ULMB will work with AMD cards at any refresh rate. Of course, the higher the refresh rate, the better. However you can't have ULMB and G-Sync enabled at the same time. As for which one is better, that's subjective. I prefer G-Sync over ULMB for everything.

Would one even profit off having both active at the same time? I know it works on two different problems with low fps, but would one actually see an improvement over gsync with ulmb activated? Don't have a monitor that is able to offer either of the two, so I wouldn't know

Would one even profit off having both active at the same time? I know it works on two different problems with low fps, but would one actually see an improvement over gsync with ulmb activated? Don't have a monitor that is able to offer either of the two, so I wouldn't know

I don't know. Would be nice to find out though.

Tried asking in another thread but got no response. What kind of GPU(s) is needed for 1440p gaming on Ultra settings? Is AA required at all at 1440p? Don't want to get it if I'll end up at 50fps on modern games. And what about VRAM? Is 3GB enough?

Tried asking in another thread but got no response. What kind of GPU(s) is needed for 1440p gaming on Ultra settings? Is AA required at all at 1440p? Don't want to get it if I'll end up at 50fps on modern games. And what about VRAM? Is 3GB enough?

I mean most is going to come down to preference and what games your playing. Some people will tell you no because they like FPS above 140+. Some people enjoy 30fps+. Some people will tell you, you need AA @ 4K resolutions. Some people don't use AA at all. For me I would tell you a 780Ti is fine, but then again all I play is CS:GO/SC2/Dota 2. Which would probably all get 60+fps @ 1440p on a 770 let alone a 780. Theoretically going from 1080p to 1440p should reduce performance by ~33% but obviously real world is going to have some variance. But if you have a particular game in mind, just take 33% off the number and if its above 50fps then you're probably going to be fine.

I mean most is going to come down to preference and what games your playing. Some people will tell you no because they like FPS above 140+. Some people enjoy 30fps+. Some people will tell you, you need AA @ 4K resolutions. Some people don't use AA at all. For me I would tell you a 780Ti is fine, but then again all I play is CS:GO/SC2/Dota 2. Which would probably all get 60+fps @ 1440p on a 770 let alone a 780. Theoretically going from 1080p to 1440p should reduce performance by ~33% but obviously real world is going to have some variance. But if you have a particular game in mind, just take 33% off the number and if its above 50fps then you're probably going to be fine.

I'm a 60+ fps guy since I've always had a 60fps monitor 🙂 Tried BF4 at 1200p and it gave me around 100-130fps which should translate to 67-87fps at 1440p. I might get a tad more if I decrease MSAA to 2x instead of 4x.

The complaint about viewing angles is a legitimate concern with TN panels. Recently, however, I got to contrast a "value" ~27" TN 1920x1200 HannsG HZ281 monitor ($230) with a value 27" 1920x1080 IPS HP monitor ($250.) Both were connected to an HD Radeon 7850 via HDMI (Radeon is 1.4a HDMI.) I was able to work with them both side-by-side and compare them for a few hours. I was surprised as I was able to get the TN panel to the same general brightness and contrast levels as the IPS, and it was also easy to see that the "value" IPS was using a visibly inferior dot-pitch, too, as the edges of things were much chunkier @1920x1080 than the raw differences in resolution would have produced. I came away surprised, because I thought the color fidelity, contrast, and brightness levels of the TN were every bit the equal of the IPS, and the dot pitch & resolution superiority of that particular TN over that particular IPS couldn't be denied. What solidified the matte TN panel triumph for me, though, was the awful, shiny glass screen coating of the IPS--it reflected everything. Ugh. Even with the viewing-angle inferiority of the TN panel, and TN viewing angles are inferior to IPS, I walked away convinced that of the two the TN was the better monitor and the one I'd rather have if I had to choose between them (I don't work with my monitor tilted away from me, anyway...;)) I guess the lesson I learned that day is one worth retaining: all TN panels are not equal, and all IPS panels are not equal, etc. Hilbert, a couple things I would have liked to have seen in this splendid review...;) Your assessment of how the monitor performs with an AMD gpu (I would expect more or less the same), and how it performs @ 120Hz, 144Hz, etc. I'm also pretty sure that G-Sync will be a flash in the pan technology, most likely replaced by something equivalent that won't be proprietary and won't cost much of anything extra. Also, being honest, I have to say that in every so-called "example" of "Gsync on, Gsync off" that I've seen so far, Gsync off looks appreciably worse than it looks on my monitor at home where I have no Gsync at all...;) This of course serves to make "Gsync on" look that much better in the demonstration. Another site once did a home-made comparison between Gsync on&off, and the off condition video was so jerky that I'd think something was wrong with my hardware or software if my non-Gsync hardware ever jerked and stuttered like that...!...;) I pay more attention to the "Gsync off" portion of the comparison videos because that tells me if the comparisons are valid. Basically, I've found that my normal non-Gsync performance is much closer to the "Gsync on" portion of the comparison videos than it is to the "Gsync off" portion.

I'd love to get one of these...but no luck in the states. Looks fantastic to me. I have no problem with TN viewing angles. So not a concern for me. I sit in front of my monitor any way.

The complaint about viewing angles is a legitimate concern with TN panels. Recently, however, I got to contrast a "value" ~27" TN 1920x1200 HannsG HZ281 monitor ($230) with a value 27" 1920x1080 IPS HP monitor ($250.) Both were connected to an HD Radeon 7850 via HDMI (Radeon is 1.4a HDMI.) I was able to work with them both side-by-side and compare them for a few hours. I was surprised as I was able to get the TN panel to the same general brightness and contrast levels as the IPS, and it was also easy to see that the "value" IPS was using a visibly inferior dot-pitch, too, as the edges of things were much chunkier @1920x1080 than the raw differences in resolution would have produced. I came away surprised, because I thought the color fidelity, contrast, and brightness levels of the TN were every bit the equal of the IPS, and the dot pitch & resolution superiority of that particular TN over that particular IPS couldn't be denied. What solidified the matte TN panel triumph for me, though, was the awful, shiny glass screen coating of the IPS--it reflected everything. Ugh. Even with the viewing-angle inferiority of the TN panel, and TN viewing angles are inferior to IPS, I walked away convinced that of the two the TN was the better monitor and the one I'd rather have if I had to choose between them (I don't work with my monitor tilted away from me, anyway...;)) I guess the lesson I learned that day is one worth retaining: all TN panels are not equal, and all IPS panels are not equal, etc. Hilbert, a couple things I would have liked to have seen in this splendid review...;) Your assessment of how the monitor performs with an AMD gpu (I would expect more or less the same), and how it performs @ 120Hz, 144Hz, etc. I'm also pretty sure that G-Sync will be a flash in the pan technology, most likely replaced by something equivalent that won't be proprietary and won't cost much of anything extra. Also, being honest, I have to say that in every so-called "example" of "Gsync on, Gsync off" that I've seen so far, Gsync off looks appreciably worse than it looks on my monitor at home where I have no Gsync at all...;) This of course serves to make "Gsync on" look that much better in the demonstration. Another site once did a home-made comparison between Gsync on&off, and the off condition video was so jerky that I'd think something was wrong with my hardware or software if my non-Gsync hardware ever jerked and stuttered like that...!...;) I pay more attention to the "Gsync off" portion of the comparison videos because that tells me if the comparisons are valid. Basically, I've found that my normal non-Gsync performance is much closer to the "Gsync on" portion of the comparison videos than it is to the "Gsync off" portion.

There is no hidden conspiracy with Gsync doing any such thing to make it look better. Vsync off looks terrible on any monitor I've used. Tearing kills my eyeballs, and I see it very clearly.

I bought this monitor. Watchdogs with G sync on glitches terribly Hilbert. Would be interesting if you see the same. When I enable G Sync (with or without mods) the main menu glithces through into the main gameplay, Its almost like screen tearing but when the tear occurs, its a screen of the main menu. If I disable G sync then it works fine. However... if this glitch didnt occur, the stutter issue we experience with SLI is minimal at best. It is a great improvement. Its just a shame this menu problem stops me playing it at the moment. p.s. before people thinking im trashing this monitor. Every other game is fantastic. I died so many times in battlefield purely because im immersed in the the smoothness, and detail. Watchdogs is the only game i experience problems, but then again who doesnt with that AAA title 🙁

Watchdogs with G sync on glitches terribly Hilbert. Would be interesting if you see the same.

Sorry bro, this monitor already has been packaged up ready to be send to the next media / reviewers.

Hilbert great review as always! I have this monitor on pre-order and I am curious why you have said a 6400dpi mouse is a requirement for G-Sync, can you or someone else please elaborate on this? Thanks

http://www.blurbusters.com/mouse-125hz-vs-500hz-vs-1000hz/

Sorry bro, this monitor already has been packaged up ready to be send to the next media / reviewers.

Ah well, great review anyway. I am thoroughly enjoying this monitor. Luckily in Norway the markets aren't greedy like some, and so there was no hiking of prices. It was a generic price with all companies selling this. Not sure about the Turbo button however. Seems a bit pointless to me.

War child how do you find the colours and black background level? With this being an 8-bit monitor I'm hoping for good colours. With the review saying that the colour were off @7500K then surely you can compensate by adjusting the colour via the menu on the monitor? As this is a gaming monitor you really would not want to bother with .ICC files.

And if one wants to bother with ICC profiles, TFT Central releases their profiles: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/icc_profiles.htm Every monitor differs, but yours will be very similar to theirs.

And if one wants to bother with ICC profiles, TFT Central releases their profiles: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/icc_profiles.htm Every monitor differs, but yours will be very similar to theirs.

I used their profile for my vg248qe. The only thing I didn't like was their gamma setting was a bit to low. Other than that, It was spot on for everything else.

War child how do you find the colours and black background level? With this being an 8-bit monitor I'm hoping for good colours. With the review saying that the colour were off @7500K then surely you can compensate by adjusting the colour via the menu on the monitor? As this is a gaming monitor you really would not want to bother with .ICC files.

Colours arepretty good actually. I have seen better but considering the features this monitor has its perfectly fine for me. I upgraded from the Benq XL2420T 144hz monitor, and the colour difference for me is fantastic. For those who are already accustomed to IPS monitors maybe they will have a few flaws. There is a downloadable profile from http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/icc_profiles.htm#change

Tried asking in another thread but got no response. What kind of GPU(s) is needed for 1440p gaming on Ultra settings? Is AA required at all at 1440p? Don't want to get it if I'll end up at 50fps on modern games. And what about VRAM? Is 3GB enough?

I only play BF4, and use 2x 780ti Classified for my Swift monitor 🙂 120+ fps all the time on ultra settings 🙂

I only play BF4, and use 2x 780ti Classified for my Swift monitor 🙂 120+ fps all the time on ultra settings 🙂

A new monitor plus another 780Ti is a wee bit much for my wallet to handle 😀

I am going to buy this when available in New Zealand, should give my setup a good workout compared to my Asus VG278HE 1080p 144hz screen I have now.

It is actually an Nvidia recommendation. The 1000 Hz polling rate is most important though to prevent mouse-lag. With the dynamic refresh rate a fast mouse is gonna be really precise control wise. Up-to a level you never experienced. I can confirm that, gaming with a fast mouse 'feels' incredibly good and lag-free.

There are mice which perform worse at 1000Hz then 500Hz (instabilities in tracking). Zowie AM/FK (not the FK1) are the most obvious examples of this.

A new monitor plus another 780Ti is a wee bit much for my wallet to handle 😀

Just wait a bit until the prices on the monitor drop with some competition, just like the 780Ti with the 880 approaching 😀 (... at least I hope so hehe)