Twitter: Stay up to date: @TFTCentral |    Forum: Discuss this review  | RSS Feed: Review Alerts


Introduction

We have to admit we've been quite busy in recent times focused on the wide range of 27" and larger monitors coming to the market. We shouldn't forget that the 24" space is also pretty active, and still popular with many users. We have with us at the moment a 24" sized screen from Asus, the MG248Q. This is clearly focused at gaming audiences with the 1ms G2G response time, 144Hz refresh rate and Adaptive-Sync technology clearly the key selling points. The monitor is TN Film based and offers some decent additional features as well including NVIDIA 3D vision 2, a fully adjustable stand and a decent range of video inputs.



Specifications and Features

The following table gives detailed information about the specs of the screen:

Monitor Specifications

Size

24"WS (61 cm)

Panel Coating

Medium AG coating

Aspect Ratio

16:9

Interfaces

1x DisplayPort 1.2a, 1x HDMI 1.4, 1x Dual-link DVI

Resolution

1920 x 1080

Pixel Pitch

0.276 mm

Design colour

Matte black bezel, stand and base with some red trim in places

Response Time

1ms G2G

Ergonomics

Tilt, height, swivel and rotate

Static Contrast Ratio

1000:1

Dynamic Contrast Ratio

100 million:1

VESA Compatible

Yes 100mm

Brightness

350 cd/m2

Accessories

Power cable, DisplayPort cable, DL-DVI cable, audio cable

Viewing Angles

170 / 160

Panel Technology

AU Optronics TN Film

Weight

net: 7.2 Kg

Backlight Technology

W-LED

Physical Dimensions

(WxHxD)
556 x 392 - 542 x 275 mm

Colour Depth

16.7m

Refresh Rate

144Hz
Adaptive Sync 40 - 144Hz

Special Features

FreeSync support, NVIDIA 3D Vision 2, Blue Light filter settings, headphone jack, 2x 2W stereo speakers

Colour Gamut

Standard gamut
sRGB, ~72% NTSC

 

 

The MG248Q offers a good range of connectivity options with DisplayPort, HDMI 1.4 and Dual-link DVI connections offered. The digital interfaces are HDCP certified for encrypted content and the video cables are provided in the box for DisplayPort and DL-DVI, but not HDMI.

The screen has an external power supply and comes packaged with the small power brick and cable you need. There is an audio in and headphone out connection as well, along with 2x 2W stereo speakers, but no USB ports at all which is quite rare on modern screens.

Below is a summary of the features and connections of the screen:

Feature

Yes / No

Feature

Yes / No

Tilt adjust

DVI

Height adjust

HDMI

Swivel adjust

D-sub

Rotate adjust

DisplayPort

VESA compliant

Component

USB 2.0 Ports

Audio connection

USB 3.0 Ports

HDCP Support

Card Reader

MHL Support

Ambient Light Sensor

Integrated Speakers

Human Motion Sensor

PiP / PbP

Touch Screen

Blur Reduction Mode

Factory Calibration

G-Sync

Hardware calibration

FreeSync

Uniformity correction

Wireless charging



Design and Ergonomics

 

Above: front views of the screen. Click for larger versions

The MG248Q comes in an attractive design which is quite similar overall to the popular ROG Swift PG278Q and PG279Q. This model isn't part of that Republic of Gaming (ROG) brand, but it carries some of the design traits of those models. It is a mostly black design, with matte plastics used for the bezel, back, stand and base. There is a shiny silver Asus logo in the middle of the bottom bezel and grey DisplayPort and HDMI logos in the bottom left hand corner. The bezel measures ~11.5mm around all sides so looks pretty thin, although technically it's not a "borderless" panel like the ROG screens. Although on those models even though there's a thin plastic border, there's still a total 10mm black edge when you account for the panel border around the screen so it makes little difference.


Above: view of the base of the stand. Click for larger version

There is some red trim in places on the base where there is a circular section around the monitor arm, reminiscent of the light-up red ring on the ROG Swift PG278Q/PG279Q models (this doesn't light up here). There is also a red font for the "supreme gaming experience" slogan on the base of the stand.

 

 


Above:  back views. Click for larger version

The back of the screen is a matte black plastic and has a textured pattern as you can see above which looks nice. There is a cable tidy hole in the stand which you can also pick out here. The stand can be removed and the screen is VESA 100 compatible if you need. You will notice the OSD control joystick and buttons on the left hand side of these pictures as well.

 
Above: full tilt range shown. Click for larger versions

The screen offers a full range of ergonomic adjustments. Tilt is smooth and easy to move, offering a good adjustment range as shown above.

 
Above: full height adjustment range shown. Click for larger versions

The height adjustment is also smooth and easy to move, providing a decent adjustment range as well. At the lowest setting the bottom edge of the screen is ~25mm from the edge of the desk, and at maximum extension it is ~155mm. This gives a total 130mm adjustment range.


Above: rotation function shown

Side to side swivel is smooth and again easy to move, with the base remaining stationary on the desk as you move it. Rotation is also offered. It is a little stiff but at least fairly useable on a screen this size. Overall the screen remained stable on the desk although there was a bit of wobble if you knocked the screen.

A summary of the screens ergonomic adjustments is shown below:

Function

Range

Smoothness

Ease of Use

Tilt

Yes

Smooth

Easy

Height

130mm

Smooth

Easy

Swivel

Yes

Smooth

Easy

Rotate

Yes

Quite Smooth

A little stiff

Overall

Good range of adjustments, smooth and easy to use.

The materials were of a good standard and the build quality felt very good as well. There was no audible noise from the screen, even when conducting specific tests which can often identify buzzing issues. The whole screen remained cool even during prolonged use as well which was pleasing.

 
Above: interface connections. Click for larger version

The back of the screen features the interface connections as shown above. There are (from left to right) the power connection, DisplayPort, DL-DVI, HDMI, audio in and headphone out.



OSD Menu

  
Above: OSD labels on front bezel (left), and control buttons on the back (right)
Click for larger version

The OSD menu is controlled primarily by a small joystick control located on the back of the screen, in the bottom right hand corner. This joystick is accompanied by 3 pressable buttons as well as an on/off power button. There are small grey logos on the front bezel to help indicate the location and function of each button on the back.

There is quick launch access via two of the buttons to the GameVisual preset mode menu and the GamePlus features as shown above.

Pressing the joystick in brings up the main OSD menu as shown above. This is split in to 8 sections down the left hand side, with the options available in each section then showing on the right. Navigation is quick, easy and intuitive thanks to the joystick control and there were lots of options available as well. In this first section you can change the preset mode again if you want, with each one being somewhat customisable and saveable.

The 'Color' menu has controls for some of the main functions like brightness, contrast, colour temp (inc RGB levels).

The 'image' section has a few advanced options like the Trace Free overdrive control, aspect ratio control, and option to turn FreeSync on/off if you're using a compatible AMD graphics card.

The other sections are fairly self-explanatory so we won't go in to detail.

 


Power Consumption

In terms of power consumption the manufacturer lists usage of <65.0W and <0.5W in standby mode. We carried out our normal tests to establish its power consumption ourselves.

State and Brightness Setting

Manufacturer Spec (W)

Measured Power Usage (W)

Default (90%)

<65.0

25.4

Calibrated (20%)

-

13.6

Maximum Brightness (100%)

-

26.6

Minimum Brightness (0%)

-

10.6

Standby

<0.5

0.5

We tested this ourselves and found that out of the box the screen used 25.4W at the default 90% brightness setting. At 100% brightness this increased a little to 26.6W. Once calibrated the screen reached 13.6W consumption, and in standby it used only 0.5W. We have plotted these results below compared with other screens we have tested. The consumption is comparable to other monitors in this size range as you might expect, and a little less than the bigger sized screens.



Panel and Backlighting

Panel Manufacturer

AU Optronics

Colour Palette

16.7 million

Panel Technology

TN Film

Colour Depth

6-bit+ FRC ?

Panel Module

M240Q007 V0

Colour space

Standard gamut

Backlighting Type

W-LED

Colour space coverage (%)

sRGB, ~72% NTSC

Panel Part and Colour Depth

The Asus MG248Q features an AU Optronics M240Q007 V0 TN Film technology panel which is capable of producing 16.7 million colours. Although we do not have access to the full panel spec sheet, we believe is achieved through a 6-bit+FRC colour depth as with most TN Film panels of this size range.

The panel part is confirmed when dismantling the screen as shown below.

Screen Coating

The screen coating is a medium anti-glare (AG) offering. It isn't a semi-glossy coating, and isn't as light as some modern IPS type panels either. It's in keeping with other TN Film panels we've tested. Thankfully it isn't a heavily grainy coating like some old IPS panels feature, although there is some graininess noticeable. It retains its anti-glare properties to avoid too many unwanted reflections of a full glossy coating, but does not produce an too grainy or dirty an image that some thicker AG coatings can. There were some slight cross-hatching patterns visible on the coating as well but only if you looked very closely.


Backlight Type and Colour Gamut

The screen uses a White-LED (W-LED) backlight unit which is standard in today's market. This helps reduce power consumption compared with older CCFL backlight units and brings about some environmental benefits as well. The W-LED unit offers a standard colour gamut which is approximately equal to the sRGB colour space. Asus quote 72 % NTSC coverage as well. Anyone wanting to work with wider colour spaces would need to consider wide gamut CCFL screens or the newer range of GB-r-LED type (and similar) displays available now. If you want to read more about colour spaces and gamut then please have a read of our detailed article.


Backlight Dimming and Flicker

We tested the screen to establish the methods used to control backlight dimming. Our in depth article talks in more details about a common method used for this which is called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM). This in itself gives cause for concern to some users who have experienced eye strain, headaches and other symptoms as a result of the flickering backlight caused by this technology. We use a photosensor + oscilloscope system to measure backlight dimming control with a high level of accuracy and ease. These tests allow us to establish

1) Whether PWM is being used to control the backlight
2) The frequency and other characteristics at which this operates, if it is used
3) Whether a flicker may be introduced or potentially noticeable at certain settings

If PWM is used for backlight dimming, the higher the frequency, the less likely you are to see artefacts and flicker. The duty cycle (the time for which the backlight is on) is also important and the shorter the duty cycle, the more potential there is that you may see flicker. The other factor which can influence flicker is the amplitude of the PWM, measuring the difference in brightness output between the 'on' and 'off' states. Please remember that not every user would notice a flicker from a backlight using PWM, but it is something to be wary of. It is also a hard thing to quantify as it is very subjective when talking about whether a user may or may not experience the side effects.


100%                                                  50%                                                  0%


Above scale = 1 horizontal grid = 5ms

At 100% brightness a constant voltage is applied to the backlight. As you reduce the brightness setting to dim the backlight a Direct Current (DC) method is used, as opposed to any form of PWM. This applies to all brightness settings from 100% down to 0%. The screen is flicker free as advertised, which is excellent news.

Pulse Width Modulation Used

No

Cycling Frequency

n/a

Possible Flicker at

 

100% Brightness

No

50% Brightness

No

0% Brightness

No

For an up to date list of all flicker-free (PWM free) monitors please see our Flicker Free Monitor Database.

 


Contrast Stability and Brightness

We wanted to see how much variance there was in the screens contrast as we adjusted the monitor setting for brightness. In theory, brightness and contrast are two independent parameters, and good contrast is a requirement regardless of the brightness adjustment. Unfortunately, such is not always the case in practice. We recorded the screens luminance and black depth at various OSD brightness settings, and calculated the contrast ratio from there. Graphics card settings were left at default with no ICC profile or calibration active. Tests were made using an X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter. It should be noted that we used the BasICColor calibration software here to record these, and so luminance at default settings may vary a little from the LaCie Blue Eye Pro report.

OSD Brightness

Luminance
(cd/m2)

Black Point (cd/m2)

Contrast Ratio
( x:1)

100

346.37

0.31

1117

90

319.25

0.29

1101

80

293.07

0.26

1127

70

266.32

0.24

1110

60

240.49

0.22

1093

50

212.95

0.19

1121

40

185.01

0.17

1088

30

157.82

0.14

1127

20

128.91

0.12

1074

10

99.39

0.09

1104

0

70.76

0.06

1179

 

Total Luminance Adjustment Range (cd/m2)

275.61

Brightness OSD setting controls backlight?

Total Black Point Adjustment Range (cd/m2)

0.25

Average Static Contrast Ratio

1113:1

PWM Free? 

Recommended OSD setting for 120 cd/m2

17

We conducted these tests in the default 'Racing' GameVisual preset mode. The brightness control gave us a very good range of adjustment. At the top end the maximum luminance reached 346 cd/m2 which basically met the specified maximum brightness of 350 cd/m2 from the manufacturer. There was a decent 276 cd/m2 adjustment range in total, and so at the minimum setting you could reach down to a low luminance of 71 cd/m2. This should be more than adequate for those wanting to work in darkened room conditions with low ambient light. A setting of 17 in the OSD menu should return you a luminance of around 120 cd/m2 at default settings in this preset mode (Racing). It should be noted that the brightness regulation is controlled without the need for Pulse Width Modulation, using a Direct Current (DC) method for all brightness settings between 100 and 0% and so the screen is flicker free.

We have plotted the luminance trend on the graph above. The screen behaves as it should in this regard, with a reduction in the luminance output of the screen controlled by the reduction in the OSD brightness setting. This is a linear relationship.

The average contrast ratio of the screen was decent for a TN Film panel at 1113:1. This was fairly stable across the brightness adjustment range as shown above with some fluctuation at the lower brightness adjustment end below 20%.



Testing Methodology

An important thing to consider for most users is how a screen will perform out of the box and with some basic manual adjustments. Since most users won't have access to hardware colorimeter tools, it is important to understand how the screen is going to perform in terms of colour accuracy for the average user.

We restored our graphics card to default settings and disabled any previously active ICC profiles and gamma corrections. The screen was tested at default factory settings using our X-rite i1 Pro 2 Spectrophotometer combined with LaCie's Blue Eye Pro software suite. An X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter was also used to verify the black point and contrast ratio since the i1 Pro 2 spectrophotometer is less reliable at the darker end.

Targets for these tests are as follows:

  • CIE Diagram - validates the colour space covered by the monitors backlighting in a 2D view, with the black triangle representing the displays gamut, and other reference colour spaces shown for comparison

  • Gamma - we aim for 2.2 which is the default for computer monitors

  • Colour temperature / white point - we aim for 6500k which is the temperature of daylight

  • Luminance - we aim for 120 cd/m2, which is the recommended luminance for LCD monitors in normal lighting conditions

  • Black depth - we aim for as low as possible to maximise shadow detail and to offer us the best contrast ratio

  • Contrast ratio - we aim for as high as possible. Any dynamic contrast ratio controls are turned off here if present

  • dE average / maximum - as low as possible. If DeltaE >3, the color displayed is significantly different from the theoretical one, meaning that the difference will be perceptible to the viewer. If DeltaE <2, LaCie considers the calibration a success; there remains a slight difference, but it is barely undetectable. If DeltaE < 1, the color fidelity is excellent.



Default Performance and Setup

Default settings of the screen were as follows:

Monitor OSD Option

Default Settings

Preset GameVisual Mode

Racing Mode

Brightness

90

Contrast

80

Color Temp

User Mode

RGB

100, 100, 100


Asus MG248Q - Default Settings, Racing mode

   

 

Default Settings
Racing mode

luminance (cd/m2)

349

Black Point (cd/m2)

0.30

Contrast Ratio

1154:1

 

Initially out of the box the screen was set in the default 'Racing' GameVisual preset mode. The image looked very bright at the default 90% brightness level and it looked a little washed out. It looked as if the gamma was too low which is fairly common for gaming screens. The image also felt a little cool and you could tell the screen was using a standard gamut backlight as well with the naked eye.

 

We went ahead and measured the default state with the i1 Pro. The CIE diagram on the left of the image confirms that the monitors colour gamut (black triangle) is fairly equal to the sRGB colour space. There is some minor over-coverage in green and blue shades but not by anything significant.

 

Default gamma was recorded at 1.9 average, leaving it with a 12% deviance from the target of 2.2 which was an issue for general desktop use. For gaming, its often desirable to have a lower gamma level like this, and we've seen plenty of gaming screens in the past with low gamma out of the box, so this isn't unusual. However, given there is no gamma control  in the OSD menu, it will be hard to correct without a calibration device. White point was measured at a slightly cool 7349k, being 13% out from the 6500k we'd ideally want for desktop use. Again, slightly cooler setup is often preferred for gaming and multimedia.

 

Luminance was recorded at a very bright 349 cd/m2 which is a too high for prolonged general use. The screen was set at a default 90% brightness in the OSD menu but that is easy to change of course to reach a more comfortable setting without impacting any other aspect of the setup. The black depth was 0.30 cd/m2 at this default brightness setting, giving us an excellent (for a TN Film panel) static contrast ratio of 1154:1. Colour accuracy was fairly decent out of the box with an average dE of only 2.9, maximum of 5.4. Testing the screen with colour gradients showed smooth transitions in all shades, with minor gradation evident in darker tones. Overall this default setup was geared at gamers which is probably to be expected. For general day to day desktop and other uses it is not ideal as the gamma and white point are quite a long way off the desired levels.

 

 

We also wanted to test the screen out of the box in the 'sRGB' GameVisual preset mode. This looked very similar to the default 'Racing' preset, and actually was more limited as all the controls for brightness, contrast, colour temp and RGB are now greyed out. We measured the setup nonetheless:

Monitor OSD Option

Default Settings

Preset GameVisual Mode

sRGB Mode

Brightness

n/a

Contrast

n/a

Color Temp

n/s

RGB

n/a


Asus MG248Q - Default Settings, sRGB mode

 

Default Settings
sRGB mode

luminance (cd/m2)

343

Black Point (cd/m2)

0.30

Contrast Ratio

1143:1

 

This preset mode showed basically no change compared with the 'Racing' preset mode, other than an ever so slightly higher gamma at 2.0 average (10% deviance now instead of 12%). Given all the controls are locked in this mode, and how bright the screen is, we can't see any real use for this preset.

 

 

Monitor OSD Option

Default Settings

Preset GameVisual Mode

User Mode

Brightness

90

Contrast

80

Color Temp

User Mode

RGB

100, 100, 100


Asus MG248Q - Default Settings, User mode

    

 

Default Settings
User Mode

luminance (cd/m2)

342

Black Point (cd/m2)

0.30

Contrast Ratio

1141:1

 

The User preset mode gives you more control over the settings and is probably a decent starting point to calibrate the screen to a more comfortable setup for day to day general use. In this mode the gamma was again slightly better, with an average of 2.0 measured and a smaller 8% deviance from the 2.2 target. Gamma is going to be the main issue as it will be hard to correct without a calibration device. White point was still too cool at 7505k, but at least in this user mode you have access to adjust the RGB channels to correct that fairly easily. Incidentally we measured the other colour temp presets which returned the following measurements:

 

Cool - 16,973k

Normal - 7283k

Warm - 4784k

User - 7505 k

 

Luminance can be corrected easily enough through the brightness control, now available again as normal in this 'user' preset. Colour accuracy was pretty decent out of the box with an average dE of only 2.4. Some OSD adjustments will help correct the white point and brightness nicely, and the calibration device will help correct the gamma curve.

 

 

Calibration

 

We used the X-rite i1 Pro 2 Spectrophotometer combined with the LaCie Blue Eye Pro software package to achieve these results and reports. An X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter was used to validate the black depth and contrast ratios due to lower end limitations of the i1 Pro device.

 

Monitor OSD Option

Calibrated Settings

GameVisual Preset Mode

User mode

Brightness

20

Contrast

80

RGB

100, 90, 83


Asus MG248Q - Calibrated Settings

  
 

 

Calibrated Settings

luminance (cd/m2)

121

Black Point (cd/m2)

0.12

Contrast Ratio

1005:1

 

We changed to the 'user' GameVisual preset mode which had delivered the optimal starting point for our calibration, and offered us access to the RGB controls from within the menu. We adjusted the RGB channels and brightness setting as shown in the table above. All these OSD changes allowed us to obtain an optimum hardware starting point and setup before software level changes would be made at the graphics card level. We left the  LaCie software to calibrate to "max" brightness which would just retain the luminance of whatever brightness we'd set the screen to, and would not in any way try and alter the luminance at the graphics card level, which can reduce contrast ratio. These adjustments before profiling the screen would help preserve tonal values and limit banding issues. After this we let the software carry out the LUT adjustments and create an ICC profile.

 

Average gamma was now corrected to 2.2 average with a 0% deviance, correcting the 8% deviance we'd seen out of the box in this preset mode (2.0 average gamma). The white point had now been corrected nicely to 6486k, bringing it in line with the target and correcting the overly cool 15% deviance we'd seen by default. Luminance had been improved thanks to the adjustment to the brightness control and was now being measured at 121 cd/m2. This left us a black depth of 0.12 cd/m2 and gave us a decent static contrast ratio (for a TN Film panel) of 1005:1 which was on spec. Colour accuracy of the resulting profile was very good, with dE average of 0.7 and maximum of 2.0. LaCie would consider colour fidelity to be very good overall. Testing the screen with various colour gradients showed mostly smooth transitions but some slight banding in darker tones where the gamma was being corrected at the graphics card level through the profilation of the screen. There was some gradation in darker tones also. You can use our settings and try our calibrated ICC profile if you wish, which are available in our ICC profile database. Keep in mind that results will vary from one screen to another and from one computer / graphics card to another.

 

Note: we had some later issues calibrating the screen in this user mode. If you find the image looks off or wrong using these settings from the user mode, try them instead in the racing mode. You should still be able to use our recommended OSD settings and calibrated ICC profile in that mode.

 

 

 

Calibration Performance Comparisons


 

The comparisons made in this section try to give you a better view of how each screen performs, particularly out of the box which is what is going to matter to most consumers. When comparing the default factory settings for each monitor it is important to take into account several measurement areas - gamma, white point and colour accuracy. There's no point having a low dE colour accuracy figure if the gamma curve is way off for instance. A good factory calibration requires all 3 to be well set up. We have deliberately not included luminance in this comparison since this is normally far too high by default on every screen. However, that is very easily controlled through the brightness setting (on most screens) and should not impact the other areas being measured anyway. It is easy enough to obtain a suitable luminance for your working conditions and individual preferences, but a reliable factory setup in gamma, white point and colour accuracy is important and not as easy to change accurately without a calibration tool.

 

From these comparisons we can also compare the calibrated colour accuracy, black depth and contrast ratio. After a calibration the gamma, white point and luminance should all be at their desired targets.

 

 

Default setup of the screen out of the box was not that great for general day to day desktop use, since the screen was set up more for gaming requirements. Many screens aimed at the gaming market are set up in this way so we can't be too harsh on them as it's deliberate. However, users should be aware that for non gaming / non multimedia use there are some limitations and it's not always easy to correct some of the settings if you want to. On the MG248Q the main issue is the gamma, which is 1.9 - 2.0 average and quite a long way off the 2.2 target. With no gamma controls in the OSD menu, it's hard to correct this without a calibration device (or maybe our calibrated ICC profile in some cases). The other areas like the white point (which was 13% out and too cool) can be corrected quite well by basic OSD changes. The TN Film panel did at least offer a good calibrated contrast ratio though. If you're after a more rounded screen for other uses besides gaming, then other models can deliver better setup out of the box. The Dell U2414H and U2417HJ for instance are more rounded IPS-based panels in the 24" space and have a better overall default setup. They won't match the raw gaming performance of this screen though.

 

 

 

The display was decent when it came to contrast ratio for a TN Film panel. It offered a 1005:1 calibrated contrast ratio, putting it a bit ahead of other TN Film screens like the Acer XG270HU (828:1), Asus ROG Swift PG278Q (858:1), BenQ XL2730Z (917:1) and Dell S2716DG (876:1). Of course it can't compete with VA panel types which can reach over 2000:1 easily, and commonly up to around 3000:1 like the Acer Predator Z35 shown here for example.

 


Viewing Angles


Above: Viewing angles shown from front and side, and  from above and below. Click for larger image

Viewing angles of the screen were as you might expect from a TN Film panel. Unfortunately this panel technology is inherently poor in this field, and so viewing angles are more restrictive than other competing technologies like IPS and VA variants. Although the manufacturer will quote a viewing angle of 170 / 160 (a classic indication that a TN Film panel is being used by the way if in doubt), in practice there are some obvious contrast and colour tone shifts horizontally, and especially vertically.

As you move your head from side to side in a horizontal plane, there is a contrast shift and the image becomes more pale and introduces a slight yellow hue. As you move to a wider angle the image can become more washed out as well and a slight pink hue is introduced. Vertically the fields of view are more restrictive still. From above the image becomes pale and washed out, while from below there is a characteristic TN Film darkening of the image. Unfortunately vertically the viewing angles will introduce noticeable shifts in the contrast and colour tone of the image which mean that for any colour critical work it is not really very well suited. TN Film panels have long suffered from these restrictive viewing angles due to the nature of their pixel structure. They are still fine for a single user for general use and certainly the TN Film panels offer their advantages when it comes to pixel response times and refresh rate for gaming. If however, you were hoping to do any colour critical or photography work you may find these shifts in the appearance of the image difficult. An IPS-type panel would probably be a wiser choice if you were looking for a screen with much wider viewing angles but having said that you are probably mainly interested in gaming if you are considering this screen. Remember, the MG248Q is specifically designed for gaming, and so you will have to live with some of the sacrifices of TN Film to get the kind of gaming performance and features offered here. There are some high refresh rate gaming IPS panels available now in larger sizes as well which can offer better viewing angles than TN Film models, although they are normally priced higher and have some other characteristic differences, and so TN Film models like this still have their place for many users.


Above: View of an all black screen from the side. Click for larger version

On a black image there is a moderate pale grey tint introduced to the image when viewed from a wide angle. This isn't too severe and shouldn't present any real problems in practice. Certainly not the obvious white glow you get from most modern IPS-type panels in similar situations and fairly standard for a TN Film panel. Very similar to what we have seen from other recent gaming TN Film screens like the Asus ROG Swift PG278Q and BenQ XL2730Z. The glow you see from most modern IPS panels can put off some users. So on the one hand, those IPS models have much better general viewing angles than the TN Film models, but they do show more glow which some people find an issue.



Panel Uniformity

We wanted to test here how uniform the brightness was across the screen, as well as identify any leakage from the backlight in dark lighting conditions. Measurements of the luminance were taken at 35 points across the panel on a pure white background. The measurements for luminance were taken using BasICColor's calibration software package, combined with an X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter with a central point on the screen calibrated to 120 cd/m2. The below uniformity diagram shows the difference, as a percentage, between the measurement recorded at each point on the screen, as compared with the central reference point.

It is worth noting that panel uniformity can vary from one screen to another, and can depend on manufacturing lines, screen transport and other local factors. This is only a guide of the uniformity of the sample screen we have for review.
 


Uniformity of Luminance

The luminance uniformity of the screen was pretty good overall. The central regions and lower half of the screen remained within a small 5 - 10% deviance from the centrally calibrated point. The upper corners, especially the top left region, showed the most variation, where luminance dropped down to 93 cd/m2 in the most extreme example. Approximately two thirds of the screen was within a 10% deviance threshold which was not bad.


Backlight Leakage


Above: All black screen in a darkened room. Click for larger version

We also tested the screen with an all black image and in a darkened room. A camera was used to capture the result. The camera showed there was some slight clouding detected in the top left corner and some along the bottom edge and corners. This was not possible to see this during normal every day uses though and was nothing severe.

Note: if you want to test your own screen for backlight bleed and uniformity problems at any point you need to ensure you have suitable testing conditions. Set the monitor to a sensible day to day brightness level, preferably as close to 120 cd/m2 as you can get it (our tests are once the screen is calibrated to this luminance). Don't just take a photo at the default brightness which is almost always far too high and not a realistic usage condition. You need to take the photo from about 1.5 - 2m back to avoid capturing viewing angle characteristics, especially on IPS-type panels where off-angle glow can come in to play easily. Photos should be taken in a darkened room at a shutter speed which captures what you see reliably and doesn't over-expose the image. A shutter speed of 1/8 second will probably be suitable for this.

 


General and Office Applications

With a 1920 x 1080 resolution, the desktop real estate  of the MG248Q feels a step down compared with all the high resolution panels we've tested, and the 27" 2560 x 1440 models we are used to using day to day. You do lose a large amount of desktop space, and although side by side split screen working is possible, it's not as easy due to the more limited resolution and space. With a 0.2745mm pixel pitch, text is comfortable and easy to read natively, providing a sharp and crisp image. It is not as sharp as the 1440p panels we've become accustomed to, or of course any ultra HD/4K resolutions where scaling is used, but it is perfectly adequate. For this size screen, 1920 x 1080 is about your limit of sensible resolution without needing to use operating system scaling options.

The moderate AG coating of the TN Film panel could be considered a bit grainy, especially on white office backgrounds to a lot of people. It's not as clear as modern IPS coatings or any semi-glossy solution. Still, it's not as grainy as old IPS panels and is on par with other TN Film matrices we've tested. Perhaps the main issue with this panel technology though is the restrictive viewing angles, making contrast and colour tone shifts a bit of a problem when it comes to colour critical work. They are the same here as other TN Film panels, being restrictive especially vertically. The screen is fine when viewed head on though really for office and text work, but for colour critical work or photo editing etc you'd be better off with an IPS-type panel. The default setup of the screen was a bit restrictive for normal uses, as the gamma is set up more for gaming, and hard to adjust without a calibration tool (or maybe our calibrated ICC profile). There are 5 blue light filter modes offered here if you want to add further eye care protection and might be worth experimenting with for prolonged office use.

The brightness range of the screen was very good, with the ability to offer a luminance between 346 and 71 cd/m2. This should mean the screen is perfectly useable in a wide variety of ambient light conditions, including darkened rooms. A setting of ~17 in the OSD brightness control should return you a luminance close to 120 cd/m2 out of the box if you stick to the default preset mode. Otherwise you might want to try the settings from our calibration section. On another positive note, the brightness regulation is controlled without the need for the use of the now infamous Pulse-Width Modulation (PWM), and so those who suffer from eye fatigue or headaches associated with flickering backlights need not worry. There was no audible noise or buzzing from the screen, even when specifically looking for it using test images with a large amount of text at once. The screen also remains cool even during prolonged use.

There aren't really any extra features on this screen for office environments, since it's primarily a gaming screen. There's not even any USB ports on this model which is pretty rare now for any screen. No ambient light sensor, card reader, motion sensors or anything either. There was at least a good range of ergonomic adjustments available from the stand allowing you to obtain a comfortable position for a wide variety of angles. The VESA mounting support may also be useful to some people as well. 2x 2W stereo speakers might be useful for the odd mp3 or Youtube video and a headphone out port is also provided.

 
Above: photo of text at 1920 x 1080 (top) and 1600 x 900 (bottom)

The screen is designed to run at its native resolution of 1920 x 1080 and at a 60Hz recommended refresh rate. However, if you want you are able to run the screen outside of this resolution. We tested the screen at a lower 1600 x 900 resolution to see how the screen handles the interpolation of the resolution, while maintaining the same aspect ratio of 16:9. At native resolution the text was sharp and clear. When running at a the lower resolution the text shows quite high levels of blurring. You also lose a lot of screen real-estate as well of course so where possible it is best to run at 1920 x 1080.

 


Responsiveness and Gaming

Quoted G2G Response Time

1ms G2G

Quoted ISO Response Time

n/a

Panel Manufacturer and Technology

AU Optronics TN Film

Panel Part

M240Q007 V0

Overdrive Used

Yes

Overdrive Control Available to User

Trace Free setting

Overdrive Settings

0, 20, 40, 60, 80, 100

The MG248Q is rated by Asus as having a 1ms G2G response time, which indicates the panel uses overdrive / response time compensation (RTC) technology to boost pixel transitions across grey to grey changes. There is a user control for the overdrive impulse via the OSD menu, using the 'Trace Free' setting. The part being used is the AU Optronics M240Q007 V0 TN Film technology panel. Have a read about response time in our specs section if you need additional information about this measurement.

We will first test the screen using our thorough response time testing method. This uses an oscilloscope and photosensor to measure the pixel response times across a series of different transitions, in the full range from 0 (black) to 255 (white). This will give us a realistic view of how the monitor performs in real life, as opposed to being reliant only on a manufacturers spec. We can work out the response times for changing between many different shades, calculate the maximum, minimum and average grey to grey (G2G) response times, and provide an evaluation of any overshoot present on the monitor.

It is worth noting that with a 1920 x 1080 resolution, this screen should be easier to power for most systems than the wide range of 2560 x 1440 screens (and above) which are now popular. If you have a lower end system or graphics card then you will find this resolution less of a demand certainly.

We use an ETC M526 oscilloscope for these measurements along with a custom photosensor device. Have a read of our response time measurement article for a full explanation of the testing methodology and reported data.
 


Trace Free Setting

The MG248Q has 5 settings for the overdrive control available in the OSD menu, under the Trace Free option. We carried out various motion tests to establish the optimum setting here. To the naked eye it was easy to see the difference between each settings. These results were the same from both an NVIDIA and an AMD test system which was good news. We have seen some FreeSync screens behave poorly when connected to a FreeSync system, where the overdrive control is often disabled or operates very differently. Thankfully the overdrive control (via the Trace Free setting) behaved fine on both systems.

It should be noted however that the response times behave a little differently depending on the refresh rate. We tested the response times at 60Hz and 144Hz at various Trace Free settings to try and establish which the optimal setting was. Keep in mind what refresh rate you are going to use on the screen, depending on requirements. Also if you use FreeSync the refresh rate will dynamically change within the 40 - 144Hz range also depending on your system and frame rate output.

60Hz Refresh Rate


At TF 0 there was a pretty large amount of motion blur to a moving image, where the overdrive impulse had been turned off. As you switch up to 20, the blurring is reduced a bit but it's still at pretty high levels in some cases. The average G2G response time measured here was 7.2ms, but some transitions were much slower where the overdrive impulse was perhaps not aggressive enough. At TF 40 the blurring was reduced quite significantly and the moving image looked sharper and clearer. You can see from our response time measurements at this setting above that we recorded a 3.4ms G2G average response time which was very good. Some transitions started to show some moderate to high levels of overshoot but this was hard to see in practice and didn't seem to affect the screen too much. It should be noted that at TF 0 and 20 there was no overshoot at all, as the overdrive impulse was very modest.

Once you pushed TR up to 60 there was very little change to the actual response times, but a dark overshoot trail started to become very noticeable. Our measurements above show that the overshoot was severe at this TR 60 setting. At 80 and 100 it was even more pronounced in practice, where the overdrive impulse was just too aggressive. So at 60Hz, TR 40 seemed to be optimal.

144Hz Refresh Rate

With a higher refresh rate of 144Hz active, the response time behaviour was a little different. At TF 20 the response times were a bit faster now than they had been at lower refresh rates, with a 4.4ms G2G response time measured. Some overshoot started to creep in though but nothing too obvious. At TF 40, the response times had been pushed a little faster than at 60Hz, but the overshoot was starting to become more noticeable.

We still felt that in actual use and fast moving content the TF 40 setting gave the optimal response time behaviour overall, especially at the lower end of the refresh rate range. If you are pushing higher frame rates towards the top end of the refresh rate range consistently, and start to find that the overshoot becomes too apparent, dropping down to TF 20 might be worth a try. If you're more at the lower end of the refresh rate range, or using the screen for external 60Hz consoles etc, TF 40 is certainly optimal.

 


Detailed Response Time Measurements

We took the following measurements at the maximum 144Hz refresh rate and with the Trace Free setting at 40.

The average G2G response time was measured at 3.2ms which was very good and on par with the other recent TN Film gaming panels we've tested. Rise times (changes from dark to light shades) were slightly slower than fall times (changes from light to dark shades) but not by anything significant. Some measurements reached just about to the 1ms G2G specification as well (1.1ms was the lowest measured).

If we evaluate the Response Time Compensation (RTC) overshoot then the results are a bit disappointing at this maximum refresh rate of 144Hz. There are quite high levels of overshoot across quite a lot of the transitions, some of them reaching up to very high levels (e.g. 0 > 50 = 65.1% overshoot). Remember, this overshoot was higher when running at 144Hz, and reduced down to more moderate levels as the refresh rate lowered. So you won't see this overshoot in practice unless you're running consistently at the top end of the refresh rate range. We felt TF 40 delivered the best response time performance across the refresh rate range overall, but the overshoot was a little too high when it reached the top end, without really much reduction in the pixel response times. We would have preferred a slightly less aggressive overdrive impulse we think for higher refresh rates. TF of 30 might have been ideal if it was available!

 


Display Comparisons

The above comparison table and graph shows you the lowest, average and highest G2G response time measurement for each screen we have tested with our oscilloscope system. There is also a colour coded mark next to each screen in the table to indicate the RTC overshoot error, as the response time figure alone doesn't tell the whole story.

The response time performance of the MG248Q is on par with the other modern TN Film gaming screens we've tested. With an average G2G response time of 3.2ms it offers decent pixel transition times like popular models like the Asus ROG Swift PG278Q (2.9ms), BenQ XL2730Z (3.4ms) and Dell S2716DG (3.1ms) for instance. Each of these models shows moderate to high levels of overshoot which is quite common for the fastest TN Film panels, as manufacturers push response times as low as they can and try to meet the desirable 1ms G2G spec. At the full 144Hz refresh rate, the overshoot was higher on the MG248Q than those other mentioned models by a bit, but as we've explained in the previous section, as the refresh rate lowers the overshoot is reduced so we feel that overall (and considering dynamic refresh rate ranges offered here by G-sync/FreeSync) it's pretty much on par with those other gaming screens.

These TN Film gaming screens remain a bit faster than the IPS-type models available (e.g. Acer Predator XB270HU, Asus ROG Swift PG279Q), including those that now support high refresh rates of 120Hz and above. They 'feel' a bit snappier and sharper than IPS panels, although you do need to live with some moderate to high levels of overshoot in practice on the TN Film models, whereas a lot of the high refresh rate IPS panels are overshoot free. It's a bit of a balancing act, depending on your needs. To be honest, many users wouldn't notice much practical difference between those two types of screen so it's nothing much to worry about.

 

The screen was also tested using the chase test in PixPerAn for the following display comparisons. As a reminder, a series of pictures are taken on the highest shutter speed and compared, with the best case example shown on the left, and worst case example on the right. This should only be used as a rough guide to comparative responsiveness but is handy for a comparison between different screens and technologies as well as a means to compare those screens we tested before the introduction of our oscilloscope method.


24" 1ms G2G AU Optronics TN Film @ 144Hz (Trace Free = 40)

In practice the MG248Q showed low levels of blurring and a sharp and clear moving image. With high refresh rate support up to 144Hz you also get additional benefits in perceived motion blur and the screen is a step above any 60Hz refresh rate panels on the market. At the high end of the 144Hz refresh rate range, and with Trace Free at 40, some dark overshoot starts to creep in as you can see above. This reduces as the refresh rate lowers which we talked about earlier.


24" 1ms G2G AU Optronics TN Film @ 144Hz (Trace Free = 40)


27" 1ms G2G AU Optronics TN Film @ 144Hz (Response Time = Normal)


27" 1ms G2G AU Optronics TN Film @ 144Hz (OD = Normal)


27" 1ms G2G AU Optronics TN Film @ 144Hz (AMA = High)

If we compare the MG248Q to some other recent gaming screens we've tested with TN Film panels the performance is very comparable. Response times are at a similar level and in practice the levels of blurring and overshoot are on par with one another.


24" 1ms G2G AU Optronics TN Film @ 144Hz (Trace Free = 40)


27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA (IPS-type) @ 144Hz (OD = Normal)


27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA (IPS-type) @ 144Hz (OD = Normal)


27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA (IPS-type) @ 144Hz (Trace Free = 80)

The above images compare the MG248Q then with the three high refresh rate IPS-type panels we've tested. In practice the IPS models show smooth and fluid movement and are also free of any noticeable overshoot as well which is pleasing. The TN Film models like the Asus MG248Q are slightly faster, and have a slightly different "feel" than the IPS models, but most users would be perfectly happy with any of the options here for gaming.

 



Additional Gaming Features

  

FreeSync Support - For those with a suitable graphics card, the MG248Q supports Adaptive Sync, offering a dynamic refresh rate range between 40 and 144Hz. This provides a decent lower end of the range, as well as supporting up to the maximum refresh rate of the monitor which is good news. Have a read of our Variable Refresh Rates article for more information on the benefits of Adaptive Sync / FreeSync. Since the screen is using FreeSync and not NVIDIA G-sync Asus have not had to sacrifice anything in the way of video inputs or scalers etc. Thankfully they've also managed to keep the input lag low.

Aspect Ratio Control - the screen has 4 options for aspect ratio control through the OSD 'image' menu as shown above. There are options for full, 4:3, 1:1 pixel mapping and overscan. There is oddly no "aspect ratio" option for maintaining the source aspect at whatever it is, but filling as much as the screen as possible. It's probably not a major issue as 1:1 pixel mapping is offered and the resolution of this panel is low anyway. External devices are generally 16:9 aspect ratio by default at 1080p now, so the native resolution/aspect ratio of the screen can accommodate that nicely.

NVIDIA 3D Vision 2 - We felt like this was a bit of an odd addition really. Some users will maybe want to use NVIDIA 3D Vision for their gaming, but with the screen being more aimed at an AMD graphics card market (with the FreeSync support), it felt like a bit of a mis-match. If you have an AMD card you can use FreeSync, but won't be able to use NVIDIA 3D Vision. If you have a compatible NVIDIA card you can use 3D Vision but not FreeSync. Still, it's there if you need it.

  

LightBoost (Blur Reduction Hack) - with NVIDIA 3D Vision 2 being supported, you can also make use of the LightBoost system if you want for some blur reduction benefits. It would have been nice to see a native blur reduction mode included on the screen, but NVIDIA users can at least use the hack method if they want. Have a read of our Motion Blur Reduction Backlights article for more information.

GamePlus features - available via the OSD menu is a series of game enhancements as shown above. Might be useful to some serious gamers.

Preset Modes - There are various preset modes available as shown above, and most can be altered quite well to your personal taste. These might be useful to quickly switch between different uses, certainly if you want a different setup for gaming than for general desktop use which is quite common.



Lag

We have written an in depth article about input lag and the various measurement techniques which are used to evaluate this aspect of a display. It's important to first of all understand the different methods available and also what this lag means to you as an end-user.

Input Lag vs. Display Lag vs. Signal Processing

To avoid confusion with different terminology we will refer to this section of our reviews as just "lag" from now on, as there are a few different aspects to consider, and different interpretations of the term "input lag". We will consider the following points here as much as possible. The overall "display lag" is the first, that being the delay between the image being shown on the TFT display and that being shown on a CRT. This is what many people will know as input lag and originally was the measure made to explain why the image is a little behind when using a CRT. The older stopwatch based methods were the common way to measure this in the past, but through advanced studies have been shown to be quite inaccurate. As a result, more advanced tools like SMTT provide a method to measure that delay between a TFT and CRT while removing the inaccuracies of older stopwatch methods.

In reality that lag / delay is caused by a combination of two things - the signal processing delay caused by the TFT electronics / scaler, and the response time of the pixels themselves. Most "input lag" measurements over the years have always been based on the overall display lag (signal processing + response time) and indeed the SMTT tool is based on this visual difference between a CRT and TFT and so measures the overall display lag. In practice the signal processing is the element which gives the feel of lag to the user, and the response time of course can impact blurring, and overall image quality in moving scenes. As people become more aware of lag as a possible issue, we are of course keen to try and understand the split between the two as much as possible to give a complete picture.

The signal processing element within that is quite hard to identify without extremely high end equipment and very complicated methods. In fact the studies by Thomas Thiemann which really kicked this whole thing off were based on equipment worth >100,1000 Euro, requiring extremely high bandwidths and very complicated methods to trigger the correct behaviour and accurately measure the signal processing on its own. Other techniques which are being used since are not conducted by Thomas (he is a freelance writer) or based on this equipment or technique, and may also be subject to other errors or inaccuracies based on our conversations with him since. It's very hard as a result to produce a technique which will measure just the signal processing on its own unfortunately. Many measurement techniques are also not explained and so it is important to try and get a picture from various sources if possible to make an informed judgement about a display overall.

For our tests we will continue to use the SMTT tool to measure the overall "display lag". From there we can use our oscilloscope system to measure the response time across a wide range of grey to grey (G2G) transitions as recorded in our response time tests. Since SMTT will not include the full response time within its measurements, after speaking with Thomas further about the situation we will subtract half of the average G2G response time from the total display lag. This should allow us to give a good estimation of how much of the overall lag is attributable to the signal processing element on its own.

 

Lag Classification


To help in this section we will also introduce a broader classification system for these results to help categorise each screen as one of the following levels:

  • Class 1) Less than 16ms / 1 frame lag - should be fine for gamers, even at high levels

  • Class 2) A lag of 16 - 32ms / One to two frames - moderate lag but should be fine for many gamers. Caution advised for serious gaming and FPS

  • Class 3) A lag of more than 32ms / more than 2 frames - Some noticeable lag in daily usage, not suitable for high end gaming


For the full reviews of the models compared here and the dates they were written (and when screens were approximately released to the market), please see our full reviews index.

(Measurements in ms)

 

Total Display Lag (SMTT 2)

3.75

Pixel Response Time Element

1.60

Estimated Signal Processing Lag

2.15

Lag Classification

1

 Class 1

We have provided a comparison above against other models we have tested to give an indication between screens. The screens tested are split into two measurements which are based on our overall display lag tests (using SMTT) and half the average G2G response time, as measured by the oscilloscope. The response time is split from the overall display lag and shown on the graph as the green bar. From there, the signal processing (red bar) can be provided as a good estimation.

The screen showed a total average display lag of only 3.75 ms as measured with SMTT 2. Taking into account half the average G2G response time at 1.60ms, we can estimate that there is ~2.15 ms of signal processing lag on this screen. Basically nothing at all. This is a very good result and puts it on par with other high end gaming displays shown here.



Movies and Video

The following summarises the screens performance in video applications:

  • 24" screen size makes it a reasonable option for an all-in-one multimedia screen, but being quite a lot smaller than most modern LCD TV's of course.

  • 16:9 aspect ratio is more well suited to videos than a 16:10 format screen, leaving smaller borders on DVD's and wide screen content at the top and bottom.

  • 1920 x 1080 resolution can support full 1080 HD resolution content

  • Digital interfaces support HDCP for any encrypted and protected content

  • Good range of connectivity options provided with DisplayPort, HDMI and Dual-link DVI offered.

  • Cables provided in the box for DisplayPort and DL-DVI, but not HDMI.

  • Moderate AG coating provides reasonably clear images with no major graininess, and without the unwanted reflections of a glossy solution. Some graininess apparent as with other TN Film panels, but shouldn't present a problem in movies.

  • Wide brightness range adjustment possible from the display, including a maximum luminance of ~346 cd/m2 and a decent minimum luminance of 71 cd/m2. This should afford you good control for different lighting conditions. Contrast ratio remains stable across that adjustment range as well and is strong for a TN Film panel. Brightness regulation is controlled without the need for PWM and so is flicker free for all brightness settings.

  • Black depth and contrast ratio are strong for a TN Film panel at 1005:1 after calibration. Detail in darker scenes should not be lost as a result.

  • There is a specific 'movie' preset mode available for movies or video if you want but it is much cooler than our calibrated custom mode. May be useful to some though.

  • Very good pixel responsiveness which should still be able to handle fast moving scenes in movies without issue. Some overshoot issues start to creep in at high refresh rates, but for movies and external devices they should run at 60Hz anyway. Try TF 40, but if you find there is any distracting overshoot, TF 20 should be more than sufficient for movies as well.

  • Viewing angles are limited due to the use of TN Film panel technology. May cause issues with gamma and contrast shift if you change your line of sight or have several people trying to see the screen at once. Not really an ideal technology for movies as a result of this viewing angle limitation.

  • Very good and mostly easy to use range of ergonomic adjustments available from the stand, so should be easy to obtain a comfortable position if you want to sit further away from the screen for movie viewing.

  • No particularly noticeable backlight leakage, and none from the edges which is good. This type of leakage may prove an issue when watching movies where black borders are present but it is not a problem here.

  • 2x 2W integrated stereo speakers on this model for the occasional movie clip and Youtube video, but probably not suitable for movie viewing. There is also an audio input and headphone output connection if needed.

  • Good range of hardware aspect ratio options with full, 4:3, 1:1 and overscan modes available which should be fine for most uses.

  • Picture in picture (PiP) and Picture By Picture (PbP) are not available.

  • NVIDIA 3D Vision 2 supported for 3D movies if you have a compatible graphics card and content.
     


Conclusion

The Asus MG248Q was a very solid gaming screen in the 24" space. The key areas of interest for this screen are where it did particularly well. It offered fast response times which were on par with other top-end TN Film gaming screens we've tested in recent months. There was high refresh rate support up to 144Hz, with a good FreeSync range also of 40 - 144Hz available. The low lag which was excellent news as well. Somewhat disconnected is the support for NVIDIA 3D Vision and LightBoost blur reduction hacks if you have an NVIDIA system, so although this is primarily aimed at AMD users (because of the FreeSync support) it's still an interesting choice for NVIDIA users.

The default setup of the screen is more aimed at gamers as well, with a low gamma and slightly cool colour temperature. Unfortunately that did mean it was a little bit restrictive for more general desktop uses, as the gamma is a bit hard to correct unless you have a calibration device. We would have welcomed more control over the gamma from the screen to overcome this. On the plus side, the contrast ratio was strong for a TN Film panel and you had a decent backlight adjustment range as well. You also need to be aware of the limitations of TN Film technology of course, particularly when it comes to the viewing angles which impact image quality and limit any colour critical work. It's firmly a gaming technology really and at least delivers well in that area.

We liked the functionality and ease of use of the stand, and it was nice to see a decent range of connections and OSD options provided. The flicker free backlight was welcome as ever. Although not officially a ROG branded screen, the design was very nice and it looked very much like the ROG Swift PG278Q and PG279Q models at the end of the day. If you're after a solid gaming screen in the 24" space, this is a great option.

If you appreciate the review and enjoy reading and like our work, we would welcome a donation to the site to help us continue to make quality and detailed reviews for you.
 

Pros

Cons

Excellent gaming performance with fast response times, high refresh rate, low lag and FreeSync support

Default setup aimed at gaming and not as good for general uses

Nice premium design, quite similar to the ROG Swift range

Limitations of TN Film technology when it comes to viewing angles particularly

Nice range of gaming extras and features

Some overshoot starts to become high at top end of refresh rate range (TF 40)


 

TFT Central Awards Explained

We have two award classifications as part of our reviews. There's the top 'Recommended' award, where a monitor is excellent and highly recommended by us. There is also an 'Approved' award for a very good screen which may not be perfect, but is still a very good display. These awards won't be given out every time, but look out for the logo at the bottom of the conclusion. A list of monitors which have won our awards is available here.

 

 

Back to Top

 

Sections
______
 

Reviews

Articles

News

Forum

Buying Support

___________

 

TFT Selector

Specifications Explained

Terms and Functions

Technologies

Frequently Asked Questions

Resources

_______

 

Panel Search Tool
Settings and ICC Profiles Database

Monitor Panel Parts Database

Laptop Panel Parts Database

Links

About

_____

 

Contact

Donations

Store

Advertise

 


    Copyright, TFT Central.                 Privacy Policy and Cookies

 

     Search TFT Central