The perfect 4K 43” monitor! Soon! Asus XG438Q ROG

I know this is a very unfair comparison, but last night I had my XG438Q and LG OLED E6 side by side, and the difference in IQ was worlds apart.

Obviously it's not a fair comparison but after gaming on the OLED for so long, feels so inferior to move to this monitor. Yes the response is tons better and smoother on the monitor but still the IQ is far wose than the OLED.

Does anybody know if the XG43UQ will have local dimming zones and quantom dot tech like the Asus PG65UQ. The latter being to big for me so I am having hopes on the upcoming XG43UQ.
 
shadow2761 said:
I know this is a very unfair comparison, but last night I had my XG438Q and LG OLED E6 side by side, and the difference in IQ was worlds apart.

Obviously it's not a fair comparison but after gaming on the OLED for so long, feels so inferior to move to this monitor. Yes the response is tons better and smoother on the monitor but still the IQ is far wose than the OLED.

Does anybody know if the XG43UQ will have local dimming zones and quantom dot tech like the Asus PG65UQ. The latter being to big for me so I am having hopes on the upcoming XG43UQ.
Click to expand...


You should just stick with the OLED lol! You will never find an LCD monitor to compete with its IQ, and quite frankly you shouldn't have even looked haha... but too late now :LOL:. The XG43UQ will be very similar, don't expect anything near OLED performance. It's only slightly more expensive, which indicates it won't have any fancy back-light tech... it's just a bit brighter and has DSC.

If IQ really matters to you THAT much, you won't find anything that beats OLED, not for years yet... maybe MicroLED will be it. As you point out, response and smoothness will be better on a dedicated PC LCD monitor, and for some people that will be more important. There's no right or wrong here, it just comes down to what your priorities are...
 
Last edited:
Guess I'll be sticking with my 43" Samsung QLED until that grand and glorious OLED is available in the same size.
 
bananadude said:
You should just stick with the OLED lol! You will never find an LCD monitor to compete with its IQ, and quite frankly you shouldn't have even looked haha... but too late now :LOL:. The XG43UQ will be very similar, don't expect anything near OLED performance. It's only slightly more expensive, which indicates it won't have any fancy back-light tech... it's just a bit brighter and has DSC.

If IQ really matters to you THAT much, you won't find anything that beats OLED, not for years yet... maybe MicroLED will be As you point out, response and smoothness will be better on a dedicated PC LCD monitor, and for some people that will be more important. There's no right or wrong here, it just comes down to what your priorities are...
Click to expand...

There is ONE way OLED would lose out to FALD LCD. And that's when the ABL kicks in on OLED. I remember playing Horizon Zero Dawn's Frozen Wilds DLC in HDR and with all that snow on screen it was causing the ABL to kick in and almost made the game look like SDR. So yeah games with that kinda scenery the LCD's brightness advantage would win out but otherwise for dark HDR games like RE7/RE2 Remake and SDR content the OLED is just world's better.
 
Commander Shepard said:
Guess I'll be sticking with my 43" Samsung QLED until that grand and glorious OLED is available in the same size.
Click to expand...

What model Samsung do you have exactly? I think you'll be waiting A LONG time for a 43" OLED, if it ever comes at all, and I know of no manufacturer even talking about doing that. I know LG have a 48" screen coming next year, but that's still on the big side.
 
bananadude said:
You should just stick with the OLED lol! You will never find an LCD monitor to compete with its IQ, and quite frankly you shouldn't have even looked haha... but too late now :LOL:. The XG43UQ will be very similar, don't expect anything near OLED performance. It's only slightly more expensive, which indicates it won't have any fancy back-light tech... it's just a bit brighter and has DSC.

If IQ really matters to you THAT much, you won't find anything that beats OLED, not for years yet... maybe MicroLED will be it. As you point out, response and smoothness will be better on a dedicated PC LCD monitor, and for some people that will be more important. There's no right or wrong here, it just comes down to what your priorities are...
Click to expand...


Well I wanted to stick with OLED but because I wanted to be more competative with online fps gaming,I decided to get a gaming monitor. While the response and 120Hz of this monitor is far better than my OLED, it really did hurt in the IQ.

Having said that, I still have not messed around with any settings or calibration etc, something I will attempt in the coming days. If I can get the image looking better, I will be more inclined to keep it, if not I may sell it and just get a Oled C9 and wait for a better quality fast monitor panel comes out.

And if anyone is reading my comments in regards to this monitor, please do not be put off by what I am saying. This panel probably does have really good image quality in comparison to other panels, its just that I am coming from 3 years of gaming on an OLED panel. I actually have not used a PC panel for about 4-5 years so my judgement here may be quiet biased.
 
bananadude said:
What model Samsung do you have exactly? I think you'll be waiting A LONG time for a 43" OLED, if it ever comes at all, and I know of no manufacturer even talking about doing that. I know LG have a 48" screen coming next year, but that's still on the big side.
Click to expand...
Samsung Q60. It's actually got a pretty nice picture. I'm always hoping something better comes along.

I know, ain't likely we'll ever see a 43" OLED anytime. I had a 55" LG OLED as my main TV and ruined it in about 2 years with a nasty case of burn-in. After years of trying different sized 4K TVs as monitors, I've settled on 40" - 43" as the best for me. Which means my choices always will lack the the top features of bigger models.
 
Well this is finally a 43" that doesn't lack 120hz 4k and has variable refresh rate that works with nvidia gpus, and is about 3x the contrast and black depth of ips and tn.. nothing like FALD or OLED contrast and black depth though. I do wish they had a HDR FALD model at this size, then it would last me several years.

60hz is smearing blur during viewport movement in 1st/3rd person games and it's low motion definition # of frames shown per second. 120hz gaming lcds came out in 2009, and g-sync in 2012-13 I think. There's no way I'd ever drop to 60fps/60Hz max and no VRR. OLED still has bad sample and hold blur at 60fps/Hz regardless of it's response time and has no VRR yet. Even consoles are starting to do VRR and the next batch will allow higher Hz I'm hearing. We're 2/3 of the way through 2019 already. HDMI 2.1 should open FALD QLED and OLED tvs up to 120hz with VRR so it's a matter of time, with no nvidia die shrink and no nvidia hdmi 2.1 output yet but it'll happen eventually.. These 43" monitors are another of a bunch of good "right now" monitors - but a lot of the newer monitors will be surpassed in the next year+ in bandwidth alone. There should also be a lot more to chose from with a bunch of hdmi 2.1 tvs with 4k 120hz VRR and QFT eventually. This monitor could bridge the gap for 2 years or so just fine though.. until hdmi 2.1 tvs, monitors, and gpus are common.
 
I definitely agree- more choices is better, and a FALD option would be nice particularly if it is as good as the one on the 27” 4k gsyncs. I would pay more for that.
TV-wise, there have been no FALD options at 43” for a while now, I hope that changes, it is probably the sweet spot for large 4k monitor use on a desktop.
 
I realized default OD was level 3, this presented too much ghosting. I switched to level 2 but haven't tested it yet.

Also, default saturation was 50, I felt this setting is far too washed out. So I increased it to 60 and like the image much more now. I was comparing it to my OLED E6 and thought wow its getting better lol.

Unfortunately no more time to play around. Only got 5 minutes on it today lol.

Interestingly, the ASUS PG65 has HDR 1000 and 384 local dimming zones. But that screen is $7K AU and 65" is far too big. So, hoping the XG43UQ coming later this year, which is suppose to be HDR1000, also has local dimming zones like the PG65.
 
shadow2761 said:
Interestingly, the ASUS PG65 has HDR 1000 and 384 local dimming zones. But that screen is $7K AU and 65" is far too big. So, hoping the XG43UQ coming later this year, which is suppose to be HDR1000, also has local dimming zones like the PG65.
Click to expand...

I guarantee that it will not. Asus would be screaming from the rooftops about this if it were.
 
bananadude said:
I guarantee that it will not. Asus would be screaming from the rooftops about this if it were.
Click to expand...

Its almost certainly the same panel Acer is using in their 43" and that panel itself is probably just a higher binned version of the one ASUS is using in the XG438Q. All of these are edge lit.
 
Ugh, what to do. I guess I'll wait it out. Thanks for your impressions so far shadow2761. I was really excited about this monitor but your initial impressions may have saved me $1200. I suppose there's no need to rush with the UQ and Acer coming. I just don't know if I'll be satisfied with anything less than that 48" OLED that's supposedly coming, but if you can tweak the settings on this to the point where it's not a massive downgrade in IQ then it has some promise. For everyone else, you're right - it would probably be a lot easier to look at this as somewhat of a grail monitor but even then, with better ones coming it does feel like somewhat of a stop-gap solution. But I guess they ALL are as long as the tech keeps advancing.
 
elvn said:
My LG GK850G has a big lighting ring on the back of it which might be what you are talking about. A wheel on the osd controls what color it is set to. Works pretty well for a cool blue, but my walls are blue so your mileage may vary there. I'd find that type of ring light on the back a lot more useful than the tiny aura sync projector.

Previously on my 27" monitor, I had stick on led strip bias lighting. I found it works better if you cut up some strong patches of velcro into small strips and connect it with that instead of relying on it's own glue however, as monitors tend to be warm and the default glue wasn't very strong compared to the coiled memory of the strip and it's own weight.

As for the asus rog aura sync mini projector, it'd be nice if they had different logo/design filters you could swap in to the spotlight but that's not possible as far as I can tell.

https://www.asus.com/us/ROG-Republic-Of-Gamers/ROG-Spotlight/

how to disable: https://www.asus.com/support/FAQ/1009854/

There are mini LED spotlights for sale fairly cheap that do a round spot of color without a logo,
or you could go nuts and get an actual LED logo projector like a 15w or 20w GOBO logo projector for $140 (incl one custom logo) if you were into it that much. There are also some ~$15 logo projecting car lights made for under cars or off of the bottom of car doors that could work with some wiring to a wall wart or usb power perhaps.
Click to expand...
The PG27UQ has an insert for the bottom light that projects the ROG logo, which you can take out completely or swap out for other designs that came in the box. Don't know if it's the same with this one.
 
Lateralus said:
Ugh, what to do. I guess I'll wait it out. Thanks for your impressions so far shadow2761. I was really excited about this monitor but your initial impressions may have saved me $1200. I suppose there's no need to rush with the UQ and Acer coming. I just don't know if I'll be satisfied with anything less than that 48" OLED that's supposedly coming, but if you can tweak the settings on this to the point where it's not a massive downgrade in IQ then it has some promise. For everyone else, you're right - it would probably be a lot easier to look at this as somewhat of a grail monitor but even then, with better ones coming it does feel like somewhat of a stop-gap solution. But I guess they ALL are as long as the tech keeps advancing.
Click to expand...

We should know whether the 48" OLED is actually happening by Q1 2020. I personally don't think its actually coming to market, partly because LG doesn't want people using these as monitors (and the associated warranty costs from burn-in).
 
burburbur said:
We should know whether the 48" OLED is actually happening by Q1 2020. I personally don't think its actually coming to market, partly because LG doesn't want people using these as monitors (and the associated warranty costs from burn-in).
Click to expand...


The 48" is coming to market, but it's no more a monitor than any of the 55" OLEDs available. LG wouldn't advise them for PC I'm sure, but I'd question how many people actually would... 48" is still massive on a desk. This is still going to marketed as a TV, just a cheaper and more compact OLED for people who don't want 55" (or find that too big) in a bedroom or smaller lounge.
 
bananadude said:
The 48" is coming to market, but it's no more a monitor than any of the 55" OLEDs available. LG wouldn't advise them for PC I'm sure, but I'd question how many people actually would... 48" is still massive on a desk. This is still going to marketed as a TV, just a cheaper and more compact OLED for people who don't want 55" (or find that too big) in a bedroom or smaller lounge.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Same feature set, just a smaller panel. And I agree that 48" is still much larger than most are willing to go for a monitor, so I can't see warranty claims being the reason that LG decided to pass on bringing to market a size that could drive additional sales for people who want or require a smaller set.

If for some reason it doesn't happen then I'll get a 9 or 10 series 55" since that will still be an improvement over my B7 in terms of features and gaming, but after having used 48" and 55" 4K panels as monitors I do prefer 48" for everyday use. 43" of course would be awesome too, but there's no point in torturing myself hoping for one of those yet because unlike the 48" there haven't even been rumors or roadmaps mentioning that size.
 
Lateralus said:
Ugh, what to do. I guess I'll wait it out. Thanks for your impressions so far shadow2761. I was really excited about this monitor but your initial impressions may have saved me $1200. I suppose there's no need to rush with the UQ and Acer coming. I just don't know if I'll be satisfied with anything less than that 48" OLED that's supposedly coming, but if you can tweak the settings on this to the point where it's not a massive downgrade in IQ then it has some promise. For everyone else, you're right - it would probably be a lot easier to look at this as somewhat of a grail monitor but even then, with better ones coming it does feel like somewhat of a stop-gap solution. But I guess they ALL are as long as the tech keeps advancing.
Click to expand...


Like I said, don't be persuaded by my initial impressions because I am coming from OLED gaming for 3 yrs straight.

But like I said, I increased the saturation from 50 to 60 and the image is much more popping now without being too oversaturated.

I am sure with more proper tweaking I can get an even better image. I really don't mind it now, it does look good! More testing to come soon.
 
We are still not back to CRT levels of Gaming.... there is such massive collusion in the panel market.
 
Gamer X said:
We are still not back to CRT levels of Gaming.... there is such massive collusion in the panel market.
Click to expand...

If OLED used BFI, it would shatter CRT into a million pieces of shit.

bananadude said:
The 48" is coming to market
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
shadow2761 said:
Like I said, don't be persuaded by my initial impressions because I am coming from OLED gaming for 3 yrs straight.
Click to expand...

Right. I am too (well coming up on 2 years instead of 3) so I know it's going to be a step backward. :) I could probably deal with pale blacks and the other regressions in IQ for everything but horror games considering the extra motion fluidity, but with other options in the pipeline it may be best for me to wait. I do look forward to your continued impressions!
 
Pardon me jumping in here 12 pages in.

Does this thing actually exist yet?
 
jojo69 said:
where?
Click to expand...

Im Australia, so we got it about 2 weeks ago. I assume rest of the world are not far behind now.

Oh and another thing, we also have the LG 38gl950f available for preorder due to arrive in stores in about 2 weeks time. If that wasn't double the price with only HDR400 I would have also got that monitor and compared it side by side with this XG43.
 
burburbur said:
We should know whether the 48" OLED is actually happening by Q1 2020. I personally don't think its actually coming to market, partly because LG doesn't want people using these as monitors (and the associated warranty costs from burn-in).
Click to expand...

I disagree. LG went to extensive lengths to cut input lag on their 2019 lineup, getting it down to only 6.6ms. Only one platform is using high refresh OLED that requires low input lag; PC use. They also sell the panel to Alienware for their gaming monitor. I think the 48" is specifically targeted at PC users or people who want a TV in the bedroom. I don't know of anyone who would want smaller than a 55" in a living room.

shadow2761 said:
Im Australia, so we got it about 2 weeks ago. I assume rest of the world are not far behind now.

Oh and another thing, we also have the LG 38gl950f available for preorder due to arrive in stores in about 2 weeks time. If that wasn't double the price with only HDR400 I would have also got that monitor and compared it side by side with this XG43.
Click to expand...

Which store in Australia?
 
Vega said:
I disagree. LG went to extensive lengths to cut input lag on their 2019 lineup, getting it down to only 6.6ms. Only one platform is using high refresh OLED that requires low input lag; PC use. They also sell the panel to Alienware for their gaming monitor. I think the 48" is specifically targeted at PC users or people who want a TV in the bedroom. I don't know of anyone who would want smaller than a 55" in a living room.
Click to expand...


Surely that's with console gamers in mind. There are so few people using OLEDs as PC monitors, not least because of the size restrictions (never-mind the fear of burn-in that would give most people second thoughts), that it seems inconceivable PC users would be so much as a brain fart in the mind of LG OLED engineers!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: isp
like this
Console don't run at 120 Hz. You'd be surprised on how many people on TV forums use LG OLED TV's as monitors.
 
Burn in is prob why I heard the DELL gaming OLED will be 400nit which is in SDR range, and no HDR. Normal LG OLED tv's ABL keeps the scene color brightness down to 600nit but you could say TVs are made for more dynamic content than PCs and consoles(even so sports and news have static logos and readouts). .

Speaking of maximum color nits kept as a burn in risk reducing safety factor - as far as I know all of the RTINGS OLED "torture" tests were run in SDR and not with HDR color brightness hitting the screens. In fact I just looked it up again and as their test details show, most were done at 200nit, with their max tv set to 380nit.

"
  • The total duration of static content. LG has told us that they expect it to be cumulative, so static content which is present for 30 minutes twice a day is equivalent to one hour of static content once per day.
  • The brightness of the static content. Our maximum brightness CNN TV has more severe burn-in than our 200 nits brightness CNN TV.
  • The colors of the static areas. We found that in our 20/7 Burn-in Test the red sub-pixel is the fastest to degrade, followed by blue and then green.
"

CNN "MAXIMUM" Brightness test they did is only 380nits:
"As above, live CNN is played on the TV through a cable feed. However, for this TV, the 'OLED Light' is set to maximum, which corresponds to a brightness of 380 nits on our checkerboard pattern. This is to show the relationship between burn-in rate and 'OLED Light' with the exact same content and over the same time period.

-------------
Vega said:
Console don't run at 120 Hz. You'd be surprised on how many people on TV forums use LG OLED TV's as monitors.
Click to expand...

Well even now the xbox one supports VRR on some samsung TVs (the TV's themselves support 120hz 1080p and 120hz 1440p already they just lack hdmi 2.1 for 4k 120hz) The next gen of consoles is supposed to support 120hz 4k.


Microsoft's next Xbox and Sony's PlayStation 5 are going to play games super smoothly, but you might need a new TV to make the most them
The new game consoles we're expecting from Microsoft and Sony in 2020 will be capable of running games at 4K resolution at 120 frames per second.
Click to expand...

https://www.businessinsider.com/best-tvs-for-next-xbox-project-scarlett-playstation-5-120hz-2019-6

------------------------

We are in a middle ground right now due to hdmi 2.1 rollout time constraints and product roadmaps.
 
Last edited:
Oh man, I was hoping Vega was in here.

I assume you will be running 3 of these.
 
Vega said:
Console don't run at 120 Hz. You'd be surprised on how many people on TV forums use LG OLED TV's as monitors.
Click to expand...

But you can't run a TV at 120Hz on PC due to HDMI limitations and lack of Display Port. The Alienware is obviously going to be the first and only exception, and stands alone, but of course comes with an insane price tag. Outside of this, things won't change until we see GPUs with HDMI 2.1, and that's a good year away most likely. I was thinking more in respect to input lag, which obviously does factor in to console use, plus VRR functionality on some models (which DOESN'T work via PC, only console). I'd bet that FAR more people are using OLEDs for console gaming than PC gaming, and there's little doubt that OLED TV's, in their current state, are more geared towards console than PC use.

The LG 48" changes nothing in that regard, and LG are doing it to broaden their reach and solidify their monopoly on the OLED market, one which they already dominate (they sell panels to Philips, Panasonic and Sony). 48" is simply a smaller option that bridges the gap with consumers wanting more affordable and smaller OLEDs.
 
Last edited:
I couldn't afford an OLED display anwyays, and really all I wanted was a decent high refresh rate large screen display with adaptive sync and HDR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
Vega said:
I disagree. LG went to extensive lengths to cut input lag on their 2019 lineup, getting it down to only 6.6ms. Only one platform is using high refresh OLED that requires low input lag; PC use. They also sell the panel to Alienware for their gaming monitor. I think the 48" is specifically targeted at PC users or people who want a TV in the bedroom. I don't know of anyone who would want smaller than a 55" in a living room.
Click to expand...


They are more than happy to sell bare panels to other companies who will use them in non-LG branded products that LG doesn't need to pay warranty for. I agree 100% with you that almost nobody wants a 48" screen for a TV, particularly when the 55" is getting so cheap now. That's why I don't see them releasing one themselves. I also think the number of PC users on a 48" screen is probably well below 1% of users. If the mainline PC monitor brands can't justify a quality product at that size, I can't believe LG would be doing so with a TV product.
 
burburbur said:
They are more than happy to sell bare panels to other companies who will use them in non-LG branded products that LG doesn't need to pay warranty for. I agree 100% with you that almost nobody wants a 48" screen for a TV, particularly when the 55" is getting so cheap now. That's why I don't see them releasing one themselves. I also think the number of PC users on a 48" screen is probably well below 1% of users. If the mainline PC monitor brands can't justify a quality product at that size, I can't believe LG would be doing so with a TV product.
Click to expand...

It entirely depends where you live. In the UK, there are plenty of houses with small lounges/kitchens where even 48" is too big. While 55" has obviously fallen in price, it's still wayyyy too big for many people. My sister lives in a house where no room could take 55" without being a monstrosity on the wall, and this isn't uncommon, so it's wrong to say "almost nobody" would want a TV of this size. It will also VERY much depend on price... if they come in much cheaper than 55", they will fly off the shelves.
 
burburbur said:
They are more than happy to sell bare panels to other companies who will use them in non-LG branded products that LG doesn't need to pay warranty for. I agree 100% with you that almost nobody wants a 48" screen for a TV, particularly when the 55" is getting so cheap now. That's why I don't see them releasing one themselves. I also think the number of PC users on a 48" screen is probably well below 1% of users. If the mainline PC monitor brands can't justify a quality product at that size, I can't believe LG would be doing so with a TV product.
Click to expand...

Burn in is on the customer, not the manufacturer.

No one warranties OLED for burn in, so that really isn't a factor.
 
bananadude said:
It entirely depends where you live. In the UK, there are plenty of houses with small lounges/kitchens where even 48" is too big. While 55" has obviously fallen in price, it's still wayyyy too big for many people. My sister lives in a house where no room could take 55" without being a monstrosity on the wall, and this isn't uncommon, so it's wrong to say "almost nobody" would want a TV of this size. It will also VERY much depend on price... if they come in much cheaper than 55", they will fly off the shelves.
Click to expand...

This is my concern. The 48" will need to be cheaper than the 55" models. But, the 55" B series is already flirting with $1,000 on sale. Making a 48" panel is not massively cheaper than a 55" one. So if they want a sub-$1000 price point on the 48" TV that makes me think they'll be stripping features. Slower processor, no 120 Hz option, fewer inputs, older inputs, etc. I just can't see LG being generous enough to release a 48" with 120Hz, VRR, sub 7ms input lag, and HDMI 2.1 ports for $1,000 or less when high end monitors are going for 4-5 times that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top