NVIDIA G-Sync Pulsar monitor - Asus ROG Strix XG27AQNGV

[bbuser]

Hi All,

I've been waiting for this monitors release like the rest of us for some time now but I seem to be hearing mixed reviews which have left me unsure on the purchase.

Can anyone please give me some advice on who may have tried the monitor and a high refresh OLED. Im currently torn between this and the 480hz OLED from ASUS. Is there a big difference in motion clarity between either monitor?

My other concern as I play FPS titles, is there a perceivable latency difference between either. I was always under the impression that gsyn adds a small amount of delay.

Thanks.

I own a 360Hz Pulsar and a 500Hz OLED

The Pulsar has better motion clarity, but if you're playing a game like Valorant or CS2 then the 480Hz will be the better choice due to seeing things faster due to the higher refresh rate, which could be do or die in some scenarios.

For motion clarity as a deciding factor then the Pulsar is the better option, especially if you're going to play a variety of games, single player, multiplayer, competitive and want things to look better as you pan the camera (including the use of Frame gen)

If you value, better HDR, and will use the display for content consumption primarily as well + movies/tv shows then OLED for sure.

[kyube]

Hi. I wonder why so many people seem to omit CRTs from consideration without a clear reason why. Even when, like in your case, you've basically already made sacrifices in things such as resolution, and I guess it's not even a proper fit for your monitor's aspect ratio, like I see other people do. The other downsides of CRTs, such as low brightness, etc. are nothing you can't usualy fix by spending a bit of time tweaking your room environment and things like that. And then you're playing a game and a genre that originated with CRT monitors in mind. And if you're already on a CRT, then the best thing to meet your priorities would be your CRT, or a better CRT, such as one that can do a higher refresh rate at the lowest resolution that you'd like to go to (there's generally a tradeoff between these settings).

Other than CRTs, I estimate (but I have no experience with) that some of the TN monitors of 480Hz+ should have a lower average latency of a given pixel change first becoming visible (relevant for e.g. small objects first appearing), however CRTs still achieve a lower latency from a frame being ready to the first pixel anywhere on the screen becoming visible (relevant for large sized changes, or for synchronizing your sense of where in the game world your character is). But it's only a 1-2ms difference either way. Other relevant characteristics, such as motion blur and brightness can supposedly get close (more tweakable on some TNs). And given how much cheaper CRTs can still be found for, I see no point in these TN monitors for your or my use case.

The biggest issue I see with using CRTs in 2026 is:
• All graphics cards since Maxwell lack a RAMDAC to natively support CRTs, limiting their total bandwidth to some extent & introducing additional processing latency into the chain
• Having the physical space & table rigidity for them
• Finding a (trinitron) tube that's of decent quality (sharpness, physical quality etc.)
• Extreme radiated EMI can be a dealbreaker for chasing best possible signal integrity (not to mention a large health concern)
• Most “Esports” games don't allow 4:3 resolutions anymore
• Inability to set them up ergonomically in eye-level due to their monstrous weight

Models such as the XG2431, XL2566K, DyAc2 panels (e.g.: 46X+, 66X+, 86X, 86X+), 360Hz IPS GSYNC models (e..g: PG259QN) and even the Pulsar panels (using the ULMB2 fixed refresh rate mode) all satisfy the “backlight strobing in esports games” use-case far better than CRTs.
For a slightly higher PPI option, AOC Q25G4SR (and enduring KSF fringing) or the upcoming P245MS Pro+ (24.5" QHD 380Hz) are more desirable
CRTs for high FPS esports gaming are, by all essence, obsolete.
Even for the <100Hz segment, the XG2431 or older DyAc1 models are much better options.

[MSIfanboy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5CulORywRU

phpBB [video]

[whitespider999]

The above was beyond a terrible review in my opinion. Terrible technical explanations, strange demographic focus, playing outside the gsync range, no side by side, no true understanding of motion clarity benefits. The list goes on.

[MSIfanboy]

Hi. I wonder why so many people seem to omit CRTs from consideration without a clear reason why. Even when, like in your case, you've basically already made sacrifices in things such as resolution, and I guess it's not even a proper fit for your monitor's aspect ratio, like I see other people do. The other downsides of CRTs, such as low brightness, etc. are nothing you can't usualy fix by spending a bit of time tweaking your room environment and things like that. And then you're playing a game and a genre that originated with CRT monitors in mind. And if you're already on a CRT, then the best thing to meet your priorities would be your CRT, or a better CRT, such as one that can do a higher refresh rate at the lowest resolution that you'd like to go to (there's generally a tradeoff between these settings).

Other than CRTs, I estimate (but I have no experience with) that some of the TN monitors of 480Hz+ should have a lower average latency of a given pixel change first becoming visible (relevant for e.g. small objects first appearing), however CRTs still achieve a lower latency from a frame being ready to the first pixel anywhere on the screen becoming visible (relevant for large sized changes, or for synchronizing your sense of where in the game world your character is). But it's only a 1-2ms difference either way. Other relevant characteristics, such as motion blur and brightness can supposedly get close (more tweakable on some TNs). And given how much cheaper CRTs can still be found for, I see no point in these TN monitors for your or my use case.

The biggest issue I see with using CRTs in 2026 is:
• All graphics cards since Maxwell lack a RAMDAC to natively support CRTs, limiting their total bandwidth to some extent & introducing additional processing latency into the chain
• Having the physical space & table rigidity for them
• Finding a (trinitron) tube that's of decent quality (sharpness, physical quality etc.)
• Extreme radiated EMI can be a dealbreaker for chasing best possible signal integrity (not to mention a large health concern)
• Most “Esports” games don't allow 4:3 resolutions anymore
• Inability to set them up ergonomically in eye-level due to their monstrous weight

Models such as the XG2431, XL2566K, DyAc2 panels (e.g.: 46X+, 66X+, 86X, 86X+), 360Hz IPS GSYNC models (e..g: PG259QN) and even the Pulsar panels (using the ULMB2 fixed refresh rate mode) all satisfy the “backlight strobing in esports games” use-case far better than CRTs.
For a slightly higher PPI option, AOC Q25G4SR (and enduring KSF fringing) or the upcoming P245MS Pro+ (24.5" QHD 380Hz) are more desirable
CRTs for high FPS esports gaming are, by all essence, obsolete.
Even for the <100Hz segment, the XG2431 or older DyAc1 models are much better options.

this 610hz asus is worse than pg248qp, and my 540hz zowie is just better, sure at around 360fps-610hz it isnt a crazy difference compared to the zowie, but at 120hz and 240hz the zowie buries it, the zowie looks like a clear image with some crosstalk, the asus looks like a blurry mess, its actually disturbing me lol. its so strange even though it has a rolling backlight it gets worse at lower than 360hz, like double imaging/crosstalk, from top to bottom, even the game visual modes alter the crosstalk, its wild, i can now start to see the zowie tax

TLDR- at 360hz-610hz its alright, i still think zowie looks clearer, and at lower than 360hz, its a no contest, i was expecting this to be like pg248qp but brighter and rolling scan, but asus slopped on elmb thats worse than ulmb, HAHA

[Depo]

Cheers everyone for the input.

So I generally hit 360fps, slightly under or over in my games of choice. Would I still see the benefits of this monitor or would say a fixed ULMB2/DYac or higher refresh 480hz OLED then be more desirable?

As mentioned I currently main a the MSI MPG271QRX which is a 360hz OLED.

Thanks again.

[rnk0]

Image quality is significantly better than Zowie’s TN panels (as expected).
But: Viewing angles and color reproduction - especially black levels- are on an entirely different level with an OLED. No contest here.

Do you mean that the black levels and color etc. are "on par" with OLEDs? Unlike TNs?

[chiglit]

But what about the lower fps performance - mainly the 60-100 fps region? A lot of reviewers mention how a Pulsar monitor can offset the cost of upgrading a GPU, for example, but then show high refresh rate gameplay examples. There's a contradiction here - Pulsar is advertised as being a combo of Gsync and ULMB - i.e., good for fluctuating FPS AND motion clarity, but then there's the caveat of flicker at <90Hz ?? So which is it? I understand that people are waiting for the new firmware to drop, but I heard that even the min of 75Hz that's supported now results in flicker. Can anyone with hands-on experience confirm?

I am mainly considering Pulsar for both ~100 FPS singleplayer titles, but as well for the occasional high refresh rate multiplayer. I guess what I'm asking is: "Is Pulsar worth it for someone who plays at ~90fps instead of 360 more often than not?

[kyube]

this 610hz asus is worse than pg248qp, and my 540hz zowie is just better, sure at around 360fps-610hz it isnt a crazy difference compared to the zowie, but at 120hz and 240hz the zowie buries it, the zowie looks like a clear image with some crosstalk, the asus looks like a blurry mess,

The biggest issue with all non-Zowie “E-TN's” (540Hz) or “Rapid-TN's” (600–610Hz) is the use of KSF/PFS WLED backlight instead of a QD WLED backlight.
This results in severe red fringing.

its so strange even though it has a rolling backlight it gets worse at lower than 360hz, like double imaging/crosstalk, from top to bottom, even the game visual modes alter the crosstalk, its wild, i can now start to see the zowie tax

TLDR- at 360hz-610hz its alright, i still think zowie looks clearer, and at lower than 360hz, its a no contest, i was expecting this to be like pg248qp but brighter and rolling scan, but asus slopped on elmb thats worse than ulmb, HAHA

These monitors are all conceptually dependant on the refresh rate (vertical frequency) for the clarity you want to achieve.
The highest refresh rate setting is the lowest MPRT target option.
Everything below is subpar.
Hence why monitors with a adjustable pulse width setting (e.g. G-SYNC module ones or blurbusters utility ones such as the XL2566K, XG2431,...) are amazing at any refresh rate you set on them (excl. GSYNC ones since they're fixed refresh rate targets)
I don't know the exact duty cycle's that each implementation targets on these models though...

[brownvim]

But what about the lower fps performance - mainly the 60-100 fps region? A lot of reviewers mention how a Pulsar monitor can offset the cost of upgrading a GPU, for example, but then show high refresh rate gameplay examples. There's a contradiction here - Pulsar is advertised as being a combo of Gsync and ULMB - i.e., good for fluctuating FPS AND motion clarity, but then there's the caveat of flicker at <90Hz ?? So which is it? I understand that people are waiting for the new firmware to drop, but I heard that even the min of 75Hz that's supported now results in flicker. Can anyone with hands-on experience confirm?

I am mainly considering Pulsar for both ~100 FPS singleplayer titles, but as well for the occasional high refresh rate multiplayer. I guess what I'm asking is: "Is Pulsar worth it for someone who plays at ~90fps instead of 360 more often than not?

75hz doesn't have any flicker, the problem is it gives a double image which ruins the clarity. We just have to wait and see how well it does for lower frame rates, in its current state its not good.