Beforehand: I’m a casual gamer. For me a PC is primarly a workstation not a toy. But when I want to play, I do it right. That’s why I assembled a very silent (thanks to a premium fan) and at that time a very powerful gaming PC: AMD FX 8350 processor (8-core) overclocked to 4.4 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM G.Skill 1866 MHz and a GeForce GTX 780 TI from the house EVGA with SC version,also slightly overclocked. Granted, there is already more powerful hardware, but mine is now almost half a year old. What was missing was a real gaming monitor with 3D function that replaces my 22-inch 60 Hz screen by LG.
My choice was this monitor because at the present time it was the only device that even supported 1440p resolutionon on 27 inches. Up until now my graphics cards has been bored with all games at Full-HD at the maxium resolution. Now it can show what it can do. And it will have to because with 70% more pixels than before the fans are clearly audible. That’s why I recommend everyone who wants to buy this display to use a high-end graphics card. It would be a shame to not enjoy the high resolution image at full details. A GTX 780 seems to me to be currently the lowest limit, which should be used.
Firstly: I can’t verify that the desktop usage at 144 Hz is really super smooth but my hold 60 Hz display was top notch. There is no visible difference even if the priests of the apocalypse beg to differ. Although if you tune down the Asus to 60 Hz you’ll really see a difference to 144 Hz. Which presents the question why a 750€ device offers the same results as a 5 year old 22 incher which cost 200 euros back then. Doesn’t matter – the image is lush, the colors are strong and full of contrast and there is finally some room for multiple windows. If find large white areas to be unpleasent. In a dark enviroment it hurts a bit in the eyes. But that can easily be fixed by some settings. No stars removed for this.
The display shows it’s true abilities while gaming: The games look amazing at the 1440p resolution. Here again a graphic card by Nvidia is recommended to be sure that technologies like G-Sync are really used and tearing/blur is reduced even more.
On the TN-Panel: I sit about 1 meter from the display. The image itself is evenly lit, but due to the proximity to the screen you get the impression in the desktop operating that the corners are not completely illuminated, although they de facto are. That’s just the technology behind it. A little more distance from the screen makes this effect disappear or you have to get a screen with a different technology. Therefore also no star deduction, that would be unjustified. Interestingly, the effect disappears while playing. I at least don’t see it. And yes: The black while gaming is black, even with backlighting. The word "light" includes that something is lit. But it is not so bright that it appears gray, as previous speakers partially said before. I find that to be a bit overplayed and I can’t confirm it.
On the 3D-Mode: I got myself some NVidia 3D Vision 2 glasses and of course tested them immediatly. Guys: 3D on the PC is amazing. However it’s important that the games really support it. Some games that are not 3D-Vision certified just get converted. It sometimes happens that many objects are not rendered properly which induces headaches. That’s too bad but I think that more and more games will be optimized for 3D. The technologie is mature and I find it to be way better on the PC than in the 3D cinema. It’s tons of fun and I don’t want to go without anymore. That the image gets a bit darker because of the shutter technologie is just part of the deal. Nvidia-Lightboost offers a solution to this problem. The image can get raised to the same level of brightness as in the 2D mode. Very practical and I like it quite much.
All in all I am very pleased with the monitor. It offers an extremely sharp, high-contrast image, which is ideal for both gaming as well as work. At the present time the monitor costs around 700 dollars, which is pretty steep. But as someone who wears glasses I know that eyes are a very precious commodity. So why not do them something nice for them, you’ll look at the display a lot and probably for a few years until the next display arrives. So it doesn’t really make a difference if I spend 700 dollars here or for another gaming monitor that only has full-hd but costs 200-250 dollars lower. Even Asus seems to currently know that they are market leader 😉 With a little more competition the price will probably fall to realistic 400-500 dollars sometimes.
But there is one thing: A dead pixel. It’s located quite unfavorably, 3cm from the bottom edge excactly in the middle of the display. In a colorful image it isn’t really visible but to be honest: At this price, with a product in the top price segment, I expect flawlessness. I actually should remove 2 stars for this but except for the dead display I am completly conviced by the display. Therefore, only 1 star deduction. I’ll make use of my right of return and replace the screen. That’s just not okay.
Thanks the author: Jone