Viewing Angles, Uniformity, Response & Lag
You won’t mistake the PG258Q for an IPS panel, but if you compare the above photo to those of other TN monitors, you can see that the Asus display retains more detail in darker areas and exhibits a less severe color shift to the sides. The familiar red tint is still there, just not as much. You can even see some detail in the top-down shot. Most others wash this view out completely. It would be great if this kind of speed were possible in a VA panel but apparently, we’re not there yet. For now, TN is the best balance of motion quality and image fidelity.
To learn how we measure screen uniformity, please click here.
TN panels tend to be all over the map in our screen uniformity tests. Some perform well like the PG258Q. Others, not so much. Oh wait, the last place finisher is the IPS-based AG271QG. That shows how sample-specific our field tests are. We’ve already seen plenty of evidence that Asus is using a high quality panel part here. You should be able to buy it with confidence. Not only did both the white and black field results score below 10%, the color test is one of the lowest values in our database. This is one of the reasons for our sample’s high intra-image contrast.
Pixel Response & Input Lag
Please click here to read up on our pixel response and input lag testing procedures.
The PG258Q ties our record for quickest panel response and destroys the mark for overall input lag. If you’re wondering why anyone would turn off G-Sync, this is the reason. Locking the refresh rate at 240Hz means having essentially zero control latency. It’s pretty obvious from our results that refresh rates determine lag, even though the difference is miniscule. Those looking for that last nth degree of performance will find it here. We’d say it can’t get any better, but we know that future technologies will be even faster than this. For now and the foreseeable future, though, the PG258Q is the king of speed.
MORE: Best Computer Monitors
MORE: How To Choose A Monitor
MORE: All Monitor Content
No wonder this thing is $600.
Have fun paying the Nvidia tax.
Because that's the reality of GPUs at the moment. GPUs can get you a solid 4K/60 or a solid 1080p/144. You're not going to get 4K/144 in any modern games on any PC at the moment (unless you're only playing 20-year-old games). So there's not a lot of sense in wanting to invest in a 4K/144 monitor now, only in anticipation of when GPUs can finally push that many pixels, because you'll be wasting the monitor while you wait, and when such GPUs finally do arrive, the monitors will be better and cheaper.
I would assume so, but I've learned some very expensive lessons by making purchases based on assumptions. : /
The reason you won't get it is because the GPU's won't do it, not because the games won't. Game developers want to make more realistic games but the GPU's are lagging way behind. Nvidia hasn't had any real competition for many years so there was no need for them to push to 4K gaming at 144Hz or higher. I am hoping AMD's cards will force Nvidia to get off their buts as it seems the consumers aren't going to pull their money from Nvidia until Nvidia gets back on the ball.
My current hardware isn't really capable of producing more than a reliable 1080p60. (GTX 970, i5-4590). So I see no reason to switch to a higher res screen or higher refresh rate screen.