Asus rog gx500

nope, 860m is about the max this thing can go up to, fitting anything above will just turn it into another nuke

 

I see you saying this a lot in various threads.. 1440p scales to 1080p "perfectly" too but you'll never overcome interpolation and it's blurry nasty look.

Not to mention the other downsides to 4k small sized panels.. more LEDs required to back light them = less battery life.. probably more energy required to also just plainly display the extra pixels too.

 

OK... so, sorry if I offend.


1440 does not scale to 1080 perfectly. 1440/1080=1.33333
2160 does scale to 1080 perfectly. 2160/1080=2
so, if you use 4 pixels on the 3840x2160 panel as 1 pixel, then it should have a perfectly sharp rendition at 1920x1080.
The issue is if the panels driver board will not run a smoothing/blur algorithm to the output and render that awful interpolation look we get when running LCDs at not native resolutions.
We also really need to drop the p off 1080p as it stands for progressive. Was only in place to differentiate between interlaced and progressive. Because 1080i was actually 1920x540 even line / 1920x540 odd line, so they could half the required bandwidth for broadcast, and because LCD drivers could not keep up.

They do not have individual LEDs for every pixel. The entire back light is lit by an array of LEDs along the edge of the panel (usually). Having more pixels in the LCD just adds more holes to let light through. All an LCD is, is a liquid crystal panel sandwiched between two 90 degree polarized layers. Each crystal site in a pixel is for one color, RGB. So if current is applied to all the colors it is fully blocking the back light and you get black, if no current is applied to all colors you get white, and then ratios in between produce all the different colors. Different tech panels do it different ways, but this is the general gist of how an LCD works. So basically... no extra power is required to back light a higher resolution panel.

Extra power is required to process the extra pixels though, purely because of the need for extra bandwidth and rendering. So full circle, HD is to 1080i as 4K is to 1080p.

Don't take this as an attack on you, I just don't like the spread of incorrect information. Also being of engineering background I am not very much fun at parties. :thumbsup:

 

It's not taken as an attack, but there's no way 4 pixels to make 1 pixel at 1080p (by the way, people say 1080p because it's easier to type than 1920x1080). It's going to look blurry, not sharp. Besides, pixels do not turn off.. And we know these aren't RGB LED backlit arrays (yes i'm an engineer, too).. It's fact that a more dense panel (especially one at 15.6") will require more edge-lit/brighter LEDs to provide more nits than a 1080p screen would require. IGZO technology mitigates this a lot but not enough.. The second problem is that most 4k panels today cannot go above 48hz.. The refresh on 4k just isn't there.

The rest of your post is irrelevant to my particular concerns.. The fact I've owned 1440p and it's 100% correct for 1080p resolution but blurry/interpolated.. But just because the 4k aspect ratio of 16:9 is compatible with 1080p doesn't mean it's going to look the same as a native 1920x1080.. It's not turning those extra 4k pixels off = more energy used.

Edit: I get what you're saying, 4 pixels to make 1 large pixel to equal a 1080 resolution versus 1.33 pixels per 1 pixel at 1080 for a 1440p panel. I would assume your logic is correct, that 1080 resolution might look less blurry because of this but the issue for me and a lot of others is the energy required used to backlight and power 4k pixels is unnecessary this early for GPUs.. I think it's just a numbers game, a race to see who can put 4k panels on devices before the rest.. We all know GPUs can't game at 4k (old games maybe) but anything from like 2005+ isn't going to do so well I bet. It just makes more sense for Asus to offer a plain 1080 res screen.. Heck if we were going to dream, i'd rather have a 16:10 screen than 16:9. Everything is too wide/long for my tastes..

 

..I suppose by the same token, one pixel would also be... well, pixely? Blurry?

Seriously, though - on lcds, with duplication/nearest neighbour, you obviously get "blocks" instead of blur when rendering at half the native resolution of the screen... although will the effect be more or less obvious when starting with a higher resolution..?

Anyway - imo, adding a full-screen filter is not really a good solution to this either. So unless you are going to watch film - that again is actually produced in the native resolution the screen is in (rather than upscaled). Or play games that don't use per pixel operations for the effects, or have 4k pre-render targets (i.e., none of them.. unless maybe Pillars of Eternity gets a 100Gb DLC with a 4k target for the backgrounds).. Are you really going to want a 4k display?

I mean, maths is maths. To double the resolution of a render from some 1080 target, any simple linear algorithm that wants to have the same precision will need to crunch 4 times as many pixels. More advanced render targets easily multiply that many, many times. And graphics cards so far isn't keeping up with that as resolutions double. (Which anyone who has a massive gaming rig with games running in 4k will see - when the object scaling in the rendering context suddenly makes you prefer blurring filters..).

...Arguably the techniques used at the moment are not really scalable upwards if you're being somewhat realistic. And the tech to actually allow accurate targets at higher resolutions won't be available on the PC market for many years (most likely never, on the pain of lawsuit from intel).

 

Every once in a while you get luck with a LCD controller and it will just output 1:4 without applying blur or sub pixel rendering. Some old industrial LCDs would work like this and you could get crisp harmonic resolutions (couldn't think of a better word than harmonic, but you understand the idea).

My first dell, 20" was 1600x1200, would display 800x600 perfectly. No blur, no filtering, just crisp pixels rendered at 1:4.

That is why I am hopeful that Asus understands that we want to run these panels at 1080 for gaming and we want crisp resolution. I hope the selected LCD driver will not disappoint.

 

Also beyond gaming, I plan to use this computer for image and video editing. I don't know where Adobe Premiere and AfterEffects are on HiDPI support, but LightRoom works fine. So my big wish is to run the screen in 4K for editing and 1080 for gaming/Oculus development.

16:10 would be awesome.

 

I'm using the Y50 now. The 4k scales perfectly to 1920x1080 and the image doesn't look any different than a 1080 panel. The only option to scale in between is 2048 x 1152. This seems to be the standard for panels of this resolution, as I have never seen 2560x1440 offered on any of these 4k panels yet. As for the speculation, I think we can safely assume they will be using the same panel as the NX500, which is 60 Hz, so no worries there.

 

That's good to know at least, I guess it's safe to say these manufacturers chose 4k because of it's ability to go "practically" native to 1080p since it looks native anyways..

 

i'm going to jump in on this conversation and agree here. at the end of the day, i'm looking for a superior panel to perform image editing/graphic manipulation with and the ability to downscale the resolution for the purposes of gaming.

my 8 y/o dell runs 1680x1050 with an 8600M GT and I was still able to squeeze in GTA:IV on the "lowest" resolution possible. the video card is going to output the selected resolution, the LCD components do the rest. i don't get all of the discussion with "you won't be able to game at 4k, why would you want it?" the video card is doing the brunt of the work. pick the resolution that works for the game (that allows you to actually play the game) and it won't matter what resolution your LCD is capable of.

 

This might be the laptop for me if cooling and noise is good. I wish it was on a 14'' form factor though, also would only need 1080P instead of 4K

 

You can run 4k as 1080p if you like.

 

Resolution does not change the needed backlight energy. Only the percent of transmission changes that. If your pixels are 80% RGB, 20% masking, then it'll let the same amount of light through whether the 15.6" screen is 768p, 1080p, or 2160p, or 8640p.

The board driving the screen will consume more power with a higher resolution though. Even if the software is operating at 1080p, the board still has to address 4 physical pixels individually for each single software pixel.

And it's great that 4k is unnecessary for you. I'm a semi-pro photographer (i.e. I've sold some photos) as well as a gamer. So the fact that it's 4k (and covers 100% Adobe RGB) is a huge plus for me. There are a gazillion other 1080p sub-sRGB gaming laptops out there if you don't need 4k or wide color gamut. Please don't try to talk Asus into killing one of the only products that fills my niche.

 

arguments and speculations aside, there are "plenty" of notebooks out today that offer many similar features but the majority of them are missing some of the fit and finish details that I've been looking for in an ultra-portable. i've been sitting on my outdated technology for so long, anything is going to seem like an improvement (hell my battery died 2 years ago).

i've been on the fence about the MSI offerings but every time i look at them, there's just one additional thing they're just not capable of, i wish they'd do. and just about every other ultra-portable has RAM limitations that just don't make any sense in today's requirements.

i do have some concerns, based on the nx500 testing and hope they get worked out. i want/need this device to last another 6+ years.

 

I'm not crazy about 4K either. And yes, I can apparently downscale just fine to 1080 when gaming, but that's not the point. For me, it's all about the price. I would prefer to have a 1080p panel for $200, maybe even $300 less. 4K is too much. It's too high of a jump. No thanks.

 

^ I agree

Does anyone know if the 860m is going to be maxwell?
I'm assuming it is, but can anyone confirm based on the provided current information?

Thanks!

 

Wouldn't the Gigabyte P34G-V2 fit your bill? 1080p, $300 less, and same GPU in an even smaller form factor.

 

Assuming Asus actually cares about battery life.. I'll expect the worse about the required backlighting like when Apple decided to go Retina on the iPad and had to amp up the battery to get a rated 10 hours again due to the dense panel.

I'm more concerned that the 4k screen will command an outlandish price tag even though the panel itself probably costs the same as a 1080p. I am more into talking Asus into offering 1080p panels for non-photographers that like to game.

 

The Razer Blade 14 has a 70Wh battery and appears to get 5-6 hours of web browsing and office programme use; that's what I've read on the Razer forum, at least. We can expect at least that much from the GX500, since its battery is significantly larger (96Wh). The Blade's screen should have slightly lower power consumption as it's only 3k and uses IGZO technology, but I'm hoping the GX500's larger battery will outweigh that.

I've also seen promising estimates over here, although the testing methodology (if there was any) isn't described at all.

 

that is actually a really, really nice laptop. But I'll probably get the N550JK in the end, won't be able to get to that price range. Thanks anyway!

 

am i the only one that wishes the GX500 had similar styling to the NX500? i'm OK with black (i suppose), but the "grills" on the sides of the keyboard look much more modern on the NX500.

 

Brudduhs gotta realize that the GX500 isn't meant to gain the market share of someone who says, "Dat 4K gon' lag yo' she it up when you gon' game!"...

If you're seriously waiting for this laptop so you can buy a FHD version instead, you're wasting your time. There are so many other options for what you're looking for.

As someone who needs a lappy for digital art, should I wait for the Asus GX500 and risk not having access to a personal computer for 2 months, or cop the AORUS X3 + and deal with the shoddy 72% NTSC color gamut?

 

What level of gamut Is your printer and your work usually produced at? Which gamut measure do you use? Adobe RGB?

 

I'm actually pretty much new to digital art, but looking to produce professional quality art within 4 years. At this time, I don't have my own printer for digital art nor do I know what gamut I use/ what the standard is for concept artists. Please help a clueless man out. lol

 

I suggest you look up some guides as often more does not equal better. It comes down to what level you target.

 

Sorry ?
It's been more than 6 months that I'm looking to a laptop to replace my Sony SV15. I want a 15" model (perfect size for me) with wide angle FHD IPS type panel (3~4k is useless for me), Maxwell generation dedicated GPU, thin, less than 2.2kg and good full metal construction. Nothing come close.
Gigabyte ? terrible manufacturing quality and looking
MSI ? looks very cheap to me (yes I've seen it in the shop)
Dell XPS ? no thanks, I don't want a oven, and Dell support ...
Macbook ? all my software runs on Windows
Razer blade ? fantastic looking but 13 is too small and 17 too big
so ? nothing...

 

That's an awful large amount of requirements you listed there... Its not really surprising that nothing out there fits ALL of them.

The Razer blade is 14inches btw

 

acer v5 573g
you are welcome

keep in mind he said just maxwell, not any particular card. everything from 830m to 860m is maxwell so basically anything would work

 

I keep hearing about this but keep finding models with a 720M. Do you have a link to one?

 

Try googling 'Acer Aspire V5-573G-54218G1Taii' or 'Acer v5 573g Maxwell'.

First result wielded this:
Acer Aspire V5-573G-54218G1Taii Notebook Review Update - NotebookCheck.net Reviews

 

the one with an 850m as of now is not yet a US model, but you can find it on amazon.uk

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Acer-Aspire-V5-573G-74518G25A_-Intel-GeForce/dp/B00KINZ2GQ

I don't know if it will be released in US or not, but most likely yes. the downside is that it's D3 850m

 

thanks for the suggestion but I said quality product, not acer typical rubbish (worst brand on quality with HP, too many acer fails around me)
oh and I forgot to mention that CPU performance must be acceptable, not the ULV anemic stuff embedded on the acer. I need some processing power for gaming and 3D work, so at least 2GHz base frequency quad core required...

Yes it may sound asking too much, but my 2 years old Sony SV15 has better specs than most of the new stuff, so why it's not possible to have better in 2014 ? Only thing I ask over my Sony is quad core and a Maxwell GPU in same form factor. Looks like its too much for these corporate that only think cost reduction and race to the bottom...

 

mind enlighten me with your sv15 specs?

 

Acer and HP don't actually make laptops. In fact neither do Dell, Apple, Toshiba, etc. They're made by ODMs, and it's virtually impossible to figure out which ODM made a particular model laptop. Apple uses Quanta exclusively for the current gen Macbooks. Quanta also makes most of HP's laptops. Most of Asus' laptops are made by Pegatron, since Pegatron was spun off from Asus just 7 years ago. Same story with Acer and Wistron, except Wistron was spun off in 2001 so it's a lot harder to say who makes a particular Acer model.

List of laptop brands and manufacturers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

I think he meant Acer's level of quality and expectation are typically less than Asus. When I think Acer, I think plastic, inexpensive and generally boring design. There are exceptions, like the S7 series, but in general Acer's laptops are cheaper than others. Apple and HP may share the same manufacturer but that doesn't mean they share the same level of quality. There are design considerations that come into play and it really helps Apple that they have pretty much the same unibody year after year. It's kind of hard to have quality issues when things don't change that much. These manufacturers have complete control over the design and the decisions made affect how well the laptop operates. The ODMs probably just do what they are told and have very little design input.

 

apple uses foxconn for current gen macbooks, not quanta

 

What you're describing is an OEM. What distinguishes an ODM from an OEM is that the ODM does the design. That's what the D stands for - Original Design Manufacturer. The company ordering the laptop makes high-level decisions like features and specs, what sorts of QC tests the laptop should withstand, etc. But the ODM actually designs and manufactures the laptop. Even the unibody aluminum chassis wasn't Apple's design - an ODM was playing around with some new milling equipment and thought they could get it to work. They looked at their list of clients to see who might be interested in it, pitched it to Apple, who agreed to try it.

When you look at objective measures of quality (reliability), Apple is actually only slightly above average. Asus is consistently near the top of the charts. Apple just scores so high in subjective ratings (user surveys) because they've got a really good aftermarket service program that leaves their customers happy.
http://www.squaretrade.com/htm/pdf/SquareTrade_laptop_reliability_1109.pdf
http://www.rescuecom.com/news-press-releases/computer-reliability-report-2013.aspx

The first report is statistics from one of the big companies which sells extended warranty programs. The second is from a largish computer repair shop comparing the number of each brand which comes into their shop to that brand's market share. The trend you notice is that companies with closer ties to the mnaufacturer (e.g. Samsung, Asus) tend to do better.

I'm pretty sure Foxconn makes the iPhones (definitely) and iPads (not sure), and the Macbooks are by Quanta. The old Core Duo/Core 2 Duo plastic Macbooks were by Asus if memory serves me (as were the earlier Powerbooks).

 

I might've remembered wrong then, but in my memory macbooks are always made by foxconn, at least 3 years ago they were.
also the survey you gave seem to completely forget about gigabyte LOL
the sad thing is that gigabtyte is the ODM for razer, but their own notebook design just can't compare to razer

 

The first report mentions including only brands with more than 1000 costumers (in their base). So, there's that...

 

While this laptop seems great, since there is obviously no way it could ever run a game at 4k i don't really see the point might as well just put a 1080p screen. The scaling would take about a week of annoying me before I hated looking at it lol.

Guess I'm still looking at the MSI, for a thin gaming laptop atm.

 

By the time they decide to announce the day we can go buy this thing I fear it going to be eclipsed by the new Maxwell hardware. What is taking so long, and not a peep from ASUS on anything, no leaks, no nothing. I would be happy with a badly sourced rumor at this point.

 

As usual rather than waiting for a specific product, buy the best available when you need it.

 

Been waiting for this laptop for a while.

This will replace my first generation macbook pro retina. I mostly run linux on my macbook anyway... I have been waiting a long time for a 4k laptop (I don't use scaling on my macbook retina and won't on this) as well as something that is similar dimensions/weight as the macbook pro.

When is this thing going to come out? Been waiting months...

Anyone know if this thing will have thunderbolt or is it just going to be displayport and is it only one port?

This could be the only deal breaker for me because I need gigabit ethernet and I refuse to use a USB adapter. It has to be thunderbolt if its going to be a dongle style and then I need a free displayport or thunderbolt output for an external monitor as well. This could be the only thing that kills it for me.

 

It's doubtful it's thunderbolt. The NX500 is Display-port only so this is likely the same.

 

It's a displayport not thunderbolt.

 

You hear anything about onboard gigabit ethernet then? Usually the notebooks that are that thin lack that Oh welll.

 

No ethernet but you do get AC wireless.

 

Quite excited about this machine, just waiting for its release, and I hope with new hardware since its taking this long.

 

If Asus keeps dragging their feet on this I may wind up going with the acer v nitro black edition 15" model when it comes out.

 

ASUS ROG GX500JM-DH71T 15.6" 4K IPS Touchscreen Notebook | CUKUSA.com

$1999.00

Estimated ETA 9/1/14