Asus pb287q 4K, 780gtx, only getting 30hz

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,167
12,824
136
As the title suggests, using the bundled displayport cable (1.2), and still only able to get 30hz in win8.1.
I tried forcing 60hz with the nvidia kontrol panel -> hard freeze, had to give it the 5-second ko/count down..
All my initial research on the matter says it should work... :(.

Ideas ?

edit : OSD only lists input option DP 1.1 .. im going to try another cable tomorrow.
 
Last edited:

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,167
12,824
136
Yes .. bundled cable was crap, running 1.2 now at 60Hz .. omg its sweet :).

edit : not so sweet ; windows scaling. say you're running a 1080p and a 4K display, now you have to choose, eihter bulky big on the 1080p or freakish small on the 4K.

Solution : get rid og the 1080p and get another 4K.
 
Last edited:

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,167
12,824
136
I need to bring this to top and share my feels.

Coming from a Samsung Synmaster 2693 27" 1920x1200 to this Asus pb287q 4K .. Holy crap its nice, last time I did a hardware upgrade that felt this good was going HDD->SSD. Just saying, if you're pondering on the 4K move .. just do it :).
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
Asus pb287q 4K .. Holy crap its nice, last time I did a hardware upgrade that felt this good was going HDD->SSD. Just saying, if you're pondering on the 4K move .. just do it :).

Maybe but compared to other offerings in this price range? IMO, the particular monitor you have makes no sense in the context of today's marketplace and the 4K demands on a graphics card. Firstly, it's TN and secondly it has no ASync tech to compensate for low fps that any single GPU will get on 4K today.

It's now possible to get IPS + 4K + FreeSync for more or less the same price.
LG Electronics MU67 27MU67 27"

Without FreeSync/GSync on a 4K monitor, a low-end card like 780 would get killed in modern games, even 980Ti/Fury X would. That's another reason 4K without Adaptive Sync is an iffy proposition without some serious hardware, unless it's for older/not demanding modern games.

Personally, for 27" screen sizes, I would go with a 2560x1440, and it's now possible to get 1440P + 144Hz + say GSync:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0149QBOF0...olid=B7IJ7GEXZML5&coliid=I24PW2C5UC0CGG&psc=1

I've seen 27" 4K in the store and it's not comfortable for me to use on the desktop/web browsing without needing to crank resolution scaling to 150%. I think 4K makes a lot more sense at 32-40" sizes for the PC. All that matters is that you enjoy it.

Still though, that LG IPS panel + FreeSync makes your monitor look crazy overpriced and outdated in terms of features/IQ.
 
Last edited:

beginner99

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2009
5,210
1,580
136
I don't get the resolution craze either. 4k on 5.5" phones makes no sense and 4k on 27" with Windows is also not ideal. You need dpi scaling and we all know that still does not work properly.

I would say
24" 1080p
27" 1440p
>30" 4k

But I prefer 1080p + 120 hz. I looked at 27" screen and they are already too large (for my viewing distance) to even see the whole screen. Not good for gaming if you have to move your head or eyes constantly.
And then there is my limited will to spent 1000+ on GPUs.


cytg111: I thought the multi-monitor issue should be solved in windows 10?
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,167
12,824
136
Maybe but compared to other offerings in this price range? IMO, the particular monitor you have makes no sense in the context of today's marketplace and the 4K demands on a graphics card. Firstly, it's TN and secondly it has no ASync tech to compensate for low fps that any single GPU will get on 4K today.

It's now possible to get IPS + 4K + FreeSync for more or less the same price.
LG Electronics MU67 27MU67 27"

Without FreeSync/GSync on a 4K monitor, a low-end card like 780 would get killed in modern games, even 980Ti/Fury X would. That's another reason 4K without Adaptive Sync is an iffy proposition without some serious hardware, unless it's for older/not demanding modern games.

Personally, for 27" screen sizes, I would go with a 2560x1440, and it's now possible to get 1440P + 144Hz + say GSync:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0149QBOF0...olid=B7IJ7GEXZML5&coliid=I24PW2C5UC0CGG&psc=1

I've seen 27" 4K in the store and it's not comfortable for me to use on the desktop/web browsing without needing to crank resolution scaling to 150%. I think 4K makes a lot more sense at 32-40" sizes for the PC. All that matters is that you enjoy it.

Still though, that LG IPS panel + FreeSync makes your monitor look crazy overpriced and outdated in terms of features/IQ.

"Still though, that LG IPS panel + FreeSync"

Ill have to agree with you on that, nice screen, there's several factors involved here 1. I am clearly not as well into the substance as you are 2. I have decided to that I need my hardware pusher "close by" - I dont want to fiddle with the transport otherwise.

That LG screen is not in my country yet, I simply use a price-indexer, choose my price-point, read reviews and go from there.. This asus won over similar priced samsung alternatives.

I might wait for the LG (or similar) for my next 4K'er now :).

About the size and scaling, it is not an issue for me, I think for two reasons, it is really really crisp and I had lasik done a few years back.. its like a really good fit, small but razor sharp.

The games is an issue and I will be living with the non-native scaling until pascal or better.

beginner99-> I am sure it is, I am on 8.1 .. Not moving to that spyware infested ¤#% before it has been cleaned up. (blocking the updates on 8.1 too..).
 

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,209
594
126
That is quite shocking to hear that a manufacturer ships a cable that does not properly support the monitor.