ROG Strix XG27UCG: ASUS presents 4K and 160 Hz gaming monitor that also supports special 320 Hz mode

[Redaktion]

ASUS has presented the first example of a dual display mode LCD gaming monitor. To be sold as the ROG Strix XG27UCG, the 27-inch gaming monitor will be capable of operating at 4K and 160 Hz or 1080p and 320 Hz on demand.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/ROG-Strix-XG27UCG-ASUS-presents-4K-and-160-Hz-gaming-monitor-that-also-supports-special-320-Hz-mode.842312.0.html

[NikoB]

Another piece of garbage, now from Asus - it has no real support for 160Hz via DP1.4b, because... you need 32Gbps of useful data, and 1.4b is 25.92 maximum. This means that DSC is used - lossy compression.
However, potential stupid gaming buyers probably won't even notice this. HDMI 2.1, I'm sure, again does not support the FRL5/6 modes, so most likely the band, like other monitors, is cut to a shameful 24Gbps, which is even worse in practice with DSC than with DP1.4b. What remains for a high-quality signal? If there is no TB4 input port with 40Gbps, then nothing.

In fact, this monitor is a deliberate fake in terms of picture quality for 2 types of inputs at once - DP/HDMI. And taking into account the fact that TB4 ports, even if there is one, on laptops are most often connected to igpu, you can forget about high fps from dgpu.

[Ednumero]

Big fan of dual-mode tech, but again that 320Hz@1080p should really be 640Hz@1080p if the monitor can indeed support 160Hz@4K! Manufacturers need to chill with this linear gating of the quadratic complexity of resolution scaling.

Agree that the ports ought to support the full bandwidth that the monitor calls for.

[NikoB]

The frame rate doesn't make any sense if the screen panel has a response rate many times higher.

In order for the frame rate to actually work out in 100% of cases, a response is required that is guaranteed to be less than 1/(vertical frame rate)

Without measurements of real response time, all these Hertz are meaningless and a scam of ordinary buyers.

Well, secondly, let me remind you that the reaction time in those games is strictly limited by the overall system reaction time (from initial action to picture on screen) for any action from user. As Jarrod showed in his reviews, in the best models of the same laptops it is no less than 15-16ms - 50-60Hz of overall control circuit.

For a smooth 2D picture in office workload, a real 120-144Hz is enough. Much more important is the ideal operation of VRR in the range of 48Hz-144Hz. And this just remains behind the scenes in the characteristics and most reviews of laptop monitors and panels...

[Neenyah]

The frame rate doesn't make any sense if the screen panel has a response rate many times higher.

Two words for you - input lag.

500 fps is better on a 60 Hz screen than vsync 60 fps on that same screen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G3-yDz61_k

Edit: Also check this vid: Monitor Response Times ARE BROKEN - Response Times Explained