Top positive review
5.0 out of 5 starsI am so glad I gave up on 4K and went down the 144hz path instead. If you're thinking of going 4K or 144hz, hear my story...
Reviewed in the United States on July 7, 2015
-----------
My Story
-----------
All my gaming life, I have been ultimately disappointed by gaming. Whether that is poor performance despite spending so much money (remember the horrible performance of games back in 2007? Even worse than now-a-days!) or discovering I got hardware that wasn't as good (monitors that were crappier) or went in the wrong direction (4K vs 144hz).
A year ago I bought a Samsung U28D590D, which is a 4K monitor. A week after the warranty expired (1 year warranty) it got two vertical lines on it. Thankfully, I had insurance on it at BestBuy. I took it back, got a full $700 store credit. Still obsessed with getting 4K resolution for gaming, I purchased a LG 55" 4K HDTV that was one sale for a great deal.
Well, what a mistake. Apparently all 4K HDTV's except a few panasonic ones (very, very expensive) are HDMI only. As of this review, there is no HDMI 2.0 adapter, so unless you have very specific NVIDIA cards, you can't get 4K @ 60hz on them.
So there I am- stuck with three monitors. a LG 55" HDTV w/ 4K @ 30hz, a Monoprice IPS 28" w/ 1440p @ 60hz, my memory of the Samsung UD590 TN panel w/ 4K @ 60hz, and this purchase from Amazon at 1440p @ 144hz. All compared side by side (except the Samsung in memory).
When I bought the Samsung UD590, which was $100 more than this Asus monitor- the TN panel was awful compared to my $300 monoprice IPS (cheapo IPS screen). For $700, it was a disappointment. But 4K was an even bigger disappointment. Although I love the extra workspace for working in Unity to make games (a full 1080p "Game Tab" in the Editor was awesome.) that was it.
4K gaming is non-existent. I have a R9 295X2 and struggled to get a stable 40fps on most games. That is, if the game even supported more than 1 GPU. So I mostly got a choppy 4K @ 30hz - 40hz.
4K television/media content is a joke. Upscaling? Whatever. Console gaming? Impossible. TV? Not for another 5+ years. So a 4K HDTV is basically a huge scam that does nothing, 4K monitors are for gaming at really low resolutions, and the extra workspace 4K gives is negated by the eye strain and incredibly small text you will get. I have amazing vision, but even I struggled at 4K. Up the Windows DPI? Then why even have 4K? On the Samsung, anything but the native resolution (4K) looked horrendous. Unplayable, unusable. Even in games. Worst $700 I ever spent. Not even worth $300. That cheap monoprice IPS kicked that $700 Samsung UD590's butt in ALL WAYS!
The 55" 4K HDTV was cheap enough to justify keeping it for TV watching, and maybe as a second/third monitor when they finally release a HDMI 2.0 to DP1.2 adapter. I use that to watch movies, which is awesome because this monitor's stand is amazing and the monitor as a whole is very easy to move. (I keep it infront of the TV- all on my computer desk, and just move it to a stand when I want to watch TV.)
Very disappointed, until...
----------------
My Review
-----------------
In comes the Asus MG279Q.
One of the first 144hz IPS panels.
I just hate TN panels. The color is so bad compared to IPS, and the viewing angle is horrific. But TN's usually have amazing response time and high refresh rates.
This Asus MG279Q brings with it the best of both worlds. Amazing color and viewing angle of IPS, combined with the gaming response time and high refresh rate- all alongside FreeSync. Something I've read may become the new big thing in future monitors.
Skyrim, even when it dips to 35-40fps, feels a lot smoother with this monitor than with others. It just is. I don't know if that's the response time / not as much ghosting or the FreeSync. It is just smoother. When it goes above 60fps though? Oh my goodness that is awesome.
Even surfing the internet is better @ 90hz or 144hz. The mouse on the desktop is smoother. It's an amazing experience.
I have read online that once you go high refresh rate, you can't ever go back. This is true for me as it was for them.
4K was a huge letdown and content & hardware are years behind it. With this monitor, you still get an amazing picture (1440p) but you get even better a smoothly animated, silky smooth gaming experience- even when you dip!
With 4K, you struggle to get 30-40fps. With 1440p, you always get 40+, and on most games 60+. Although it isn't easy to get 80+ on many games. (That is why IMO it's fine that FreeSync caps at 90hz with this monitor).
Even better, this monitor has tons of features that turn out to be awesome. It has ADC which automatically calibrated the monitor when I hooked up my X-Rite i1Display Pro to it. I didn't have to manually do ANYTHING! So awesome!
---------
TIP
---------
According to a detailed tech review, it is best to set the "Trace Free" option to 80, not the default 60.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_mg279q.htm
-----
My Settings, After Professional Calibration
-------
(RACING MODE)
Brightness: 30
Contrast: 73
R: 100
G: 94
B: 91
TraceFree: 80
FreeSync: On (Have not tested if this is best ON or if 144hz is any different. It is noticeable on the desktop with the mouse 90hz vs 144hz, but it's not that noticeable.
-------
My System - Finally Satisfied
-------
ASUS MG279Q
Calibrated by: X-Rite's i1 Display Pro
R9 295X2
The GPU pushes Skyrim w/ 1440p @ 90hz, and with all my graphical mods I get no lower than 35fps, average 55fps, and indoors 90+ fps. (Although Skyrim is CPU bound, so that is partially why I get some of the lower fps). No other game so far has given me low framerates. With 4K, the 295X2 wasn't enough. With 1440p, it is. The refresh rate limit of 90hz when using FreeSync is fine, because few games go above 90fps even with a R9 295X2.
The color calibrator is not required, but IMO if you're already spending this much money (295X2, $600 monitor, etc.) and you have the money- it is worthwhile to get the absolute best experience. Although that tech article I linked to can give you some good settings (but every monitor will be different).