Asus MG279Q FreeSync Monitor

[HEXUS]

Bringing FreeSync to a high refresh rate, 1440p and IPS panel.

Read more.

[dfour]

Tasty but still not enough to make me put my hand in my pocket and replace my 1440p screen.

[DanceswithUnix]

Actually getting tempting. The stand on the Acer doesn't look that good, this seems the right blend of business like but can play Elite on it.

[aidanjt]

Yet the MG279Q should not be designated as a FreeSync-only monitor, because the ability to game at 144Hz and 1440p using an IPS panel makes it just as relevant for gamers with Nvidia GPUs

Eh, call me crazy, but if you're paying around g-sync money on a monitor, you should get, you know, g-sync. But this GPU vendor dependant monitor asynchronous refresh carry on is getting a bit old now. Until then, looking forward to the g-sync version of this. Hope nVidia wises up with the licencing fees and module requirements soon.

[dfour]

Eh, call me crazy, but if you're paying around g-sync money on a monitor, you should get, you know, g-sync. But this GPU vendor dependant monitor asynchronous refresh carry on is getting a bit old now. Until then, looking forward to the g-sync version of this. Hope nVidia wises up with the licencing fees and module requirements soon.

Yup just make it easy for everyone and support freesync and dump gsync

[Corky34]

Dumping Gsync is a good idea but until we see some FreeSync monitors that have a wider range of refresh rates Gsync still has a place in the market, given the currently available monitors I would go for Gsync over Freesync.

Maybe when we see a Freesync monitor that can go from 10-15Hz to over a 100 it maybe worth it, until then Freesync is the poorer cousin of Gsync (IMHO).

[aidanjt]

Don't get me wrong, the g-sync scaler made sense when they were developing the technology since existing scalers weren't quite up to scratch at that point, but by now they could have just made scaler performance a standard in the licensing conditions and leave it to the monitor manufacturers to select or design an appropriate scaler to meet those requirements. Most of the really juicy async refresh work is performed in their drivers anyway.

[Vijay567]

It will definitely enhance the gaming experience.

[RyanM]

Eh, call me crazy, but if you're paying around g-sync money on a monitor, you should get, you know, g-sync. But this GPU vendor dependant monitor asynchronous refresh carry on is getting a bit old now. Until then, looking forward to the g-sync version of this. Hope nVidia wises up with the licencing fees and module requirements soon.

The G-Sync version is going to be the ASUS PG2749Q coming in Q3 for $800. I believe this MG279Q has a North American MSRP of $600 meaning it's 25 per cent cheaper so you will be paying a premium for the G-Sync model but you do get variable refresh rate up to 144Hz not just 90Hz.

[ZaO]

They're getting there, these Ips panels, eh! Still a bit pricey right now. They're kinda like Ssd's about 3 years back. Nice toy if you have the cash, but I think many gamers will stick to TN panels for a while yet. I imagine I'll be wanting to pick one of these type of screens up in a couple years or so though

[Tunnah]

Now freesync and G-Sync have been out a while and there have been a fair few tests, what would people say is the better gaming experience when having a set amount of cash for a GPU and monitor:

-Spend more on the monitor to get a *sync capable panel, so FPS dips are handled that way
OR
-Spend more on the GPU so you don't get FPS dipping below 60 ?

[LtSkitzo]

Just need to find £1000 for this and a Fury to be sorted for the next 2-3 gaming years.

[DanceswithUnix]

Now freesync and G-Sync have been out a while and there have been a fair few tests, what would people say is the better gaming experience when having a set amount of cash for a GPU and monitor:

-Spend more on the monitor to get a *sync capable panel, so FPS dips are handled that way
OR
-Spend more on the GPU so you don't get FPS dipping below 60 ?

I think you always want more FPS, so I would still go for the higher end GPU. It is still early days for this technology, and I don't see it as a tight budget sort of thing yet though hopefully it will end up that way as display port becomes more mainstream.

It is an interesting question though, my wife has a 260X in her PC which on paper is fully freesync enabled, but I do wonder just how useful that is. If the freesync over hdmi recently demonstrated gets standardised then it opens the technology up to really low cost monitors as well, perhaps they can only do 40Hz to 60Hz but that could be enough to help.

I also wonder if this technology would benefit Intel much, given that their graphics struggles to hit 60FPS in, well pretty much anything beyond Minecraft.

[TerminatorUK]

How come the input lag results have been conducted using HDMI @ 1080p (and presumably 60hz)?

The input lag should be significantly lower if tested over DisplayPort @ 1440p and 144hz.

24.4ms of input lag would drive me crazy!

[jigger]

Finally I can upgrade my monitor to something worthwhile!

[ZaO]

I think you always want more FPS, so I would still go for the higher end GPU. It is still early days for this technology, and I don't see it as a tight budget sort of thing yet though hopefully it will end up that way as display port becomes more mainstream.

It is an interesting question though, my wife has a 260X in her PC which on paper is fully freesync enabled, but I do wonder just how useful that is. If the freesync over hdmi recently demonstrated gets standardised then it opens the technology up to really low cost monitors as well, perhaps they can only do 40Hz to 60Hz but that could be enough to help.

I also wonder if this technology would benefit Intel much, given that their graphics struggles to hit 60FPS in, well pretty much anything beyond Minecraft.

Definitely. I would much rather just buy a better gpu! The lack of range in the variable refresh rates is a big part of why I wouldn't buy one of these type of screens yet. I hardly see any frame tearing with my panel at 120hz and no vsync anyway. I'm not sure these screens make much sense at this point in time for those that would benefit most. The money would probably be much better spent on more powerful hardware..

Edit: Although, quickly glancing back at this review, it says freesync is supported from "35-90Hz". If that includes every single number inbetween, that's actually pretty damn good! I would be tempted by that if I cared more about syncing frames But as I say, the sight of screen tearing is very uncommon and minimal with my current setup, so I would still go for better hardware instead..