSync implementation."
List of G-Sync-enabled monitors - 144 Hz / 1440p
Acer XB270HU 2560x1440 27" 144 Hz IPS
Asus ROG Swift PG278Q[9] 2560x1440 27" 144 Hz TN
Acer Z35 2560x1080 35" 144 Hz VA
Asus PG279Q 2560x1440 27" 144 Hz IPS
List of FreeSyn-enabled monitors - 144 Hz / 1440p
Acer XG270HU 27" 2560x1440 (QHD) 16:9 144Hz TN
Benq XL2730Z 27" 2560x1440 (QHD) 16:9 144Hz TN
A Side Note:
"When your game’s FPS dips below the minimum refresh rate. Say 39 FPS
while using the Acer or BenQ monitors G-Sync and
FreeSync deal with the situation quite differently. With FreeSync the
monitor would simply revert back to a fixed refresh rate that matches
the lowest refresh rate that the panel is capable of. So 40Hz in the
case of the Acer and BenQ monitors and 48Hz in the case of the LG
monitor. At this point you will have to choose whether you want to run
V-Sync to mitigate tearing in exchange for input latency or run without
V-Sync and get tearing. And because the monitor’s running at its
minimum refresh rate rather than its maximum both the input latency and
the tearing become more pronounced.
G-Sync was setup in earlier G-Sync monitors to deal with the
situation not very differently than FreeSync, the monitor would simply
fix at the maximum refresh rate resulting in increase of input latency.
However it isn’t as severe as with the FreeSync behavior, as the monitor
would be fixed at the maximum rather than the minimum refresh rate. But
unfortunately with G-Sync, Nvidia doesn’t give you the option of V-Sync
off or on, it would always stay on so you can’t get rid of that latency
in exchange for tearing. However I would still consider that fixing the
monitor to the maximum refresh rate rather than the minimum to be a
superior solution. Fortunately this would only require a driver update
to change the current behavior of FreeSync below the minimum refresh
rate, which I do hope AMD seriously considers.
G-Sync employs a very clever trick in its latest iteration. Unlike
the previous G-Sync behavior below the minimum refresh rate G-Sync now
wouldn’t simply fix the panel at the maximum refresh rate. Instead the
panel will display the frame at a refresh that’s twice the FPS.
Let’s say your game FPS falls down to 25 FPS (40ms per frame), the
display panel can’t simply go down to 25Hz for reasons tied to
brightness and pixel longevity. So what G-Sync does is display the frame
twice at a rate of 50Hz (20ms per frame twice = 40ms ). So the frame
stays on the screen for the exact length of time that it needs to. This
effectively extends the benefits of G-Sync below the minimum refresh rate
providing an experience that’s identical to a panel that’s capable of
25Hz. The only downside to this technique is that it can cause a
perceptible change in brightness on some panels i.e. flickering. So
it’s certainly not a perfect solution but it’s still a viable and more
satisfying alternative to the current FreeSync implementation."