Talk about NVIDIA G-SYNC, a variable refresh rate (VRR) technology. G-SYNC eliminates stutters, tearing, and reduces input lag.
List of G-SYNC Monitors.
-
Edmond
Post
by Edmond » 02 Aug 2014, 10:26
RealNC wrote:So in EU: $1074. In NA: $650.
No. ASUS, I'm not buying your overpriced hardware. I'll wait for the AOC gsync monitor, thank you very much.
Screw the AOC. Get this one:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showprodu ... &catid=948
will be out around the same time anyway...
Ye, its 1080p on 27"; but its BIG and CHEAP, and has REAL 8bit color just like the Asus one. The AOC 24" has 6bit+bullshit color.
-
RealNC
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4432
- Joined: 24 Dec 2013, 18:32
-
Contact:
Post
by RealNC » 02 Aug 2014, 11:55
Yep, indeed. Looks to be the better monitor. "£367.99 inc VAT". That's $620, which is somewhat reasonable. Still expensive, but reasonable considering how new G-Sync is. I'm NOT gonna pay $1074 for the ASUS just because ASUS think they can rip-off people in the EU

For this $400 difference, I could buy an additional GTX780 instead...
Steam •
GitHub •
Stack Overflow
The views and opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Blur Busters.
-
Neo_Bogard
- Posts: 23
- Joined: 06 Jul 2014, 20:04
Post
by Neo_Bogard » 02 Aug 2014, 12:40
RealNC wrote:So in EU: $1074. In NA: $650.
No. ASUS, I'm not buying your overpriced hardware. I'll wait for the AOC gsync monitor, thank you very much.
I'll believe it when I see it. That comment is getting deleted. It'll be $799.
I'm not getting my hopes up.
-
omgBlur
- Posts: 68
- Joined: 26 Mar 2014, 09:59
- Location: Florida
Post
by omgBlur » 02 Aug 2014, 19:18
Yes I agree, that price is too good to be true. Even as a person that lives in the US, I think it's messed up that they are over charging for this monitor in other regions. Could it be the vendors that are charging higher fees for this monitor because of the demand? I doubt Amazon and NewEgg will sell this monitor above the MSRP. (be it $649 or $799)
-
sharknice
- Posts: 295
- Joined: 23 Dec 2013, 17:16
- Location: Minnesota
-
Contact:
Post
by sharknice » 02 Aug 2014, 22:48
omgBlur wrote:Yes I agree, that price is too good to be true. Even as a person that lives in the US, I think it's messed up that they are over charging for this monitor in other regions. Could it be the vendors that are charging higher fees for this monitor because of the demand? I doubt Amazon and NewEgg will sell this monitor above the MSRP. (be it $649 or $799)
I'm sure Amazon itself will sell it for MSRP and it will sellout right away. Then all that will be left in stock will be sold by the 3rd party vendors through amazon that will sell for ridiculous markup. That is what has happened with other monitor's I've bought there at launch.
-
Edmond
Post
by Edmond » 03 Aug 2014, 07:30
RealNC wrote:
Yep, indeed. Looks to be the better monitor. "£367.99 inc VAT". That's $620, which is somewhat reasonable. Still expensive, but reasonable considering how new G-Sync is. I'm NOT gonna pay $1074 for the ASUS just because ASUS think they can rip-off people in the EU

For this $400 difference, I could buy an additional GTX780 instead...
Ye you cant do a correct currency conversion for tech like that...
In reality in EU that acer27" will cost like 400eur MAX,
in US - 500$,
in britain - 370pounds apparently
In Europe everything is just more expensive.
-
Black Octagon
- Posts: 216
- Joined: 18 Dec 2013, 03:41
Post
by Black Octagon » 03 Aug 2014, 10:41
MSRPs are nearly always defined in a per-country/region basis. Can't just covert a price from one currency to another and assume that's what you'll pay
Sent from dumphone (pls. excuse typos and dumbness)
-
PoWn3d_0704
- Posts: 111
- Joined: 31 Dec 2013, 15:20
Post
by PoWn3d_0704 » 03 Aug 2014, 20:40
So chief, you cant even post up your review of your ROG until mid august? You mentioned there was a unit inbound to you some time ago, and I can only assume that you have it and are doing amazing things with it.
So, question about a testing method. On the VG248QE you did a test with CS:GO about how there was greatly reduced lag when you limited the FPS of the engine to below the refresh rate limit of the monitor.
So I have always been using G Sync with fps_max 140 or 143, just something less than 144. Any chance you can test that? I dont like ULMB too much, I like the smooth picture more than anything else. I just dont want lag either.
Asus VG248QE with GSync. Blur Busters GSync Contest Winner.
-
Neo_Bogard
- Posts: 23
- Joined: 06 Jul 2014, 20:04
Post
by Neo_Bogard » 03 Aug 2014, 23:37
PoWn3d_0704 wrote:So I have always been using G Sync with fps_max 140 or 143, just something less than 144. Any chance you can test that? I dont like ULMB too much, I like the smooth picture more than anything else. I just dont want lag either.
I would also love to see the test repeated for Battlefield 4, using the engines internal frame cap. That would be very valuable information to me, as a Battlefield 4 player
Ya know.. if they're taking requests

-
Haste
- Posts: 326
- Joined: 22 Dec 2013, 09:03
Post
by Haste » 06 Aug 2014, 12:56
Got my ROG SWIFT!
I'll be testing a bit over the next days.
Monitor: Gigabyte M27Q X