ASUS Intros TUF Gaming VG279Q1R 27-inch Monitor

[btarunr]

ASUS today rolled out the TUF Gaming VG279Q1R, a fast 27-inch gaming monitor. If you're willing to overlook its Full HD (1920 x 1080 pixels) resolution, on offer is an IPS panel with 144 Hz refresh-rate, 1 ms MPRT response time, ELMB (extreme low motion blur), and AMD FreeSync Premium support. ASUS offers most of its gamer-specific innovations such as GamePlus (hardware crosshairs, FPS counter, timer, multi-display alignment); and GameVisual (game genre-specific display presets). Display inputs include a DisplayPort 1.2a, and two HDMI 1.4a. The stand offers basic tilt adjustments, and can be detached to reveal a VESA wall mount. We expect a $250 price.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Regeneration]

Let me guess...

Asus figured out how ridiculous their previous announcement was:

ASUS Announces two new Full-HD 75Hz IPS Gaming Monitors

ASUS has just announced two new IPS Full-HD monitors in 24" and 27" sizes, the VZ249HEG1R and VZ279HEG1R. These two new gaming monitors both feature refresh rates of 75Hz, a luminance of 250 cd/m², a contrast ratio of 1,000: 1, and a 1 ms response time. Input is barebones with only a single HDMI...

www.techpowerup.com

So they came up with this.

1ms MPRT, ELMBB, BSBA, OTAP, GAGR, and so on = anything but GTG = fake spec.

 

[Chrispy_]

Let me guess...

Asus figured out how ridiculous their previous announcement was:

ASUS Announces two new Full-HD 75Hz IPS Gaming Monitors

ASUS has just announced two new IPS Full-HD monitors in 24" and 27" sizes, the VZ249HEG1R and VZ279HEG1R. These two new gaming monitors both feature refresh rates of 75Hz, a luminance of 250 cd/m², a contrast ratio of 1,000: 1, and a 1 ms response time. Input is barebones with only a single HDMI...

www.techpowerup.com

So they came up with this.

1ms MPRT, ELMBB, BSBA, OTAP, GAGR, and so on = anything but GTG = fake spec.

Indeed! GTG response times are omitted from specs about as often as panel type when it's budget TN;

"Call it anything else - Easyview, Readybrite, Clearpicture, Turboview - but you're fired if I see TN listed anywhere"
- PHB at MonitorCorp

I also wonder if there's scope for a class-action lawsuit against any monitor manufacturers claiming 1ms because when tested by reputable reviewers with the right testing hardware, they never even get close to 1ms.

Asus TUF Gaming VG27AQ Review - TFTCentral

27" gaming screen from Asus, featuring for the first time support for simultaneous VRR (FreeSync and G-sync) and a motion blur reduction

www.tftcentral.co.uk

1ms? No. Actually 3-7ms - and even then, the overshoot error is almost 30% for those 3ms transitions, which is so wrong, you can't really call that a valid pixel response in the first place.

 

[Vayra86]

With displays its actually very simple. You can just assume by rule of thumb that its utter shit, and maybe, just maybe you might be surprised here and there.

If this IPS actually has low ghosting and a decent peak brightness it looks pretty good. ELMB is a nice feature. But for 250 bucks... doubtful.

 

[HD64G]

They need to get that on sale for close to 200 (€/$) in order to be competitive.

 

[LTUGamer]

OK, so TUF motherboards series all the time was labeled as "highest reliability" series, while ROG series was marked as "maximum performance series"

It is clear that all motherboards has +/- same reliability. I had ability to play with Sabertooth Z97 Mark 1 and I can say that it is regular motherboard with "Thermoshield" on it ant two additional fans which can blow air inside that plastic... And actually it is the only one motherboard which was broken out of the box. Two RAM slots were dead So basically they are regular motherboards, which use certified components (but doesn't mean that better components):

To prove that realibility is not the case:
1. https://www.hardware.fr/articles/862-2/cartes-meres.html

-Average the most reliable manufacturer (AsRock) fault ratio: 1,75%
-Average Asus motherboard fault ratio: 3,71%
-ASUS Sabertooth X58 fault ratio: 6,69% (5th worst rank that year, 4th worst motherboard among Asus products)

2. https://www.hardware.fr/articles/920-2/cartes-meres.html

-Average the most reliable manufacturer (Gigabyte) fault ratio: 2,02%
-Average Asus motherboard fault ratio: 2,31%
-ASUS SABERTOOTH Z77 fault ratio: 4,95% (4th worst rank that year, 2nd worst motherboard among Asus products)

3. https://www.hardware.fr/articles/934-2/cartes-meres.html

-Average Asus motherboard fault ratio: 2,31% . This time Asus had the best score in reliability
-ASUS SABERTOOTH 990FX R2.0 fault ratio: 5,31% (8th worst rank that year, 2nd worst motherboard among Asus products)

So I believe that we can conclude: Asus TUF motherboards are not better and not not worse than others in terms of reliability. But OK, lets forget it now. Lets talk about monitors again

TUF monitor? Seriously? What it does mean? What it should stand for? More reliable monitor? What differences are among TUF monitors and regular monitors? Looks like the regular monitor with expensive badge which even doesn't fit for this market...

 

[Gmr_Chick]

OK, so TUF motherboards series all the time was labeled as "highest reliability" series, while ROG series was marked as "maximum performance series"

It is clear that all motherboards has +/- same reliability. I had ability to play with Sabertooth Z97 Mark 1 and I can say that it is regular motherboard with "Thermoshield" on it ant two additional fans which can blow air inside that plastic... And actually it is the only one motherboard which was broken out of the box. Two RAM slots were dead So basically they are regular motherboards, which use certified components (but doesn't mean that better components):

View attachment 151489

To prove that realibility is not the case:
1. https://www.hardware.fr/articles/862-2/cartes-meres.html

-Average the most reliable manufacturer (AsRock) fault ratio: 1,75%
-Average Asus motherboard fault ratio: 3,71%
-ASUS Sabertooth X58 fault ratio: 6,69% (5th worst rank that year, 4th worst motherboard among Asus products)

2. https://www.hardware.fr/articles/920-2/cartes-meres.html

-Average the most reliable manufacturer (Gigabyte) fault ratio: 2,02%
-Average Asus motherboard fault ratio: 2,31%
-ASUS SABERTOOTH Z77 fault ratio: 4,95% (4th worst rank that year, 2nd worst motherboard among Asus products)

3. https://www.hardware.fr/articles/934-2/cartes-meres.html

-Average Asus motherboard fault ratio: 2,31% . This time Asus had the best score in reliability
-ASUS SABERTOOTH 990FX R2.0 fault ratio: 5,31% (8th worst rank that year, 2nd worst motherboard among Asus products)

So I believe that we can conclude: Asus TUF motherboards are not better and not not worse than others in terms of reliability. But OK, lets forget it now. Lets talk about monitors again

TUF monitor? Seriously? What it does mean? What it should stand for? More reliable monitor? What differences are among TUF monitors and regular monitors? Looks like the regular monitor with expensive badge which even doesn't fit for this market...

I've said this before to describe the clusterf^$k that continues to be the Asus TUF series GPUs, most notably being the RX 5700 XT, but I'll say it again. TUF stands for The Ultimate Flop

In all seriousness though, I'm not even sure what makes Asus' earlier TUF branded mobos necessarily "better" than other boards at the time. A board can be built with high quality components, but that doesn't necessarily make it any less fragile than a board built with meh components. Motherboards are just delicate any way you slice it.