• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

[THG] AOC G2460PG 24-Inch G-sync Monitor Review

B

bystander36

Diamond Member
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/aoc-g2460pg-g-sync-monitor,4005-8.html

It seems a new G-sync monitor is out. While they estimated the price at $550, Best Buy has it for sale at $476.83, and sells a non G-sync version for $449.99. You can see the prices listed by Bust Buy on the same page.

The non G-sync version seems kind of expensive compared to others, but they are only asking $27 dollars more for G-sync, which should give people hope on reasonably priced G-sync monitors.
 
I'm seeing the G-sync version for $449 at BB.com, with the non-G-sync version at $250. "Regular price" for the G-sync is $500, $400 for the non-G-sync.

Couple points from the article...

Asus’ ROG Swift initially sold for $800 back in August. A quick check online today reveals that it’s actually more expensive, averaging around $1000. There’s no doubt that enthusiasts are buying them, just not in great enough quantities to push prices down.
Click to expand...

Why does the author believe prices of the Swift would go down if more people were buying them? Does he not understand how prices work?

AOC’s G2460PG represents a new value point. Granted, it’s only the second G-Sync-capable product out there.
Click to expand...

This isn't the second G-sync monitor out, I think its the 5th? Probably the second they've reviewed, they seem to be a little behind the times...
 
Last edited:
Almost $500 for a tiny 24 inch 1080p TN monitor? Both this and the Swift are rip-offs imo. Ironically with Swift prices now at $900-1000, this AOC presents a value option:

"The AOC has better scores for color and grayscale accuracy. They're in a dead heat when it comes to the all-important response and input lag tests. Both also offer motion-blur reduction and a 144Hz refresh rate. And there is no difference in their G-Sync implementations."

But boy after using a large monitor for PC gaming and a large plasma for console gaming for 7.5 years, you'd have to pay me to use a small 24 inch monitor for 2015 gaming. The immersion factor is just not comparable. For GSync to take off they really need to make a 27" 2560x1440 TN at $350-400 and IPS at $500-550.

Right now a large 32" 4K IPS is $1000.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...0_uhd_ips.html

Add FreeSync to that monitor for $100 and Swift is dead in the water. With the rate that large IPS 4K panels are falling in price, we should see even more aggressive pricing on large 4K monitors by late 2015/2016. I would never buy a GSync monitor right now before seeing how FreeSync and AVHA/IPS panels work once Sammy and others bring them onboard next year. Right now GSync monitor have an NV price premium due to no competition. Also, there is still hope that NV adopts FreeSync with time which means not being forced to use NV cards for 7-8 years useful life of that monitor. Supporting GSync now would basically be counter to allowing for FreeSync standard to become a universal brand agnostic feature.
 
Last edited:
You don't seem to understand how prices work either... Add $100 to a $1000 monitor, and the Swift will drop in price to where it will sell at. Its called competition.

And now this thread has turned into a sales pitch for Free-sync... :thumbsdown:
 
Last edited:
96Firebird said:
You don't seem to understand how prices work either... Add $100 to a $1000 monitor, and the Swift will drop in price to where it will sell at. Its called competition.

And now this thread has turned into a sales pitch for Free-sync... :thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

What more did you expect along with the hyperbole on pricing of the Swift.
 
Economies of scale say that if enough people were buying the Swift, then production would ramp up and prices would be at MSRP and meeting/exceeding demand.

That's why people would expect the price to come down. Given that initial demand was high, ASUS should have ramped up to get more units out and get more dollars in their pocket. But things haven't gone that way, and instead the prices are inflated because production remains lackluster and issues continue to pop up driving returns.

I'm guessing had they been able to get it out at around $500-$600, there would be fewer returns, but at the premium price, people demand perfection and inventory is eaten up. I'm expecting a flood of refurbs to hit the market in about a month.


With regards to this monitor, I'm more anxious to see the AOC 3440x1440 and seeing what price it will actually be when it hits shelves. But this monitor, for those wanting to stick to 1080p seems like it could deliver a nice experience.
 
L
96Firebird said:
You don't seem to understand how prices work either... Add $100 to a $1000 monitor, and the Swift will drop in price to where it will sell at. Its called competition.

And now this thread has turned into a sales pitch for Free-sync... :thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

Actually I fully understand how prices work without competiton, hence my point that GSync has a huge price premium attached to it due to no viable competition. For example what would you say to a $400 TN 1080p 24" monitor without GSync 1.5 years ago? You would say it's overpriced garbage when Korean 27" IPS 2560x1440 were selling for $300-400.

Secondly, why is it so few people on our forums and worldwide have jumped on the GSync TN panel bandwagon if the technology is so great? You see the problem? It's not a lot of money for someone using a monitor for 5-8 years to go out and buy a $500 screen but why isn't it happening? Guess what most PC gamers realize that 4K is the future and that TN panels have inherent issues with colour accuracy, colour shift, screen uniformity and viewing angles. Take GSync away and how does a $400-500 24" 1080p monitor look? What about an $800-1000 Swift? Now you get the full picture why adoption of these monitors is not taking off.

Take GSync feature away for a second and compare these screens to MacBook Pro or iMac Retina, and it's going to be obvious they are not in the same league. GSync is probably amazing but when you attach this tech to an overpriced low resolution small sized TN panels and then jack up the price to levels of 27" 2560x1440 IPS for a 24" 1080P TN and to levels 32" 4K IPS with 27" 2560x1440 TN, a lot of gamers see right through that. Based on that comparison the early adopter GSync premium isn't just $100 but significantly more if you look at it that way.

Let's see which one of us is right in the next 2-3 years. If FreeSync is as good as GSync and FreeSync comes out on AVHA / IPS 4K panels of various sizes not just limited to 27" and lower, GSync offerings will have to step up their game. If you are happy paying $500 and $800-1000 to be an early adopter of GSync with these TN panels, knock yourself out but don't try to downplay that GSync has suffered major setbacks in adoption partly because it's overpriced tech attached to OK, but not spectacular, TN panels of small sizes.

Also, your insinuation that I am promoting FreeSync is entirely incorrect. What I am against is promoting a closed priprietary standard that will segregate PC gaming. I don't view locking in as a good future for PC gaming until it's the last reserve. I would be just as relucant to recommend FreeSync had it come out first on high priced TN panels without seeing GSync. I told all my friends to hold off from being an early adopter of Hd-DVD or BluRay until the dust settled. You seem to be fairly confident that non-4K TN-based GSync panels are the future of PC gaming for the next 5-8 years no less.
 
Last edited:
Every time I get mildly interested in high refresh TN displays, the viewing angle tests completely kill it for me. I can look at my IPS almost completely side on and the image quality is absolutely fine.

Also in their tests the IPS wasn't that far behind with response or input lag.

I'll definitely be sticking to my 2560x1600 HP LP3065, thanks. :thumbsup:
 
96Firebird said:
Why does the author believe prices of the Swift would go down if more people were buying them? Does he not understand how prices work?
Click to expand...

It's not prices, it's supply and demand, something entirely different. Prices are a response to elasticity and market equilibrium. It's helpful to know what you're talking about before going on a lecture tour 😀

RussianSensation said:
Almost $500 for a tiny 24 inch 1080p TN monitor? Both this and the Swift are rip-offs imo. Ironically with Swift prices now at $900-1000, this AOC presents a value option:

"The AOC has better scores for color and grayscale accuracy. They're in a dead heat when it comes to the all-important response and input lag tests. Both also offer motion-blur reduction and a 144Hz refresh rate. And there is no difference in their G-Sync implementations."

But boy after using a large monitor for PC gaming and a large plasma for console gaming for 7.5 years, you'd have to pay me to use a small 24 inch monitor for 2015 gaming. The immersion factor is just not comparable. For GSync to take off they really need to make a 27" 2560x1440 TN at $350-400 and IPS at $500-550.

Right now a large 32" 4K IPS is $1000.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...0_uhd_ips.html

Add FreeSync to that monitor for $100 and Swift is dead in the water. With the rate that large IPS 4K panels are falling in price, we should see even more aggressive pricing on large 4K monitors by late 2015/2016. I would never buy a GSync monitor right now before seeing how FreeSync and AVHA/IPS panels work once Sammy and others bring them onboard next year. Right now GSync monitor have an NV price premium due to no competition. Also, there is still hope that NV adopts FreeSync with time which means not being forced to use NV cards for 7-8 years useful life of that monitor. Supporting GSync now would basically be counter to allowing for FreeSync standard to become a universal brand agnostic feature.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I largely agree. Further, the people who will pay over 500 dollars for a monitor probably have a pretty damn good PC to begin with, so they can most likely get over 100 fps in most games. G-Sync at such high frame rates become a lot less necessary, the real effects are below 60 fps. As such, you'd want a higher resolution, either 1440p or 4K.

And your point visavi Freesync is also spot on. NV has been vague on this issue, because they understand that they have to support Freesync eventually. They're pimping the G-sync monitors for all its worth while they can.
 
Mondozei said:
And your point visavi Freesync is also spot on. NV has been vague on this issue, because they understand that they have to support Freesync eventually. They're pimping the G-sync monitors for all its worth while they can.
Click to expand...

Thanks! I mean I really don't understand the excitement behind a locked in standard. Imagine buying an AMD or NV card and getting adaptive v-sync monitor working all the time without having to worry about picking sides?

Some gorgeous 32" 4K IPS monitors are now dropping below $1000:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9fWtIkQfO4

These will likely drop another $200-250 by end of 2015. With such major price movements and FreeSync monitors coming in 2015, imo it's hard to objectively be excited about a 24" TN 1080P Gsync monitor at $500.
 
Mondozei said:
It's not prices, it's supply and demand, something entirely different. Prices are a response to elasticity and market equilibrium. It's helpful to know what you're talking about before going on a lecture tour 😀
Click to expand...

So the supply does not meet the demand. How does that prove people are not buying the monitor and so the prices go up, as the author suggests?
 
96Firebird said:
So the supply does not meet the demand. How does that prove people are not buying the monitor and so the prices go up, as the author suggests?
Click to expand...

If ASUS can only make 3000 a month but the demand is 10,000, price goes up. However, that doesn't mean that the monitor is selling well when there are 13-15 million GPUs sold in 1 quarter and millions of LCDs a year. 1 year ago Sennheiser IE800 came out at $999 and they were in the top 2 best off-the-shelf EIMs. Once Shure released $999 SE846, IE800 fell to $499-799. Just because ASUS has supply issues doesn't mean the Swift is selling well in the context of the overall market. Just because people are buying it at $800-1000, also doesn't mean it's actually worth that much. Just like IE800's were grossly overpriced until competition showed up, so are all of these GSync monitors.

The newly released Acer 32" IPS 4K is already $920 on Amazon which makes a 27" Swift TN 2560x1440 almost laughable. By end of 2015, we should see sales on 32" 4K IPS at $700-750. There are going to be people who don't care if the monitor is TN and have no interest in FreeSync since they only buy NV. This has been the primary group who is buying the Swift now. In other words even if a 32" 4K IPS with FreeSync came out at $699 next year, these same gamers would still buy the Swift. There are enough NV faithful to buy all of Swift's stock considering how many NV cards are sold a year. However, adoption of GSync monitors is extremely slow considering NV commands 65%+ market share.

I think a lot of consumers aren't ready to commit without seeing which way the industry goes. Lack of high quality IPS/AVHA panels for GSync is also a big negative for a lot of high end gamers.
 
Marketing Gsync (or even Freesync) to a massive audience is going to be hard. It's a lot of tech speak currently. It needs to be marketed better to get mass adoption. Explaining Gsync to the average game who just picks up a new videocard when their graphics performance becomes unbearable, they simply won't care to hear that when they are purchasing a GTX 750Ti, they don't want to hear about some $500+ monitor.
 
RussianSensation said:
If ASUS can only make 3000 a month but the demand is 10,000, price goes up. However, that doesn't mean that the monitor is selling well when there are 13-15 million GPUs sold in 1 quarter and millions of LCDs a year. 1 year ago Sennheiser IE800 came out at $999 and they were in the top 2 best off-the-shelf EIMs. Once Shure released $999 SE846, IE800 fell to $499-799. Just because ASUS has supply issues doesn't mean the Swift is selling well in the context of the overall market. Just because people are buying it at $800-1000, also doesn't mean it's actually worth that much. Just like IE800's were grossly overpriced until competition showed up, so are all of these GSync monitors.

The newly released Acer 32" IPS 4K is already $920 on Amazon which makes a 27" Swift TN 2560x1440 almost laughable. By end of 2015, we should see sales on 32" 4K IPS at $700-750. There are going to be people who don't care if the monitor is TN and have no interest in FreeSync since they only buy NV. This has been the primary group who is buying the Swift now. In other words even if a 32" 4K IPS with FreeSync came out at $699 next year, these same gamers would still buy the Swift. There are enough NV faithful to buy all of Swift's stock considering how many NV cards are sold a year. However, adoption of GSync monitors is extremely slow considering NV commands 65%+ market share.

I think a lot of consumers aren't ready to commit without seeing which way the industry goes. Lack of high quality IPS/AVHA panels for GSync is also a big negative for a lot of high end gamers.
Click to expand...

Pure conjecture as usual.
 
tential said:
Marketing Gsync (or even Freesync) to a massive audience is going to be hard. It's a lot of tech speak currently. It needs to be marketed better to get mass adoption. Explaining Gsync to the average game who just picks up a new videocard when their graphics performance becomes unbearable, they simply won't care to hear that when they are purchasing a GTX 750Ti, they don't want to hear about some $500+ monitor.
Click to expand...

This makes sense to me. Only true geeks are going to get what x-sync is all about.

1. Freesync = AMD only
2. G-Sync = NV only

Those are your choices once Freesync is available.

Regardless, G-Sync is game changing in my opinion as a gaming geek and PC enthusiast. Games look beautiful on my Swift. Much better experience than I had on my U2711 from a gaming perspective.

I for one welcome my tear free gaming overlords.
 
RussianSensation said:
If ASUS can only make 3000 a month but the demand is 10,000, price goes up. However, that doesn't mean that the monitor is selling well when there are 13-15 million GPUs sold in 1 quarter and millions of LCDs a year. 1 year ago Sennheiser IE800 came out at $999 and they were in the top 2 best off-the-shelf EIMs. Once Shure released $999 SE846, IE800 fell to $499-799. Just because ASUS has supply issues doesn't mean the Swift is selling well in the context of the overall market. Just because people are buying it at $800-1000, also doesn't mean it's actually worth that much. Just like IE800's were grossly overpriced until competition showed up, so are all of these GSync monitors.
Click to expand...

Read what the author wrote. Really, take a look and read it. Having enthusiasts buy any product in greater quantities will NEVER make the price go down. That is not how the market works. No matter how you try to compare it to another product, or twist it to try to sell Freesync to the forum, you are essentially just bringing this post more off-topic.
 
DooKey said:
Pure conjecture as usual.
Click to expand...

Right...we'll see what happens in 2015-2017. Not everyone wants a stop gap solution which is what the Swift is. 2560x1440/1600 will never take off. The foreseeable future of PC gaming is going to entail gamers moving to 4K, bypassing the 2-2.5K resolutions. With prices of 4K consumers TVs dropping every year, it will become cheaper for major manufacturers to make 4K LEDs for the PC.

Also, the jump from 1440p to 4K is bigger than going from 1080p to 1440p. Looking at Steam survey there are a ton of gamers on 1080p and 720p displays. Once 4K tech enters the mainstream, millions of these gamers will upgrade in the next 10 years. Moreso, next gen consoles will likeky target 4K as well. Like it or not 1440p is a niche resolution.
 
96Firebird said:
Read what the author wrote. Really, take a look and read it. Having enthusiasts buy any product in greater quantities will NEVER make the price go down. That is not how the market works. No matter how you try to compare it to another product, or twist it to try to sell Freesync to the forum, you are essentially just bringing this post more off-topic.
Click to expand...

This is 100% wrong if you went to business school. Your statement is only true if you are infinitely 100% supply limited/always supply constrained. However, what the author clearly meant was that as demand for the monitor increases, the manufacturer would be able to either afford to buy more fixed equipment to manufacture the product which alleviates supply issues OR more likely that with much higher probable quantities demanded, ASUS can renegotiate much lower panel, assembly, logistics, packaging costs. This is Business 101. As demand for your product increases, you can exercise economies of scale in your supply chain to force price drops due to much higher bargaining power and volume orders, similar to how Apple and Walmart negotiate with their suppliers.

Furthermore, if you can manufacture 5-10X the units with high probability that demand will remain, it will take much quicker to recoup the fixed costs of your equipment. Right now the demand might be slightly outstripping supply but not making it worthwhile enough for the manufacturer to expand the assembly to 2-3 lines / order more robots, etc. Since the Swift is not a limited production Ferrari, in the normal course of business, the more customers buy the monitor, the higher the margin ASUS will get, thus allowing it to pass on the savings to consumers over time via a lower price. This is generally how early adopter technology actually works.

One other possibility why prices may not fall with much higher demand is if ASUS has supply chain (manufacturing defects, logistics constraints) issues. Therefore, it is not possible for them to increase supply tangibly even with 2-3-5X the demand. However, such scenearios are highly unlikely to persist for a long time for a firm such as ASUS.
 
Last edited:
RussianSensation said:
Right...we'll see what happens in 2015-2017. Not everyone wants a stop gap solution which is what the Swift is. 2560x1440/1600 will never take off. The foreseeable future of PC gaming is going to entail gamers moving to 4K, bypassing the 2-2.5K resolutions. With prices of 4K consumers TVs dropping every year, it will become cheaper for major manufacturers to make 4K LEDs for the PC.

Also, the jump from 1440p to 4K is bigger than going from 1080p to 1440p. Looking at Steam survey there are a ton of gamers on 1080p and 720p displays. Once 4K tech enters the mainstream, millions of these gamers will upgrade in the next 10 years. Moreso, next gen consoles will likeky target 4K as well. Like it or not 1440p is a niche resolution.
Click to expand...

4k will not be mainstream for many years. Until affordable (for the masses) single card solutions can push 4k reasonably 4k will be just like 1440/1600p is right now. 4k is for the 1% of gamers just like SLI/CF.
 
When there are more people wanting to buy than can be produced, prices go up, which is what has happened with G-sync so far, but once supply can keep up, having a lot of sales often allows the prices to go down, as long as there is competition. We are hoping that will take place with Freesync/A-sync.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top