The Asus ROG Swift 360Hz is the world's fastest monitor

mongeese

TS Maniac
Staff member

Asus and Nvidia have partnered to develop the ROG Swift 360Hz, which is now officially the best way to view esports titles. It’s G-Sync compatible, so there’s no tearing or ghosting despite the unprecedented refresh rate. Elsewhere are typical high refresh rate stats, coming in with a 1080p resolution and 24.5” diagonal length.

All that makes it perfect for competitive esports, which is naturally its target market: who the hell else is crazy enough to shell out for 360Hz? There are only two reasons why people will buy this monitor: one, they like showing off; or two, they’re a competitive CS:GO or Overwatch player that needs every edge they can get.

There’s reasonable evidence out there that shows 240Hz monitors making pro players’ response times a little faster. Literally seeing the image a few milliseconds earlier is sort of irrelevant past 120 fps, it’s the improvement in smoothness that lets the brain make adjustments that improve accuracy. This makes shooting a target running past a window a little easier and lining up a headshot on someone who’s suddenly appeared next to you much easier.

The question is, does that scale up to 360Hz? Asus and Nvidia say it does (surprise!), and in their testing, they found it improved accuracy in a synthetic flick shot test by 4% versus 240Hz, which is a reasonable margin to care about for a professional player. For a regular player, that’s probably not going to be a good value proposition for whatever outrageous sum this monitor will end up costing.

The Asus ROG Swift 360Hz won’t be available until “later this year,” but hopefully by then, Nvidia can treat us to a few more graphics cards capable of pushing this monitor to its limits.

Permalink to story.

 

Raytrace3D

TS Addict
So the real question is, how many of us are "pro" gamer's in need of such a display? At 340Hz that's a pretty impressive benchmark to reach. I'm thinking though, if the average Joe believes getting this display is going to make them a significantly better gamer; probably not. Pro gamer's are pro for a reason. Practice. :)
 

amstech

IT Overlord
It's one of those things you would have to see run in person to truly judge.
Hopefully they show it off at various expos and events.
 

H3llion

TechSpot Paladin
So the real question is, how many of us are "pro" gamer's in need of such a display? At 340Hz that's a pretty impressive benchmark to reach. I'm thinking though, if the average Joe believes getting this display is going to make them a significantly better gamer; probably not. Pro gamer's are pro for a reason. Practice. :)
Quite easy to reach for CSGO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raytrace3D

Danny101

TS Evangelist
I'm more of a RPG single player gamer. I appreciate this kind of advancement because it ends of making the displays sufficient for my type of gaming cheaper.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raytrace3D

Danny101

TS Evangelist
Years ago, around 2005, I was mucking around with recording TV with ATI's (I almost said AMD) 9800 All-In-Wonder with it's MPEG-4 real time recorder. I was working really hard to get the bitrate as low as possible and the visuals as good as possible at that bit rate. You had the base setting and then you had the filters. Algorithms built on top of algorithms, or parallel algorithms more accurately. I found if you work hard enough, you can get the math right to achieve the visuals and smoothness at lower frame rates, but it takes a lot of work in fine-tuning. It was maddening, but I enjoyed the challenge. I was trying to lower the storage usage and I couldn't get the lossless codecs to work properly (which I could go back and run Xvid on). Although it was recorded video and it may not be the same, but I wonder if I take the time, I can get games to render fairly well at lower frame rates. I just have to understand exactly what each algorithm is doing. My theory with recording video was this: Base MPEG-4,=100% [Filters in Strength: 75%, 50%, 25%, 5%, or I would go backwards in strength. Base by itself had a lot of blocking, so I would put filters in these kinds of orders: Smoothing 40%, Sharpening 30%, and then Film Grain 20%. Sometimes being a little off would work better: 41%, 29%, and 22%.

So by these theories it makes sense that gameplay at 120 FPS on a 60HZ monitor will will look nicer, or gameplay at 60 FPS will be more responsive on a 120HZ monitor or whichever the case may be. If you have a 120HZ monitor, but your hardware is only capable of pushing a game at say 100 FPS with max filter/visual enhancement algorithms, then you might be better off setting your FPS and visual algorithms at different levels and speeds to complement the monitor speed. 100 FPS may be fine, but 80FPS or even 60FPS may actually be better tuned in algorithmic terms and work well with that refresh rate. The visual algorithms: instead of looking at them in terms of visual enhancements, but look at them terms of visual speeds and timings algorithms that fill the voids between the refresh rate and the frame rate. Even your controller apparatuses are working at some kind of algorithmic or speed rate and need to work in tandem and the system as a whole needs to be able incorporate those timings into the game and won't be able to do so promptly, if any or all of the other algorithmic timings are out of step. Faster HZ's and FPS only help to lessen the consequences and impacts of errors through brute force speed, but It doesn't necessarily mean that system is well built. That's why PC's come with many sliders...to dial them in.
 
Last edited:

ZedRM

TS Booster
IF this 360hz is 360 REAL refreshes per second, it could be thing. If it's using that frame-blending nonsense, it'll be a display to pass on.
 
Last edited:

Danny101

TS Evangelist
IF this 360hz is 360 REAL refreshes per second, it could be thing. If it's using that frame-blanding nonsense, it'll be a display to pass on.
I bought a Samsung TV advertised as 120HZ. Turned out to be 120HZ 'Motion Rate". Yeah, I was pissed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZedRM

beardrinksbeer

TS Enthusiast
I prefer my 165Hz monitor,
and it is a better size of 27",
and it is IPS as well :p
What is the monitor panel made from? IPS or TN,
it does not say. It does not say the G2G time either.
What GPU/GPU's will you have to have to run at 360Hz?
Sitting too close to computer monitor too long will affect your eyes,
you will need glasses sooner than the usual age of 40 (I was told this age by an optometrist).