Upvote Upvoted 10 Downvote Downvoted
NVIDIA and ASUS team up for 360hz monitor
posted in Hardware
1
#1
0 Frags +

https://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/status/1214014200768385024
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/nvidia-geforce-360hz-esports-gaming-monitor/

What are people's thoughts on this? Those of you who went 120/144 to 240 in the past few years, is this something worth investing in/upgrading to at all if the rest of your competitive gaming rig is solid? Do you think the diminishing returns seen in the last major refresh rate jump will be even smaller?

https://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/status/1214014200768385024
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/nvidia-geforce-360hz-esports-gaming-monitor/

What are people's thoughts on this? Those of you who went 120/144 to 240 in the past few years, is this something worth investing in/upgrading to at all if the rest of your competitive gaming rig is solid? Do you think the diminishing returns seen in the last major refresh rate jump will be even smaller?
2
#2
-7 Frags +

stupid, waste of money, human eye is 29.97 fps

stupid, waste of money, human eye is 29.97 fps
3
#3
-1 Frags +

I'm personally waiting for 480 hz

I'm personally waiting for 480 hz
4
#4
7 Frags +

idk i used 240hz in a zowie booth at dreamhack atlanta and tbh it didnt seem that drastic from 60hz to 144hz

so i just feel like even higher refresh rates won't be entirely as noticeable but this is a pretty big gap from 144

idk i used 240hz in a zowie booth at dreamhack atlanta and tbh it didnt seem that drastic from 60hz to 144hz

so i just feel like even higher refresh rates won't be entirely as noticeable but this is a pretty big gap from 144
5
#5
46 Frags +

you cant get 360 fps on a playable config

you cant get 360 fps on a playable config
6
#6
11 Frags +

Give me affordable 1440p/4k 240hz with good colors and back light strobing first.

Give me affordable 1440p/4k 240hz with good colors and back light strobing first.
7
#7
4 Frags +
YeeHawyou cant get 360 fps on a playable config

borderline doable but 100 percent up to the point why
that pc is going to be tf2 exclusive

[quote=YeeHaw]you cant get 360 fps on a playable config[/quote]
borderline doable but 100 percent up to the point why
that pc is going to be tf2 exclusive
8
#8
12 Frags +

next step: play csgo in rl for infinite hz and fps

next step: play csgo in rl for infinite hz and fps
9
#9
7 Frags +

give me a 144 hz for 100 bucks instead of this extravagant nonsense.

give me a 144 hz for 100 bucks instead of this extravagant nonsense.
10
#10
0 Frags +

i wonder how much smoother than 240 this is, i also wonder how much input lag it will have

i wonder how much smoother than 240 this is, i also wonder how much input lag it will have
11
#11
7 Frags +

jokes on u fuckers thalash already has one and hes comming back while never missing a -60 shot again

jokes on u fuckers thalash already has one and hes comming back while never missing a -60 shot again
12
#12
6 Frags +

1/140 =7.14 ms
1/360 =2.78 ms

7.14/2.78 = 2.58 time more smoother

assuming you can get 360 fps, which is pretty hard

the only way to make it worth your money is also by having a 3K pc build i assume
+ you can expect a solid price for those, i would bet over 800$

1/140 =7.14 ms
1/360 =2.78 ms

7.14/2.78 = 2.58 time more smoother

assuming you can get 360 fps, which is pretty hard

the only way to make it worth your money is also by having a 3K pc build i assume
+ you can expect a solid price for those, i would bet over 800$
13
#13
3 Frags +

gotta get a 2080ti to max out a 1080p panel now

gotta get a 2080ti to max out a 1080p panel now
14
#14
1 Frags +

That's going to be an expensive monitor on top of the very expensive computer required to run games at 300+ fps.
With the diminishing returns going from 120 to 240 I don't think going 240 to 360 will be a cost-effective difference.
Doubt that panel will be very impressive to look at either, quality and color wise.

Cool tech for the future though, gsync and similar tech definitely benefits from a higher refresh rate cap.

That's going to be an expensive monitor on top of the very expensive computer required to run games at 300+ fps.
With the diminishing returns going from 120 to 240 I don't think going 240 to 360 will be a cost-effective difference.
Doubt that panel will be very impressive to look at either, quality and color wise.

Cool tech for the future though, gsync and similar tech definitely benefits from a higher refresh rate cap.
15
#15
15 Frags +

Gl getting +300fps on sunshine mid

Gl getting +300fps on sunshine mid
16
#16
-5 Frags +

Unlikely this will look much better than 240 imo. In terms of performance maybe mastercoms or someone has some benchmark data on different systems but i doubt you're feasibly getting 300 out of tf2 in any 6s game.

Unlikely this will look much better than 240 imo. In terms of performance maybe mastercoms or someone has some benchmark data on different systems but i doubt you're feasibly getting 300 out of tf2 in any 6s game.
17
#17
10 Frags +

Hey Guys I see you're talking about reaching 300 fps in TF2, just remember that I have a config.

Hey Guys I see you're talking about reaching 300 fps in TF2, just remember that I have a config.
18
#18
3 Frags +
Olgha7.14/2.78 = 2.58 time more smoother

assuming you can get 360 fps, which is pretty hard

And assuming that the pixels actually transition fast enough for 360Hz. Those 240Hz IPS panels can't keep up with the refresh rate either, so I'm expecting this panel to be a hot load of spec sheet wanking horseshite as well.

[quote=Olgha]7.14/2.78 = 2.58 time more smoother

assuming you can get 360 fps, which is pretty hard[/quote]
And assuming that the pixels actually transition fast enough for 360Hz. Those 240Hz IPS panels can't keep up with the refresh rate either, so I'm expecting this panel to be a hot load of spec sheet wanking horseshite as well.
19
#19
4 Frags +

Pessimistic.

I can only assume this is going to cost far to much to even remotely justify it barring FPS professional players, perhaps even professional players in Racing games?

But even FPS professional players what games with active competitive scenes can actually achieve 300+ FPS, let alone 360+ when you actually need/want it? Especially if said players are using LAN PCs that haven't exactly been setup to really be able to push that kind of FPS, afaik LAN PCs even for CSGO majors don't have i9-9900ks's @ 5.0+ GHz with C states disabled.

The things is I can't think of any unless it's some ultra-specific scenario that may very well be map dependent in a game like CSGO. Ex. AWPing double doors on Dust 2 on a high end PC that hasn't been super optimized would likely still be around 360fps on low settings.

So the use scenario for a display like this is exceptionally limited, with what will likely be a high cost barrier, but it still gets worse from here...

Pixel response times in IPS, VA and even TN 100% without a doubt can not support the color transitions necessary for 360Hz. Taking even the best recorded pixel response time recorded from a 240Hz display by tft central in terms of the lowest Average with minimal overshoot we have a display that can't even 100% consistently do a pixel transition within the refresh of 240Hz at with the time interval of ~4.17ms between refreshes.

https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/asus_rog_swift_pg278q/response_5.png

At 360Hz with 2.78ms between refreshes we see that over 60% of those pixel transitions would be to slow...

This monitor has basically everything working against it.

  • Limited pool of people this would be relevant too
  • Pool becomes even more limited due to virtually no games offering that kind of framerate
  • The few use cases for this monitor are extremely map and/or role dependent for the games that can even come close to supporting this kind of FPS on modern hardware and are still active.
  • Due to the fact the panels themselves needing to be binned means availability of this monitor at reasonable prices is going to be non-existent. If it's retail price is reasonable it'll just be bought out instantly and resold for much more by scalpers.
  • Given the best pixel response times measured for various 240Hz panels odds are even well binned panels can't keep up with the pixel transitions necessary on a 360Hz display.

TL;DR This monitor is a tech demo that can be bought and nothing more. Also very likely to have some major QC issues if the binning specification is to loose.

Pessimistic.

I can only assume this is going to cost far to much to even remotely justify it barring FPS professional players, perhaps even professional players in Racing games?

But even FPS professional players what games with active competitive scenes can actually achieve 300+ FPS, let alone 360+ when you actually need/want it? Especially if said players are using LAN PCs that haven't exactly been setup to really be able to push that kind of FPS, afaik LAN PCs even for CSGO majors don't have i9-9900ks's @ 5.0+ GHz with C states disabled.

The things is I can't think of any unless it's some ultra-specific scenario that may very well be map dependent in a game like CSGO. Ex. AWPing double doors on Dust 2 on a high end PC that hasn't been super optimized would likely still be around 360fps on low settings.

So the use scenario for a display like this is exceptionally limited, with what will likely be a high cost barrier, but it still gets worse from here...

Pixel response times in IPS, VA and even TN 100% without a doubt can not support the color transitions necessary for 360Hz. Taking even the best recorded pixel response time recorded from a 240Hz display by [url=https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_rog_swift_pg278q.htm#response_times]tft central[/url] in terms of the lowest Average with minimal overshoot we have a display that can't even 100% consistently do a pixel transition within the refresh of 240Hz at with the time interval of ~4.17ms between refreshes.

[img]https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/asus_rog_swift_pg278q/response_5.png[/img]

At 360Hz with 2.78ms between refreshes we see that over 60% of those pixel transitions would be to slow...

This monitor has basically everything working against it.

[list]
[*] Limited pool of people this would be relevant too
[*] Pool becomes even more limited due to virtually no games offering that kind of framerate
[*] The few use cases for this monitor are extremely map and/or role dependent for the games that can even come close to supporting this kind of FPS on modern hardware and are still active.
[*] Due to the fact the panels themselves needing to be binned means availability of this monitor at reasonable prices is going to be non-existent. If it's retail price is reasonable it'll just be bought out instantly and resold for much more by scalpers.
[*] Given the best pixel response times measured for various 240Hz panels odds are even well binned panels can't keep up with the pixel transitions necessary on a 360Hz display.
[/list]

[b]TL;DR[/b] This monitor is a tech demo that can be bought and nothing more. Also very likely to have some major QC issues if the binning specification is to loose.
20
#20
1 Frags +

Well it is G-Sync, which is pretty much the only sensible way to run 200+ Hz. Constant 360+ fps obviously aren't going to happen.

And in all fairness you should look at the 24.5" 240 Hz panels, which are slightly faster, but I still expect the overdrive voltage necessary to hammer it down below 3ms to do terrible things to the overshoots.

Well it is G-Sync, which is pretty much the only sensible way to run 200+ Hz. Constant 360+ fps obviously aren't going to happen.

And in all fairness you should look at the 24.5" 240 Hz panels, which are slightly faster, but I still expect the overdrive voltage necessary to hammer it down below 3ms to do terrible things to the overshoots.
21
#21
-1 Frags +

so the point of having such a high refresh rate for csgo is to see someone peek a door 5ms sooner when human reaction time is at least 30 times that value with a variance from test to test of like 4 times the value?

so the point of having such a high refresh rate for csgo is to see someone peek a door 5ms sooner when human reaction time is at least 30 times that value with a variance from test to test of like 4 times the value?
22
#22
0 Frags +
Twiggyso the point of having such a high refresh rate for csgo is to see someone peek a door 5ms sooner when human reaction time is at least 30 times that value with a variance from test to test of like 4 times the value?

every bit helps when you are a slow boomer

[quote=Twiggy]so the point of having such a high refresh rate for csgo is to see someone peek a door 5ms sooner when human reaction time is at least 30 times that value with a variance from test to test of like 4 times the value?[/quote]
every bit helps when you are a slow boomer
23
#23
0 Frags +
SetsulWell it is G-Sync, which is pretty much the only sensible way to run 200+ Hz. Constant 360+ fps obviously aren't going to happen.

And in all fairness you should look at the 24.5" 240 Hz panels, which are slightly faster, but I still expect the overdrive voltage necessary to hammer it down below 3ms to do terrible things to the overshoots.

Perhaps you're right but even the reviewed 24.5in Panels still fail to meet a margin for 360Hz in over 40% of possible transitions.

Asus ROG Swift PG278Q
Asus ROG Swift PG258Q
Acer Nitro XF252Q
AOC AGON AG251FZ (this monitor has really bad RTC overshoot at the OD settings you would need to use for 240Hz or even 144Hz as the lower ones are to slow)

Of those 4 the Asus PG278Q is the most consistent in terms of pixel transition only 2/30 transitions TFT central reported wouldn't be able to be within the timeframe for 240Hz. However 21/30 wouldn't be within the time frame for 360Hz.

The Acer Nitro XF252Q has 3/30 transitions that can't meet that time interval for 240Hz. However and this is where you're technically correct it fairs better on average for 360Hz where only 14/30 can't transition within the 360Hz refresh time. Of those 4 monitors this the only monitor where the pixel response time on at least 1 transition was so slow that it would still be present after 2 refreshes at 360Hz (255 to 200 transition = 5.8ms). On a bit of tangent but this certainly seems like the best 240Hz TN in terms of overall pixel response time and how rarely RTC overshoot happens.

Side note for people who're wondering "What is RTC overshoot?" This is the amount a pixel overshoots it's desired tone and TFT central displays this as a percentage. The AOC AGON AG251FZ has the worst transition from the tone level 50 to tone level 200 at 49.8% which means it reached tone level ~274 before settling back to 200.

https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/asus_rog_swift_pg278q/response_comparison.jpg

This is an image that shows the PG278Q with it's various OD settings. Off is when the pixel transition is to slow but there's no overshoot. Normal is close to perfect for minimal overshoot and pixels transitioning fast enough. Extreme is really bad overshoot.

[quote=Setsul]Well it is G-Sync, which is pretty much the only sensible way to run 200+ Hz. Constant 360+ fps obviously aren't going to happen.

And in all fairness you should look at the 24.5" 240 Hz panels, which are slightly faster, but I still expect the overdrive voltage necessary to hammer it down below 3ms to do terrible things to the overshoots.[/quote]

Perhaps you're right but even the reviewed 24.5in Panels still fail to meet a margin for 360Hz in over 40% of possible transitions.

[url=https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_rog_swift_pg278q.htm#detailed_response]Asus ROG Swift PG278Q[/url]
[url=https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_rog_swift_pg258q.htm#detailed_response]Asus ROG Swift PG258Q[/url]
[url=https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/acer_nitro_xf252q.htm#detailed_response]Acer Nitro XF252Q[/url]
[url=https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/aoc_agon_ag251fz.htm#detailed_response]AOC AGON AG251FZ[/url] (this monitor has really bad RTC overshoot at the OD settings you would need to use for 240Hz or even 144Hz as the lower ones are to slow)

Of those 4 the Asus PG278Q is the most consistent in terms of pixel transition only 2/30 transitions TFT central reported wouldn't be able to be within the timeframe for 240Hz. However 21/30 wouldn't be within the time frame for 360Hz.

The Acer Nitro XF252Q has 3/30 transitions that can't meet that time interval for 240Hz. However and this is where you're technically correct it fairs better on average for 360Hz where only 14/30 can't transition within the 360Hz refresh time. Of those 4 monitors this the only monitor where the pixel response time on at least 1 transition was so slow that it would still be present after 2 refreshes at 360Hz (255 to 200 transition = 5.8ms). [i]On a bit of tangent but this certainly seems like the best 240Hz TN in terms of overall pixel response time and how rarely RTC overshoot happens.[/i]

[b]Side note[/b] for people who're wondering "What is RTC overshoot?" This is the amount a pixel overshoots it's desired tone and TFT central displays this as a percentage. The AOC AGON AG251FZ has the worst transition from the tone level 50 to tone level 200 at 49.8% which means it reached tone level ~274 before settling back to 200.

[img]https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/asus_rog_swift_pg278q/response_comparison.jpg[/img]
This is an image that shows the PG278Q with it's various OD settings. Off is when the pixel transition is to slow but there's no overshoot. Normal is close to perfect for minimal overshoot and pixels transitioning fast enough. Extreme is really bad overshoot.
24
#24
3 Frags +

Gonna give me the ultime advantage on endiff !!

Gonna give me the ultime advantage on endiff !!
25
#25
1 Frags +
Olgha

Don't use percentages to compare frame times. It is misleading. Humans don't see in magnitude of relative change, they see what is absolutely happening in the world. Now, what you can do is instead relatively compare two absolute frame time differences.

For example

60Hz to 144Hz:

1/60 = 16.7ms
1/144 = 6.9ms

16.7ms - 6.9ms = 9.8ms difference

144Hz to 360Hz:

1/144 = 6.9ms
1/360 = 2.8ms

6.9ms - 2.8ms = 4.1ms difference.

4.1ms / 9.8ms = 42%

So, we can say that it's less than half the benefit of moving from 60Hz to 144Hz.

[quote=Olgha][/quote]
Don't use percentages to compare frame times. It is misleading. Humans don't see in magnitude of relative change, they see what is absolutely happening in the world. Now, what you can do is instead relatively compare two absolute frame time differences.

For example

60Hz to 144Hz:

1/60 = 16.7ms
1/144 = 6.9ms

16.7ms - 6.9ms = 9.8ms difference

144Hz to 360Hz:

1/144 = 6.9ms
1/360 = 2.8ms

6.9ms - 2.8ms = 4.1ms difference.

4.1ms / 9.8ms = 42%

So, we can say that it's less than half the benefit of moving from 60Hz to 144Hz.
26
#26
0 Frags +

#23
That's why I wrote:

SetsulAnd in all fairness you should look at the 24.5" 240 Hz panels, which are slightly faster, but I still expect the overdrive voltage necessary to hammer it down below 3ms to do terrible things to the overshoots.

It's unsurprising that a 240 Hz or even 144 Hz monitor like the PG278Q would not be run with enough overdrive for 360 Hz when that ruins the quality. What would be the point?

Also why do you even bother comparing monitors with different version of the same panel? The one with the oldest 240 Hz subversion (M250HTN01.0) is the worst and the one with the newest (M250HTN01.9) is the best. Again, what would be the point if it were otherwise?

And it's not about the 24.5" panels being a tiny bit faster, it's the fact that that 360 Hz is basically guaranteed to use the next subversion of M250HTN01. Probably M250HTN01.B or C (A is 75 Hz). Maybe if nVidia can convince to lie about it they'll use a different part number but it'll still be the same panel.

#23
That's why I wrote:
[quote=Setsul]And in all fairness you should look at the 24.5" 240 Hz panels, which are slightly faster, but [b]I still expect the overdrive voltage necessary to hammer it down below 3ms to do terrible things to the overshoots.[/b][/quote]

It's unsurprising that a 240 Hz or even 144 Hz monitor like the PG278Q would not be run with enough overdrive for 360 Hz when that ruins the quality. What would be the point?

Also why do you even bother comparing monitors with different version of the same panel? The one with the oldest 240 Hz subversion (M250HTN01.0) is the worst and the one with the newest (M250HTN01.9) is the best. Again, what would be the point if it were otherwise?

And it's not about the 24.5" panels being a tiny bit faster, it's the fact that that 360 Hz is basically guaranteed to use the next subversion of M250HTN01. Probably M250HTN01.B or C (A is 75 Hz). Maybe if nVidia can convince to lie about it they'll use a different part number but it'll still be the same panel.
27
#27
2 Frags +

This is now overkill.

I recently picked up the XL2546 and while the transition from 144 to 240hz is substantial (scout fights are significantly smoother) it is much more subtle than the jump from 60 to 144. I believe that a lot of people would'nt perceive the difference between a 144 and 240hz monitor.

There is also the matter of outputting 360 fps in the middle of a team fight. That requires serious hardware and a very optimized and stripped system.

This is now overkill.

I recently picked up the XL2546 and while the transition from 144 to 240hz is substantial (scout fights are significantly smoother) it is much more subtle than the jump from 60 to 144. I believe that a lot of people would'nt perceive the difference between a 144 and 240hz monitor.

There is also the matter of outputting 360 fps in the middle of a team fight. That requires serious hardware and a very optimized and stripped system.
28
#28
0 Frags +

G-Sync though. If you drop to 280 fps in the middle of a fight you still get 280 Hz smoothness.
Or 250. Of course if you buy this to upgrade from 240 to 250 Hz I'd really question your life choices. But theoretically a 240 Hz monitor with G-Sync/FreeSync should always be better than or in the absolute worst case as good as one with 144 Hz. Same applies to 360 Hz + Sync vs 240 Hz (+Sync).

The big question is the price and how good it'll actually be beyond the theory.
This could very well be to 360 Hz what the VG248QE was for Lightboost. Aka "it works, but I really wouldn't want to look at it".
Give it a few months or a year or so to fix the worst issues and we might actually see decent 360 Hz monitors. But I'd always bet against the first product getting everything right.

G-Sync though. If you drop to 280 fps in the middle of a fight you still get 280 Hz smoothness.
Or 250. Of course if you buy this to upgrade from 240 to 250 Hz I'd really question your life choices. But theoretically a 240 Hz monitor with G-Sync/FreeSync should always be better than or in the absolute worst case as good as one with 144 Hz. Same applies to 360 Hz + Sync vs 240 Hz (+Sync).

The big question is the price and how good it'll actually be beyond the theory.
This could very well be to 360 Hz what the VG248QE was for Lightboost. Aka "it works, but I really wouldn't want to look at it".
Give it a few months or a year or so to fix the worst issues and we might actually see decent 360 Hz monitors. But I'd always bet against the first product getting everything right.
29
#29
0 Frags +
YeeHawyou cant get 360 fps on a playable config

sure, but without vsync you'll still see an improvement. Its probably nowhere near worth the price tag though

[quote=YeeHaw]you cant get 360 fps on a playable config[/quote]
sure, but without vsync you'll still see an improvement. Its probably nowhere near worth the price tag though
30
#30
4 Frags +

Sorry for the necro but I thought this would be worth adding.

Even though nobody can realistically get 360 FPS consistently, the higher refresh rates allow for better motion blur reduction at lower refresh rates. An example would be the Viewsonic XG270, which has a native refresh rate of 240Hz but near CRT levels of motion clarity at 120Hz. That's no surprise, as it's the only "Blur Busters Approved" monitor out right now. The more refresh rate headroom a monitor has, the higher the refresh rates it can achieve with the least amount of crosstalk.

It's a shame the "Extremely Low Motion Blur-sync" on my 280hz monitor wasn't actually calibrated by a real human, because the extra 40Hz should allow for even higher refresh crosstalk-free strobing compared to the Viewsonic, but no. Just don't get the VG279QM if you're getting it for the motion blur reduction.

Sorry for the necro but I thought this would be worth adding.

Even though nobody can realistically get 360 FPS consistently, the higher refresh rates allow for better motion blur reduction at lower refresh rates. An example would be the Viewsonic XG270, which has a native refresh rate of 240Hz but near CRT levels of motion clarity at 120Hz. That's no surprise, as it's the only "Blur Busters Approved" monitor out right now. The more refresh rate headroom a monitor has, the higher the refresh rates it can achieve with the least amount of crosstalk.

It's a shame the "Extremely Low Motion Blur-sync" on my 280hz monitor wasn't actually calibrated by a real human, because the extra 40Hz should allow for even higher refresh crosstalk-free strobing compared to the Viewsonic, but no. Just don't get the VG279QM if you're getting it for the motion blur reduction.
Please sign in through STEAM to post a comment.