In direct collaboration with NVIDIA, ASUS has announced the world's first 500 Hz G-Sync enabled gaming display during Computex 2022. The latest ROG Swift 24.1-inch display will feature a 500 Hz panel with a 1080p resolution and comes loaded with features such as NVIDA's Reflex Analyzer and a new vibrance mode.

Designed more the fast-paced eSports titles such as Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, Valorant, Overwatch, and titles like these, the latest monitor from ASUS's premium ROG Swift range now features an impressive 500 Hz E-TN display. Not to be confused with the standard TN panels, ASUS uses its new "eSport TN" technology, which ASUS claims offers 60% better response times.

In the above video embedded, ASUS and NVIDIA give a small demonstration of the benefits of moving to 500 Hz from 240 and 144 Hz. It tests things such as animation smoothness, ghosting, and system latency.

The ASUS ROG Swift 500Hz uses a 24.1-inch panel with a 1080p resolution. It also benefits from NVIDIA G-Sync and NVIDIA's Reflex Analyzer, which is designed to detect system latency, measure mouse clicks when using an NVIDIA Reflex certified gaming mouse, and to measure the time for the resulting pixels to change on the screen.

ASUS also includes a new enhanced vibrance mode, which is specifically tuned for eSports and is built into the monitor's firmware. ASUS claims this allows light to travel through the LCD crystals for better color vibrancy.

As we've seen from previous ROG Swift releases over the years, don't expect this to be cheap or affordable for the everyday gamer. At the time of writing, ASUS hasn't revealed the expected MSRP of the ROG Swift 500 Hz gaming monitor, nor does it state when it might hit retail shelves.

Source: ASUS

POST A COMMENT

22 Comments

View All Comments

  • name99 - Tuesday, May 24, 2022 - link

    Is the point of something like this not exactly to display 500 fps, but more to display a new frame the moment it has been calculated?
    So that the time wasted waiting for the frame to get to the screen is as small as possible, even though the actual frame rate is something varying but probably around 120 or so?
    Reply
  • ZoZo - Tuesday, May 24, 2022 - link

    I don't think that it is. With VRR technologies (Adaptive Sync, G-Sync, FreeSync, etc.) the screen should already be able to be driven to refresh immediately after a frame is available for display. Reply
  • mode_13h - Tuesday, May 24, 2022 - link

    > With VRR technologies ... the screen should already be able to be
    > driven to refresh immediately after a frame is available for display.

    I'm not sure about that, but I *am* sure the *minimum* amount of time between frames, on a 144 Hz monitor, is 1/144 s. So, a panel with a faster max refresh should be able to offer less judder, at the high end of the framerate range.
    Reply
  • ingwe - Tuesday, May 24, 2022 - link

    I am not the target audience and don't necessarily see the value of this, but that sounds pretty cool. I am curious how long it will be until the 1kHz mark is broken. I expect refresh rates to stop there, but I think a manufacturer will go there just for the sake of marketing. Reply
  • mode_13h - Tuesday, May 24, 2022 - link

    Nvidia long ago demonstrated a 1700 Hz display. That suggests it's technically feasible.

    https://techreport.com/news/29955/nvidia-reveals-a...
    Reply
  • AnnonymousCoward - Tuesday, May 24, 2022 - link

    While the motivation might be for marketing, the benefit is real: our eyes see MHz Reply
  • mode_13h - Wednesday, May 25, 2022 - link

    > our eyes see MHz

    No, they don't. I don't recall the details, but there are limits to the eye's switching speed from perceiving one color vs. another.

    I think there are benefits to high-refresh displays, however. When your eye is trying to track a moving object across the screen, your eye is moving (more or less) continuously. If the object is jumping by too much between screen refreshes, you get judder or blur, because the eye can't center the object correctly.

    That said, I don't claim to know how it makes sense to go. 500 Hz *feels* excessive to me.
    Reply
  • AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, May 28, 2022 - link

    This source says people have seen 10 ns light pulses: https://www.quora.com/Vision-eyesight-What-is-the-...

    10 ns -> 10 GHz! I don't know the brightness involved, so conservatively say "MHz".

    Secondly, let's say your screen is 1 m across, and an object moves 100 m/s. This 500 Hz screen would display just 5 samples of the object. 5 kHz refresh gets you 50.
    Reply
  • mode_13h - Sunday, May 29, 2022 - link

    > This source says people have seen 10 ns light pulses

    If the intensity is well beyond what a screen can reasonably and safely output, then it's irrelevant.

    Whatever intensity they're talking about, I'm very skeptical it's safe to be looking at such a high-energy light source for extended periods of time.

    I think there's a further dimension to this question, which is the brain's ability to process what your photo receptors are detecting. Seeing a single 10 ns light pulse is very different from processing 10 GHz worth of information.

    > Secondly, let's say your screen is 1 m across, and an object moves 100 m/s.
    > This 500 Hz screen would display just 5 samples of the object. 5 kHz refresh gets you 50.

    For very fast-moving objects, it's difficult for your eye to *start* tracking it, before it disappears. Therefore, the whole "eye-tracking" argument I made doesn't really apply. In these cases, you're better off just burning a little computation on motion-blur. That quite likely ends up being computationally cheaper than rendering a bunch of additional frames.
    Reply
  • AnnonymousCoward - Monday, May 30, 2022 - link

    Thanks for your reply...but you're not making any counterpoints to what I said. "MHz" was already margining the 10ns example by a factor of 10,000! My point remains.

    Eye tracking isn't necessary: you can see a short shooting star with your side vision.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now