ASUS VG248QE -- Pull that trigger?

[Dannar26]

It's on sale, but not magnificently so.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824236313

This is, near as I can tell, *the* monitor to get for gaming. You know, unless you're rolling in it. Then you could waste money on the admittedly sexy ROG Swift.

Should I get it now, or would it be wiser to hold off for black Friday/cyber Monday/some other 144hz budget monitor that's coming out soon?

 

[BrightCandle]

Are you looking for a gsync monitor? If so there are other options now in the 1080p variety, Acer for example has a 27" 1080p which a friend of mine recommends and its a fair bit cheaper than a ROG swift.

If you aren't looking for gsync then there are better options than the VG248QE out now. Even when it was released the Benq XL2411T was the better monitor overall IMO, but now we have the XL2411Z and XL2420Z from Benq and Eizo have the FG2421 which has an amazing strobe which is easier to turn on than with lightboost 2 and with less colour impact as well.

With gsync the modern monitors outclass the Asus quite significantly and with just 144hz/lightboost 2 monitors there are better models out as well. In all cases they are probably more expensive by a bit, but I don't think the Asus 248QE is the best in any class anymore.

 

[Dannar26]

I guess my noob is showing again. I'm not aware of the impacts of gsync...I read all the time that getting frame rates greater than 60 is an awesome experience. So much so that I will refuse to do without it, as many do here. I don't know if this gsync is the superior way to achieve this.

I have more homework to do now, thanks. =p

But ultimately it's about price. Is this the best > 60hz monitor for < $300? With my budget, it gets hard to justify anything more expensive...

 

[Cerb]

G-sync is to allow frames to be displayed when they are ready, rather than the movie/TV-centric refresh at regular intervals, as V-sync causes the effect of having a framerate of Hz/[1-n). G-sync could allow a smooth average 53 FPS, FI.

 

[Dannar26]

Aaaand it's only beneficial to Nvidia GPU owners eh?

 

[BrightCandle]

Only for Nvidia users yes. But then the Asus VGE248QE is also an Nvidia monitor, it has lightboost 2 which is why its 144hz, has 3D support (for Nvidia cards only with 3D vision) and the strobing mode is based on that 3D support.

 

[Dannar26]

That being said, since I purchased this monitor (shipping now, so no feed back yet), it would make little sense to get an AMD gpu?

 

[Cerb]

That being said, since I purchased this monitor (shipping now, so no feed back yet), it would make little sense to get an AMD gpu?

Choose based on features, performance, and driver bug preferences. AMD is already cutting prices in response to the 970 and 980, so it may not an easy call unless you're ordering today.

 

[BrightCandle]

If you got an Nvidia featureset monitor then yes it would make sense to upgrade to an Nvidia GPU if you want to use those features.

 

[Termie]

OP - what video card do you currently have?

And no, you don't need an Nvidia GPU to run the Asus VG248QE. The only thing you lose out on is strobing, which is very cool in Internet demos (see blurbusters), but is not at all critical to get much smoother gaming at 144Hz.

 

[Dannar26]

I have a very low end AMD GPU I bought on sale to diagnose some issues with a core 2 system that didn't have integrated graphics and wasn't posting. It's like a HD 6670 or some such.

I realize this monitor has some nvidia features. But if it's just the 3D,then I don't give a rip.

I want to know that if I snag a R9 290, that I won't be penalized in terms of screen fluidity or frame rate.

Also, my monitor came with a backlight bleed ”splotch" at the bottom left corner of the screen. Looked like light reflection off the screen,only it stays there regardless of the lighting. Pain in my ass to RMA...

 

[lehtv]

I want to know that if I snag a R9 290, that I won't be penalized in terms of screen fluidity or frame rate.

You won't be. I'm running Benq XL2411T (same panel as VG248QE) on a 7950, works great. AMD cards also support 2D lightboost with ToastyX's strobelight if you want to eliminate motion blur.

I'd still go with GTX 970 though. Yes, it costs a bit more, but it's worth it unless you simply find the 290 for a crazy low price (I'd say 75% of the cost of a 970 might be enough to tip me over).

• 10% faster
• overclocks better
• better frametimes (not necessarily noticeable, but it's still better quality)
• features like MFAA, easy supersampling (e.g. 4K downscaled to 1080p), voxel illumination (might be a big deal with Unreal Engine 4)
• consumes at least 50W less power at load (which has implications on your electricity bill as well as your PC's noise levels)
  

The power consumption difference alone can save you anywhere from a few dollars to dozens of dollars per year, depending on how actively you play and how much your electricity costs. That's potentially enough to bridge the initial price gap.

 

[Dannar26]

Thanks Lehtv.

I'm will you ,100% on the gtx 970. The price per performance is just too good to ignore, though I could still be swayed with an insanely cheap R9 290.

I was curious if I was locked into nVidia's ecosystem by wanting the most out of my monitor.

 

[slightlyhuman]

Noob question here. I have the asus monitor mentioned. I'm upgrading from gtx 670 to a 290x can I still use the 120hz light boost hack?