Our overall experience with Asus' PA279Q was very positive. While its price is at the high-end of 27-inch QHD screens, great performance and copious features more than justify its status in the $800 bracket.
Just look at everything you get. A native 2560x1440 resolution, sRGB and Adobe RGB gamuts, six USB 3.0 ports, DisplayPort 1.2 with MST, on-screen grids, two fully tweakable user modes, a complete set of cables, a light hood...the list stretches long indeed. And don’t forget the factory calibration. The numbers we generated from the two fixed modes are impressive enough, even without all the extras.
We've been asking for a wide-gamut monitor that has an sRGB/Rec. 709 option. The PA279Q delivers on that request. Even though Asus includes a color management system, it really isn’t necessary given the superb accuracy of the fixed sRGB and Adobe RGB picture modes.
Comparisons to the excellent Samsung S27B970D are inevitable. For $300 less, Asus gives you greater brightness, better contrast, and equivalent color, grayscale, and gamma accuracy. The big feature missing from Samsung's offering is the wider color gamut. That factor alone is enough to recommend the PA279Q ahead of it. We also prefer Asus’ anti-glare screen to Samsung’s reflective one.
We’re impressed with Asus’ build quality, too. While all the company's display products we've reviewed are well-made, this monitor is a cut above the norm. The full-range ergonomic adjustments have a very high-quality feel, and the vast OSD has a very intuitive design that is easy to navigate. We especially enjoyed using the navigational joystick. Once you get the hang of it, you’re spoiled for life.
Things we didn’t like were minor. The aforementioned CMS just doesn’t work properly. Not only is luminance control missing, but the saturation and hue sliders only change values for colors at 100 percent saturation. The rest of the gamut goes untouched. Fortunately, the sRGB and Adobe RGB modes offer near-perfect color, so you don’t have to use them. The only caveat is that you give up the grayscale controls. Again, though, this isn't a great loss. Perhaps in the next model update Asus will expand upon its otherwise fixed modes.
Of course, we’re thoroughly spoiled by QHD screens now that there's a constant stream of them coming through our labs. Once you adjust to the smaller text and icon sizes, you’ll wonder how you managed with just FHD. Native 2560x1440 monitors still command a price premium in the super-popular 27-inch size, but the benefits are great. It’s hard to imagine an image looking sharper and more detailed. Then again, we've seen Ultra HD, and we're in the process of reviewing our first 3840x2160 display, incidentally also from Asus.
For now, QHD is the standard, and Asus' PA279Q is one of the best screens we’ve tested. Its feature set puts it above the competition and its price really isn’t all that out of line. For its excellent out-of-box performance, top-notch color accuracy, selectable color gamuts, and huge feature set, we’re giving it the Tom’s Smart Buy Award.
- Asus PA279Q, The Cadillac Of Monitors?
- Packaging, Physical Layout, And Accessories
- OSD Setup And Calibration Of The PA279Q
- Measurement And Calibration Methodology: How We Test
- Results: Brightness And Contrast
- Results: Grayscale Tracking And Gamma Response
- Results: Color Gamut And Performance
- Results: Viewing Angle And Uniformity
- Results: Pixel Response And Input Lag
- Asus' PA279Q May Very Well Have It All

And are not happy with Dell and HP...
You should be smiling now!
Also at some places you can even get this around $800..
Liking the new Eizo model w/ 240 Hz mode too.
Not this year but sometime next year I'd love to upgrade my system. I built my current workstation when the phenom 1 chip came out and other than a CPU upgrade after the phenom 2 came out and graphics card revision (old one died) I've not needed to do anything else to it. Starting to get a bit long in the tooth though.
120 cd/m2 would be ideal for a darkened room but we calibrate to 200 to better replicate an average viewing environment. Most graphics pros would opt for a darker space but the average user will have more ambient light to compete with. Since we're reviewing all types of displays, we need to place them on equal footing.
-Christian-
If you want "pixel perfect" from Achieva, it'll cost you the same. Quite a gamble, big savings vs. a few dead pixels.
It's technically the same panel, but it's a rejected panel by Apple and sold to 3rd parties like Achieva. That means dead pixels and irregular lighting and color are normal. That also means fewer input options (to save money), hardly any screen controls and settings (to save money), no height or tilt adjustment (to save money), cheaper components internally (to save money), and of course, a very weak warranty.
Tie all this in with poor build quality (some of those displays have been reported as having dirt behind the panel!), and IMO it's just not worth the savings/risk. And considering manufacturers of these "affordable" QHD monitors use cheaper internal components, I'd be most concerned about how long the thing will last even if I got a perfect panel. That would always be in the back of my mind every time I touched the power button.
So while you may be saving 50%, you are paying elsewhere by short changing yourself. I know what 5 dead pixels are like on a QHD monitor, because I had them on my ASUS PB278Q 27". They were concentrated within a 4-inch square in the middle of the screen and impossible to not notice. That monitor is known to have a pretty high dead pixel rate. I promptly returned it to Fry's and stepped up to the more professional factory Adobe RGB calibrated LG 27EA83.
In addition to 10tacle's reason, you also lose the USB ports on that model.
Guess that kinda depends. I don't know why many people would spend $800+ on a 27" display only to hook it up to a cable box or PS3. That much money will get you a very nice, rather large, TV.
As do I. Sadly, the price premium for 16:10 over 16:9 is pretty ridiculous. A quick search on Newegg shows the only 2560x1600 monitor with USB 3.0 is a $1500 30" Lenovo.
I only wish this thing was 120Hz
Liking the new Eizo model w/ 240 Hz mode too.
60 Hz is really about all that's needed to fool the human eye.
TVs went to 120 Hz because of a problem peculiar to displaying movies. Most movies were shot at 24 fps. 60/24 = 2.5 which isn't an even integer. If you try to display them on a 60 Hz screen, you end up having to show one movie frame for 2/60 sec, the next frame for 3/60 sec, then repeat. The result of this uneven timing is something called judder, where smooth motion (especially panning shots) appear to stutter.
With a 120 Hz refresh, you can show each movie frame for 5/120 sec, and a smooth panning shots remain smooth. 240 Hz is just the same thing except for 3D video - 120 Hz for the left eye, 120 Hz for the right eye.
So unless you're planning to watch a lot of 24 fps movies, 60 Hz is just fine. And unless you're planning to watch 3D movies shot at 24 fps, 240 Hz is overkill. If you're watching video shot at 30 or 60 fps, it'll look the same at 60 Hz, 120 Hz, or 240 Hz.