ASUS PG248Q will be a 180 HZ Full HD monitor

I'm just sitting over here with my Qnix 2414 144hz monitor overclocked to 182HZ. Unfortunately no lightboost, but still much better than 60hz. Honestly https://cen.acs.org/articles/94/i28/rise-OLED-displays.html A couple more hurdles left for OLED. We sure could use some LCD Quantum Dot gaming monitors now though couldn't we?

 

Well, this monitor is obviously made for twitch shooters such as csgo, tf2, the upcoming quake and such. Back in the day a lot of people used to run their CRTs at 800x600@160Hz.
However, there has been a 24" 1080p korean monitor called QNIX/X-Star that uses a benq panel and runs at 180Hz just fine. It costs 150usd so I see no reason to pay a premium price for branding and slick design. On top of it its latency should be even lower as it doesn't have a scaler or OSD. The only drawback is the lack of g-sync.

edit: oops just noticed the post above /facepalm

 

3440x1440 IPS 120-144Hz Gsync will do.

 

Yet people call me nuts for buying a 1080p 27 inch monitor instead of a higher resolution

At least I'm running everything at solid framerates.

 

Could be a nice csgo monitor.

On everything low, I get 400-700fps~ so this monitor would work really nicely. However, because of the great fps I now run at full-details except FXAA...that seems to introduce noticeable input lag so I've turned it off. I've been play with DSR as well and I do really enjoy this fake 4k+ image-quality.

 

Unfortunately, we will keep hearing statements akin to "why do we need more Hz?" because most people are "mainstream" users.

The mainstream will typically say they don't need high-end products simply because they aren't high-end users or pro-gamers or can't/won't spend that much $ at the time.

The funny thing is that mainstream users slowly adopt high-end products (of that era) as the industry standard improves and products become obsolete and are replaced.
Guess what happens over time. The mainstream, after several generations of products have passed, are now using much higher-end products (compared to what they started with) and are still saying the same thing about the latest next generation products.

I wonder what the mainstream today would say if we tell them they don't need 120Hz/FPS and 1080p and should only use 60Hz/FPS and 1024x768 (and pay today's prices)?

On a related note, until we're at the point where you can't distinguish reality from the virtual, there's always room for improvement in HW or SW and there will always be a niche of people who want the improvement.

Now of course, if there's a scientific study that has a huge sample size and demonstrates the population percentiles that do not notice any significant marginal performance" gains per marginal increase in Hz, then that Hz value should be used to target and differentiate between consumers.
From my own experience I can say that for competitive first person shooters, there is a noticeable difference in clarity of movement and the overall experience between 120Hz and 240Hz. I can't comment on any higher Hz because I haven't tried it yet...

So until we reach a point where 99.99% of the population notices almost zero difference between the experience or performance of newer generation products and the old (which is probably going to be far, far in the future), we'll continue to hear the same stuff.

 

Totally agree. This only starts to matter for people who are playing competitive games.

It's took years for "lcd" (as a generic term to cover every flat screen) to provide higher hz-rates than old crt. I remember gaming in mid-2000's with a 24" Sony aperture grille running at 100hz and it was total ownage (hehe) in Half life deathmatch+adrenaline gamer.

I miss those low-latency days XD Thankfully, this higher hz-rate tech helps pave the way forward and in time will trickle-down to mainsteam.