Recommend me a 1440p G-Sync display

TheF34RChannel

New member
Hi guys,

Well it seems this is a good time to browse options for a new monitor and I am dead set on a 1440p 144Hz G-Sync.

I also have some questions:

1. I've read that it's best if you set it just below 144Hz?

2. How does a 144Hz display work out with games like Fallout 4 which is just 60 FPS?

I admit I'm drawn in by the Asus ROG SWIFT PG278Q, not the upcoming IPS model (the IPS is twice as expensive).

Also keep in mind that I like turning up graphics and currently have a GTX 970 (which will be replaced by Pascal). I can understand I might have to tone things down a bit with this card at that resolution etc.
 
Last edited:
Im using acer xg270hu and quite liking it, nice thin bezel, no backlight issues. but it doesnt have adjustable stand and its a freesync rather than gsync, also at the same time its quite expensive, I managed to get one on a deal for around 270 quite a while ago so it was worth it.

also 2. its using same engine as skyrim, i.e. anything above 60fps breaks the physics engine, while yes you can force it to run at 144, 1. 970 won't handle it, my 980ti struggles in some situations because badly optimised and aftera while in 144hz the game just breaks, i.e. you can get perma stuck at a terminal and have to load to last save.
 
I'm also looking at getting a monitor around the same specs

i'm not sure if i'm going for the benq xl2730z or asus mg278q...
 
Hi guys,

Well it seems this is a good time to browse options for a new monitor and I am dead set on a 1440p 144Hz G-Sync. .

Have you actually had first hand experience with G-Sync? IMO its not worth the money most of the time but some people are really keen on it after trying. Before spending the extra £200 (compared to the freesync alternative) or so for a G sync monitor I'd suggest giving it a go first.
 
also 2. its using same engine as skyrim, i.e. anything above 60fps breaks the physics engine, while yes you can force it to run at 144, 1. 970 won't handle it, my 980ti struggles in some situations because badly optimised and aftera while in 144hz the game just breaks, i.e. you can get perma stuck at a terminal and have to load to last save.

I used Fallout 4 as an example of a game limited to 60, of which there are not many - at least not that I'm playing.

Have you actually had first hand experience with G-Sync? IMO its not worth the money most of the time but some people are really keen on it after trying. Before spending the extra £200 (compared to the freesync alternative) or so for a G sync monitor I'd suggest giving it a go first.

Nope and not a chance either sadly; my mates are all on consoles and I can't exactly walk in a store and ask for a try - but man I would like to ha ha! FreeSync would be pointless for me since I don't own an AMD GPU nor will I, considering my GPU route as of the last couple of years. I'm aware I can run one, but it seems rather pointless? However, since you're doing just that, maybe you could tell me a little about it?

Having said that, I'm very curious about your saying it's not worth the extra money most of the time, in your opinion. Could you elaborate?

I'm also looking at getting a monitor around the same specs

i'm not sure if i'm going for the benq xl2730z or asus mg278q...

Both look nice man!
 
Nope and not a chance either sadly; my mates are all on consoles and I can't exactly walk in a store and ask for a try - but man I would like to ha ha! FreeSync would be pointless for me since I don't own an AMD GPU nor will I, considering my GPU route as of the last couple of years. I'm aware I can run one, but it seems rather pointless? However, since you're doing just that, maybe you could tell me a little about it?

Having said that, I'm very curious about your saying it's not worth the extra money most of the time, in your opinion. Could you elaborate?

Certainly. In my opinion (and down to my slightly limited experience, I only know two people with Gsync monitors) G sync only really makes sense/is noticeable if you're running a GPU that really struggles to hit the maximum refresh rate of your monitor (so think 4k with a 970). If you've got the GPU grunt to always max out the refresh rate of your monitor, all gsync will do is introduce some input lag.

In terms of games and screen tearing, all the games I previously had screen tearing issues now don't have tearing despite my FPS only dropping by 10 or so (we're talking running at a constant 240fps as opposed to 250fps). I play a few shooters that require reaction time (and low input lag) so I'd have gsync disabled for those games. The only game I've really played this year that I felt would have been improved by Gsync was Fallout 4 as the FPS in that game varies soo much depending on where you are in the map to the point where I have a few sessions of running the game on lower settings simply because some areas have too many shadows (or whatever).

Basically I feel that if you're a high FPS junkie (like me) or that you're running an OP setup GPU wise Gsync is simply a waste of money. I really like my monitor and I'd reccomend it to anyone, regardless of what GPUs they have.
even if I do have two dead pixels
 
Certainly. In my opinion (and down to my slightly limited experience, I only know two people with Gsync monitors) G sync only really makes sense/is noticeable if you're running a GPU that really struggles to hit the maximum refresh rate of your monitor (so think 4k with a 970). If you've got the GPU grunt to always max out the refresh rate of your monitor, all gsync will do is introduce some input lag.

In terms of games and screen tearing, all the games I previously had screen tearing issues now don't have tearing despite my FPS only dropping by 10 or so (we're talking running at a constant 240fps as opposed to 250fps). I play a few shooters that require reaction time (and low input lag) so I'd have gsync disabled for those games. The only game I've really played this year that I felt would have been improved by Gsync was Fallout 4 as the FPS in that game varies soo much depending on where you are in the map to the point where I have a few sessions of running the game on lower settings simply because some areas have too many shadows (or whatever).

Basically I feel that if you're a high FPS junkie (like me) or that you're running an OP setup GPU wise Gsync is simply a waste of money. I really like my monitor and I'd reccomend it to anyone, regardless of what GPUs they have.
even if I do have two dead pixels

Thanks a lot for all the information! Just to be sure, you're running an Nvidia GPU on a FreeSync monitor, right? I ask because you mentioned your turning off G-Sync for certain games. Also, what is OP? I know the abbreviation as Original Post or Original Poster.

I recognize I had an incorrect understanding about what G-Sync does, I'll read up on it in a bit, and I should rephrase my wish for a gaming monitor: I'm looking for one that eliminates screen tearing (it was my belief that both FreeSync and G-Sync took care of this*) and provides an awesome picture and stutter-free experience. Currently I'm on a cheap piece of, well you know what, out of necessity and in let's say GTA 5 and AC: Syndicate when I have Vsync off it's horrible, and only a bit better with it enabled. I'd like to alleviate it completely.

The ASUS MG279Q does look tempting, is IPS and 100,00 Euro cheaper than the G-Sync equivalent.

You're getting 240 FPS? If I want to run at a 144Hz refresh rate, can I or is it advised to slightly below that for optimal results?

I'm hoping some others with G-Sync and/or Nvidia GPUs on FreeSync monitors come in here as well - don't take this the wrong way at all!! I like multiple points of view on an expensive purchase is all.


* Hexus: “Having G-Sync enabled on a 27in, 2,560x1,440-resolution monitor makes a lot of sense for gamers who have a GeForce GTX 770/780-class of video card. These GPUs are able to mete out 40-60FPS in visually demanding titles and thus bring the visually smooth advantages of G-Sync very much into their wheelhouse. Once you see G-Sync in action and compare it against a traditional monitor there really is no going back.”

Overclockers Club: "
Playing through each of the games brought to light the kind of smoothness that only comes with this technology. It does not get rid of the game glitches that are part and parcel to the game in question, but does indeed offer improved visuals. You get the best of both worlds: no input lag and no screen tearing that you see when the frame rates outstrip the standard 60 and even 120Hz refresh rates of current monitor technology. As far as any performance hit, there really is no performance hit to speak of when enabling G-Sync technology.
By spending several hours in front of the ASUS ROG Swift PG278Q, what I did discover was that I found myself playing through the games much longer than I had before just because of how smooth the gameplay was."

PC Per: "But an interesting thing happened when enabling G-Sync. Not only did the tearing go away, but the constant stuttering was almost completely gone! This is an effect that I honestly did not expect to see, but it appears that something in the driver (or game pipeline) is adjusted or tweaked with G-Sync in play. The result is another incredibly smooth, fluid, and visually perfect game experience."
 
Last edited:
It comes down to what games you play and the FPS you get at a certain resolution. In your sig it says you use a 970, if you went to a 1440p monitor then Gsync(or freesync for that matter) would provide a benefit to you because you won't be running crazy high FPS. Now if you play counter strike or something similar, it would be useless because the input lag it adds will hurt you more than benefit you since your FPS will be far higher than any monitor can currently run at. Any game running at a high fps with a monitor running at a high refresh rate will remove stutter. It's when you get multi gpus you will introduce some stutter no matter what FPS it is. An awesome picture, well that rules out TN panels. Look at a IPS panel.
 
Ah that makes sense, cheers! If it helps, the games/series I play include: The Witcher (3), GTA (5), Assassin's Creed, Far Cry, Alien Isolation etc. I purposefully exclude Fallout 4 because currently it's a mess IMO, so a poor rule of thumb. No Counterstrike.

GPU upgrade plan will be a '1070/1080(Ti)' Pascal.

So it won't matter if I pick a Gsync or FreeSync monitor then, I mean, if I follow you guys I don't need the functions that Gsync has to offer? The ASUS MG279Q is cheaper and an IPS monitor.
 
With those games you won't be getting extreme FPS at 1440p so yeah a Gsync monitor would work for you and benefit you and you won't be needing crazy low input lag since you don't play FPS games.

Doing a quick google on that monitor and plenty of issues I see with it. Lots of people reporting panel issues which seems to be a trend in Asus high end monitors using GSYNC.
 
I play the occasional FPS, but not often. The model I mentioned is a FreeSync one, not Gsync ;) maybe it's got less issues. Would it be of equal benefit to me?
 
I play the occasional FPS, but not often. The model I mentioned is a FreeSync one, not Gsync ;) maybe it's got less issues. Would it be of equal benefit to me?

Ah thought i read GYSNC.. and no it would not be if you wanted to take advantage of Gsync. It would just be a high refresh rate monitor that's more expensive than a normal non G/Fsync monitor.
 
Okay so I'll need an IPS G-Sync monitor eh, seeing as I will take advantage of the technology? Now I ask for recommendations :)
 
Last edited:
think the cheapest one off the top of my head for Gsync/IPS is the Acer XB270HU

Nice looking monitor, reading up on it now. It's a hefty 800 Euro though - but well worth it, it seems! More expensive then the ROG Swift, but like you said it's got problems (I think Diceh. mentioned his troubles going through several somewhere here earlier?), so I'd like to avoid that like the plague.

Is there anyone here with first-hand experience with the Acer Predator XB270HU 144Hz G-Sync IPS? Reviews look favourable.
 
Last edited:
Ya he went through like 6-7 of those. I'd keep looking for a cheaper one. That was just off the top of my head and what I have available here in the US is probably little different for you.

And pretty sure Dice had the Freesync variant of the same Acer. He loved it and said was superior to the Swift in every way
 
Back
Top