Asus ROG Swift PG35VQ Pricing is Insane!

The flagship G-sync Ultimate HDR monitors aren't supposed to be in reach for most people, they're supposed to offer the best experience if cost is no object. The Acer version will probably be a few hundred bucks cheaper. The 27" PG27UQ was $2k after all.

But we've known for a long time that this monitor would be over $3K, at least a year or so. If it had come out on schedule, no question I would have bought one on release day, without even thinking twice. Nothing comparable was buyable last year.

But by the time this is buyable, I'm not convinced it's worth it, not with 120hz becoming possible on 4K OLEDs really soon. I will probably wait until after CES 2020 to buy one of these... if LG announces a 48" OLED the overpriced LCDs can fuck right off.
 
StryderxX said:
I just read that the estimated price for the Asus ROG Swift PG35VQ is $3500!!! What in the actual F@#K?!?! Is this the new norm for FALD 1000 nit computer monitors? $3500 is WAY out of most people's reach price wise.

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/66359/asus-rog-swift-pg35vq-launched-3840x1440-200hz-3400/index.html

https://www.asus.com/Monitors/ROG-SWIFT-PG35VQ/
Click to expand...
That is UK pricing, which on top of a 20% VAT also has higher import duties. Without the 20% VAT it would be $2,850 USD at current exchange rates. I believe the US price will be $2,500 based on that.

But it's not surprising to continue seeing these high prices on gaming FALD monitors. AUO in particular are doing a lot to get the transition time of HDR highlights fast enough to be used effectively with these high refresh rates. On a typical FALD TV HDR response time can be as slow as 300ms. They got it down to 30-40ms on the PG27UQ and X27.
 
IMO my biggest take away for such a high price is a relatively low resolution of 3440x1440 certainly isn't worth it. It's just a 27" 1440p monitor with some extra view-able tacked on either side. Heck, I wasn't even that impressed with 3440x1440 when they first hit the streets like five years ago.

Just regular 4K has 70% more pixels than this very expensive monitor. Another way to look at it: the HP Reverb, a $599 VR headset, has almost double the resolution of a $2500-$3000 monitor...
 
Last edited:
Sancus said:
The flagship G-sync Ultimate HDR monitors aren't supposed to be in reach for most people, they're supposed to offer the best experience if cost is no object. The Acer version will probably be a few hundred bucks cheaper. The 27" PG27UQ was $2k after all.

But we've known for a long time that this monitor would be over $3K, at least a year or so. If it had come out on schedule, no question I would have bought one on release day, without even thinking twice. Nothing comparable was buyable last year.

But by the time this is buyable, I'm not convinced it's worth it, not with 120hz becoming possible on 4K OLEDs really soon. I will probably wait until after CES 2020 to buy one of these... if LG announces a 48" OLED the overpriced LCDs can fuck right off.
Click to expand...

Blah, blah, blah...."Its not supposed to be in reach for most people." lmao....then who the hell is it supposed to be for?
Its not a shit-tastic 60hz Professional display, so who exactly is their market?

Yea the PG27UQ was two grand but its an excellent display. 1440peee is total trash and UWs are largely gimmicky.
This stupid display & price point actually makes the BFGD look reasonable lol.
 
l88bastard said:
Blah, blah, blah...."Its not supposed to be in reach for most people." lmao....then who the hell is it supposed to be for?
Its not a shit-tastic 60hz Professional display, so who exactly is their market?
Click to expand...

People who care more about actual visual quality than on-paper resolution specs that you can't even properly use due to the DP1.4 bandwidth limitations.

I don't need 4K at this size display. The only visual improvement at that resolution is text clarity, and I'm not doing spreadsheets on this monitor, the incremental text clarity improvement is minimal.

What this display does offer is a VA panel, which will have 3x the native contrast of the IPS panel in the X27/PG27UQ. That means the haloing on this monitor will be far, far less, which is the major downside of the X27 in gaming. Dark games didn't look great on that display, on this one they should look amazing.

The elephant in the room is the response rates, but TFTCentral previously stated that the display looked like it had pretty minimal ghosting for VA, and they are currently reviewing, so we will see what they say.

But to me, VA + realistic resolution + much higher refresh rate makes this the superior gaming display compared to the X27.

Armenius said:
That is UK pricing, which on top of a 20% VAT also has higher import duties. Without the 20% VAT it would be $2,850 USD at current exchange rates. I believe the US price will be $2,500 based on that.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's true, if it's $2500 and the TFT Central review is good I might just buy it out the gate.
 
Last edited:
Sancus said:
. if LG announces a 48" OLED the overpriced LCDs can fuck right off.
Click to expand...
This. None of the PC manufacturers want to build our ultimate screen because it means they can't milk tired, always one or two negative aspect screen production for another few years.
The tech to do Dp1.4 has been around for over a year. Yet nothing is on the market yet.

I too wholly look forward to our lord and saviour, the all in one TV. Time for these monitor manufacturing parasites to get a dose of reality. I know we are not a small group either.. many gamers are looking for that 40"+ 4k high hz HDR VRR 10bit experience. Some want 30" range too and I hope they are catered to as well.
 
Its like Sancus said we been speculating for a long time now its going to be over $2500 so I am not surprised by the price. However we don't even know yet if the monitor will work as well as advertised. Wait for actual independent reviews first.
 
Sancus said:
People who care more about actual visual quality than on-paper resolution specs that you can't even properly use due to the DP1.4 bandwidth limitations.

I don't need 4K at this size display. The only visual improvement at that resolution is text clarity, and I'm not doing spreadsheets on this monitor, the incremental text clarity improvement is minimal.

What this display does offer is a VA panel, which will have 3x the native contrast of the IPS panel in the X27/PG27UQ. That means the haloing on this monitor will be far, far less, which is the major downside of the X27 in gaming. Dark games didn't look great on that display, on this one they should look amazing.

The elephant in the room is the response rates, but TFTCentral previously stated that the display looked like it had pretty minimal ghosting for VA, and they are currently reviewing, so we will see what they say.

But to me, VA + realistic resolution + much higher refresh rate makes this the superior gaming display compared to the X27.



Yeah that's true, if it's $2500 and the TFT Central review is good I might just buy it out the gate.
Click to expand...

1440pee is trash. Anything below 1600 vertical res is garbage.
 
Desktop/app real estate comparison I made quite some time ago. The 4k would be ~ 40.8" in this example.

4k_21x9_2560x-27in-and-30in_1080p_same-ppi.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Sancus said:
*shrug* Your fixation on certain resolutions for no reason doesn't change the value ot fhe product at all, you know.
Click to expand...

1440P was always God awful for reading contracts and legal documents....that extra 160 pixels for 1600pee made a world of difference for productivity work.

1440P anything is so cheap-o 2011ish

2160 is very nice for productivity work and a 32" 144hz 4k display would be a Godsend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Panel
like this
You are certainly entitled to your own tastes and more options would be good for everyone.

I'm sure you appreciate the +80 pixels on the top and bottom of the screen,.. . but it's really a negligible difference compared to 4k without scaling as my desktop/app real estate diagram shows. A 38" 16:10 or 2.39.1 at 3840 x 1600 is only about .6 inches taller than a 35" (3440x1440) 21:9. Centered that's .3 inch top and .3 inch bottom. (bit more than a 1/4 " each) .

nVW9JAA.jpg
Click to expand...

Rough dimensions based on diagonal screen sizes
----------------------------------------------------------------

22.5" diagonal 16:10 .. 19.1" w x 11.9" h (1920x1200 ~ 100.6 ppi) FW900 crt

27.0" diagonal 16:9 .. 23.5" w x 13.2" h (2560x1440 ~ 108.79 ppi)
34.0" diagonal 21:9 .. 31.3" w x 13.4" h (3440x1440 ~ 109.68 ppi)
35.0" diagonal 21:9....32.2" w x 13.8" h (3440x1440 ~106.55 ppi)

37.5" diagonal 21:10 .. 34.6" w x 14.4" h (3840x1600 ~ 110.93 ppi)

31.5" diagonal 16:9 .. 27.5" w x 15.4" h (2560x1440 ~ 93.24 ppi) .. (3840x2160 ~ 137.68ppi)

40.0" diagonal 16:9 .. 34.9"w x 19.6" h (3840x2160 ~ 110.15ppi)

43.0" diagonal 16:9 .. 37.5" w x 21.1" h (3840x2160 ~ 102.46 ppi)

48.0" diagonal 16:9 .. 41.8"w x 23.5" h (3840x2160 ~ 91.79 ppi)

55.0" diagonal 16:9 .. 47.9"w x 27.0"h (3840x2160 ~ 80.11 ppi)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Click to expand...


A newspaper has around 8 lines per inch and is about 21 inches long (without folding it in half like most people do), minus about 1.5" pf total margins top to bottom. It's also about 12" wide. A lot of people might opt for a font a little larger than a newspaper's at distance compared to a phone or tablet but for example - a 43" 4k 16:9 monitor is 37.5"w x 21.1" high, so it could essentially show 3 pages of newspaper sized documents at full height without scaling.

The primary usage for a high Hz (200 Hz no less) G-sync, 1000nit FALD HDR powerhouse like the PG35VQ is obviously gaming and to a lesser degree other media/movies. You can get a crisp realtively small (compared to most tvs) 40" or 43" 4k tv for documancy for $230 - $270 now. You can also turn periphearl monitor(s) into portrait mode for documents. Multi monitor is where it's at if you can swing it.
 
Last edited:
I will agree 1600 would be more preferable to 1440 in larger monitors but unfortunately 1600 is not as popular as it once was or at least the manufacturers seem to think so considering they dont make that resolution much anymore. Would I buy a 1600 monitor over a 1440 assuming it was just as good in every way as the 1440? Damn right I would.
 
Newspapers are ~80lpi not 8 right?
While I generally have no issues with companies charging whatever they can get for new tech I do think in a year or so TVs with good gaming features will be increasingly enticing over these monitors for those who have the space, at these prices.
A lot of it has to do with r&d and engineering effort and over time those costs could come down or it can stay a niche product.
 
I think some newspapers are 200dpi not 108.8 but they don't use subpixels/cleartype and print is not the same so its not exactly an apples to apples comparison in that facet.

The point was to show that default text size in un scaled 4k resolution, which is a similar size (outside of tint text of an obituary or tiny ad) . on a 43" 16:9 can comfortably fit three newspaper sized pages physically side by side as compared to adding a tiny strip to a 1440p to get 1600 high desktop/app real-estate wise.

I also restated that the focus of a $3500 144hz g-sync, 1000nit FALD HDR is gaming and to a lesser degree media and movies, not documancy. I also would think, other than possible space considerations, someone dropping that kind of money on a monitor could afford a side 4k monitor, (or a smaller rez in portrait mode) for text, or repurpose a prior monitor.
 
Last edited:
N4CR said:
This. None of the PC manufacturers want to build our ultimate screen because it means they can't milk tired, always one or two negative aspect screen production for another few years.
The tech to do Dp1.4 has been around for over a year. Yet nothing is on the market yet.

I too wholly look forward to our lord and saviour, the all in one TV. Time for these monitor manufacturing parasites to get a dose of reality. I know we are not a small group either.. many gamers are looking for that 40"+ 4k high hz HDR VRR 10bit experience. Some want 30" range too and I hope they are catered to as well.
Click to expand...
Current OLED technology has its limitations that doesn't make it optimal for gaming. Color, of course, is wonderful, and HDR highlights are nice to have at the pixel level. But overall my PG27UQ provides a much better gaming experience than my 55" C8.
l88bastard said:
1440P was always God awful for reading contracts and legal documents....that extra 160 pixels for 1600pee made a world of difference for productivity work.

1440P anything is so cheap-o 2011ish

2160 is very nice for productivity work and a 32" 144hz 4k display would be a Godsend.
Click to expand...
You know you can rotate your monitor to portrait orientation and have all the vertical space you want. 16:10 is a dead aspect ratio and has been for quite some time, so you need to get over it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
I'm not gonna relink or copy paste behind-paywall content here(go give TFT Central money if you wanna read it before Tuesday, they perform a great service to display enthusiasts) but the PG35VQ does still have black smearing/ghosting issues. However, it is the fastest VA panel on average that they've tested, and they felt the response time was fast enough for 144hz, which makes it the first VA monitor to qualify for actually good 144hz operation. The increased native contrast(1800:1 -- much better than the X27's ~1000:1) does make blooming less apparent. Unlike the X27, it maintains high(50K:1+) contrast ratios at all window sizes in the HDR tests.

Still not totally sure it's worth, but we'll see what the pricing of the X35 Acer version is in North America.
 
Sancus said:
I'm not gonna relink or copy paste behind-paywall content here(go give TFT Central money if you wanna read it before Tuesday, they perform a great service to display enthusiasts) but the PG35VQ does still have black smearing/ghosting issues. However, it is the fastest VA panel on average that they've tested, and they felt the response time was fast enough for 144hz, which makes it the first VA monitor to qualify for actually good 144hz operation. The increased native contrast(1800:1 -- much better than the X27's ~1000:1) does make blooming less apparent. Unlike the X27, it maintains high(50K:1+) contrast ratios at all window sizes in the HDR tests.

Still not totally sure it's worth, but we'll see what the pricing of the X35 Acer version is in North America.
Click to expand...
1800:1 sounds awfully low for a VA. Is that after calibration? Variable backlight on with SDR content? By contrast, the Samsung Q9F has a native contrast of 6000:1. Speaking of Samsung, I wonder if they're using any type of coating to improve viewing angles like the new Q900R, because that TV has been shown to only have a contrast ratio of 1600:1.
 
IMO it's just a terrible time right now to buy a TV or monitor for a PC setup:

- High nit FALDs are very expensive (and getting more expensive). And you still get blooming and ghosting. And it's still LCD.

- LG is taking its sweet ass time, so no 40-43" OLEDs for those who desire that. Start slicing up those 88" 8K mother substrates!

- No HDMI 2.1, outside of LG's OLEDs.

- Very few good quality 43" 4K monitors; with TVs, 40-48" options usually get the shaft in terms of hardware and HDR capability.

- Relatively few HDR monitors above DisplayHDR 600 (400 is basically a waste, and "HDR Compatible" is marketing lingo for "You've Been Suckered")

- Very few consumer grade monitors or TVs still can't even hit full 100% DCI-P3 gamut. Seriously, WTF is up with the stall at 95-98% coverage? Is it that hard to procure organic/inorganic materials for the expanded gamut? Looks ridiculous when we've had 100% Adobe RGB monitors for years now (even if it's not utilized in the video industry). It makes me suspect that all these DCI-P3 monitors we've seen are really just using a modified Adobe RGB color space, since DCI-P3 has a greatly reduced blue-cyan-green axis compared to Adobe RGB, but an ever-so-slightly extended red-yellow-green axis.
 
Armenius said:
1800:1 sounds awfully low for a VA. Is that after calibration? Variable backlight on with SDR content? By contrast, the Samsung Q9F has a native contrast of 6000:1. Speaking of Samsung, I wonder if they're using any type of coating to improve viewing angles like the new Q900R, because that TV has been shown to only have a contrast ratio of 1600:1.
Click to expand...

It's hard to compare TV's to monitors due to pixel density. You have to squeeze so many more pixels on a smaller computer monitor therefore blocking light. That's why getting HDR 1000 on a 4K 27-32 inch is so expensive, the power output to generate that much light is so much higher than on a comparable 55-65 inch TV.
 
crazycuz20 said:
It's hard to compare TV's to monitors due to pixel density. You have to squeeze so many more pixels on a smaller computer monitor therefore blocking light. That's why getting HDR 1000 on a 4K 27-32 inch is so expensive, the power output to generate that much light is so much higher than on a comparable 55-65 inch TV.
Click to expand...
While true, it's not uncommon to see VA monitors with 2500:1 contrast ratio or better. Maybe this is a new type of VA panel that improved response time at the cost of contrast performance? Though to be fair, there have been other 200 Hz VA monitors out on the market for quite some time that has contrast ratios just as bad, if not worse.
 
Armenius said:
1800:1 sounds awfully low for a VA. Is that after calibration? Variable backlight on with SDR content? By contrast, the Samsung Q9F has a native contrast of 6000:1. Speaking of Samsung, I wonder if they're using any type of coating to improve viewing angles like the new Q900R, because that TV has been shown to only have a contrast ratio of 1600:1.
Click to expand...

It's after calibration. That is the native panel contrast, with the FALD enabled it's more like 50,000:1. PC VA monitors are usually around 2-3K:1, I've never heard of one that's anywhere near a TV's contrast, but that's not unusual -- TVs always have much better contrast ratios than PC monitors, even when they're using comparable technology.

They do note that recent VA monitors seem to have worse native contrast than older ones. In their table of comparison results there are many other VA gaming monitors around 1800-2K, for example the XG35VQ is about 1900:1. LG 32GK850G is the highest at near 3K:1.
 
yes for example example, according to tftcentral the pg27uq has poor ips SDR contrast ratio of ~ 1,100:1 and notably bad uniformity with the dynamic FALD turned off, but with it on gets something like 8,000:1 to over 11,000:1 contrast ratio range and clears up the obnoxious lack of uniformity.
 
Last edited:
1800:1 CR on this VA panel for $2500? Swing and a miss.
 
Vega said:
1800:1 CR on this VA panel for $2500? Swing and a miss.
Click to expand...

Examining things, it seems like the X35(acer) and AOC version might be cheaper than that.. the AOC version is up for pre-order for only ~2K GBP.

If this stuff releases soon(unclear when the actual release date is, but with pre-orders up July is possible?) and is available for $2K or less, I'll probably just buy it. At that price and if I can have it now, OK, fine, in 1-2 years I'll swap it for an OLED, whatever.
 
Just watched the LTT vid. The blooming around the mouse and windows from the FALD would drive me absolutely insane. Makes you realize that FALD needs like 10x the current number of zones.

We’ll be on mLED by the time FALD even gets there. Or give me an OLED.
 
gan7114 said:
Just watched the LTT vid. The blooming around the mouse and windows from the FALD would drive me absolutely insane. Makes you realize that FALD needs like 10x the current number of zones.

We’ll be on mLED by the time FALD even gets there. Or give me an OLED.
Click to expand...

Well you can see the "fix" to blooming is just to elevate all the black levels when he turns off the FALD. So it's "distracting" but you can either have the whole monitor perform much better except for your mouse pointer, or just have the whole thing perform as poorly as current LCDs do. I do think this is a software problem as well, I don't really understand why brightness needs to be maximized so hard for the mouse pointer. I don't see any blooming issues in the actual game content he showed, so maybe HDR games avoid this, not sure.

It seems pretty clear that more than one zone is illuminated around the mouse pointer, and they're all trying to max brightness, so I'm not sure zone increases will help much with this effect. OLED wouldn't do this of course, because it doesn't have any kind of algorithm that is trying to guess how much it should illuminate a completely separate backlight.
 
Sancus said:
Well you can see the "fix" to blooming is just to elevate all the black levels when he turns off the FALD. So it's "distracting" but you can either have the whole monitor perform much better except for your mouse pointer, or just have the whole thing perform as poorly as current LCDs do. I do think this is a software problem as well, I don't really understand why brightness needs to be maximized so hard for the mouse pointer. I don't see any blooming issues in the actual game content he showed, so maybe HDR games avoid this, not sure.

It seems pretty clear that more than one zone is illuminated around the mouse pointer, and they're all trying to max brightness, so I'm not sure zone increases will help much with this effect. OLED wouldn't do this of course, because it doesn't have any kind of algorithm that is trying to guess how much it should illuminate a completely separate backlight.
Click to expand...

I would assume inverting the mouse color to black would get rid of — or greatly reduce — the bloom? Has anyone here with a FALD monitor tried that? Just curious.

But yeah, when Linus was moving the cursor over dark backgrounds like in Steam or while in Civ (over the water), that looked eye-poppingly bad. :O
 
StryderxX said:
I just read that the estimated price for the Asus ROG Swift PG35VQ is $3500!!! What in the actual F@#K?!?! Is this the new norm for FALD 1000 nit computer monitors? $3500 is WAY out of most people's reach price wise.

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/66359/asus-rog-swift-pg35vq-launched-3840x1440-200hz-3400/index.html

https://www.asus.com/Monitors/ROG-SWIFT-PG35VQ/
Click to expand...


You gotta pay for the best technology I guess. I'd rather just wait for a few more years until it comes down to reasonable levels or better technology comes along.

gan7114 said:
Just watched the LTT vid. The blooming around the mouse and windows from the FALD would drive me absolutely insane. Makes you realize that FALD needs like 10x the current number of zones.

We’ll be on mLED by the time FALD even gets there. Or give me an OLED.
Click to expand...

This has been a problem with FALD TVs for years. The lack of zones always led to bloom and other issues so that's why I don't see this being worth it at all on a PC. It's better to just get a normal high refresh display right now and wait until OLED or an alternative technology is made available at reasonable prices.
 
tradeoffs for now

BACKLIGHTS...........BFGD has a less dense FALD backlight array (384) than a Q9FN tier samsung (512), and way less than a OLED per pixel emissive.
...............................= = = Slightly worse than a flagship LCD TV and OLED per pixel all white"backlight" is far superior (especially outside of HDR content where it is capped at 600nit)
...............................= = = = Suffer a lower fraction of HDR color volume and a dimmer screen on OLED or suffer Bloom or Dim "halos" off of edges with FALD arrays.

VARIABLE HZ......... BFGD has g-sync . Hdmi 2.1 generation tvs in both FALD LCD and OLED should have VRR in both LCD and OLED
...............................LG C9 has VRR on hdmi 2.0 but doesn't support free-sync and even in VRR on xbox one can't do both VRR and HDR at the same time. Future 120hz hdmi 2.1 versions prob won't have this issue.
...............................= = = No gain here.

HIGH HZ..................BFGD has high hz. Hdmi 2.1 generation tvs should be 4k 120hz.
...............................= = = No gain here

CONNECTIVITY,..... DELL ALIENWARE OLED reportedly is going to have HDMI 2.1 for future proofing along with dp 1.4 for now. HDMI 2.1 allows full 4:4:4 chroma at 120hz 4k.
...............................BFGD might use compression or it might be just like the PG27UQ 's chroma limitations past 100hz due to displayport bandwidth limits.
.............................Upcoming flagship TVs should all have hdmi 2.1
.............................= = = Dell OLED and Upcoming Flagship TVs have better connectivity / display bandwdith

RESPONSE TIME....BFGD response time - should be pretty low.
...............................A Q9Fn tier TV has 3.5ms response time 80%,15.5ms 100%. According to RTINGs there is no motion trail even at the worst transitions in their tests, probably due to overdrive or other enhancements.
...............................OLED is far superior with .2ms (two 10ths) at 80% and 2.4ms at 100%. Note this does nothing vs sample and hold blur however, but high fps at high hz does.
........................................ultra low response time does help when the frame rate and hz start to outpace the response times of LCD monitors, e.g. 120fps+120hz requires a 8.3ms response time or less
...............................= = = Response times are adequate on all especially considering max Hz and frame rate limitations

INPUT LAG..............BFGD should have lower latency than "TVs". Samsung Q9Fn tier tvs have fairly low latecy of ~10 ms. C9 OLEDs are about ~ 14ms, gaming monitors are typically lower.
...............................= = = Gaming monitors should have slightly lower input lag, so a gain here but not as much as you might think from a "TV".



HDR COLOR VOLUME / COLOR BRIGHTNESS CEILING and OVERALL HDR PERFORMANCE...............
................................BFGD should have great contrast of 8000:1 to 11,0000:1 or so with dynamic FALD and a 1000 nit HDR color brightness ceiling. FALD suffers glow or dim "bleed" off of bright HDR edges depending on the firmware.
................................A Samsung Q9Fn tier tv has ~ 19000:1 contrast with dynamic FALD and a ~1800nit HDR color brightness ceiling. FALD suffers glow or dim "bleed" off of the bright HDR edges depending on the firmware.
................................A C9 OLED tv has 1,000,000:1 contrast with "zero" blacks and a screen dimming 600nit HDR color brightness limit in order to protect against burn-in. Not bright enough overall to overcome glare in bright windowed rooms.
................................= = = Suffer a lower fraction of HDR color volume and a dimmer screen on OLED or suffer Bloom or Dim "halos" off of edges with FALD arrays.


SCREEN SIZE and PERCIEVED PPI, DISTANCE.......All of these displays are huge and in my opinion and I have 43" monitors on my modded deep desk. IMO these would require sitting back at least 4' or more.
..............................................................................= = = This brings these screens into the category of being mounted remotely with a separate desk island., using super deep desk mod, or using a couchmaster or similar couch desk setup.


EXTRA FEATURES................
............................ The Q9FN tier FALD LCD VA tvs and LG OLEDs have a few extra features which can optionally be turned on that are not found in computer monitors, which include (even at 120hz)
............................ BFI (black frame insertion/flicker)
.............................Interpolation (frame doubling/quasi frame duplication 'tweening' type tech that causes "soap opera effect" in movies which some like and some don't.. but works well for consoles and fps capped games).
.............................Worth noting that the samsung Q9fn can use it's extra features in game mode where some tvs can't. And it does this at very low input considering the features are enabled ( ~ 10.8ms at 1440p 120hz)
.............................= = = TVs have slightly more input lag (still it's down to ~10ms now on LCD, 14ms on OLED), and they may lack some of the overdrive implementation in gaming monitors..
......................................but they have a few extra bells and whistles, especailly if you are going to use them part time for consoles/30fps limited games or for watching movies.


SCREEN COATING.............
.............................BFGD if it has the same coating as the 27" FALD PG27UQ monitors would be "light AG coating" .
.....................................per TFTCentral's PG27UQ review: "The screen coating is a light anti-glare (AG) offering. It isn't a semi-glossy coating, but it is light as seen on other modern IPS type panels.
.....................................Thankfully it isn't a heavily grainy coating like some old IPS panels feature and is also lighter than modern TN Film panel coating. It retains its anti-glare properties to avoid too
.....................................many unwanted reflections of a full glossy coating, but does not produce too grainy or dirty an image that some thicker AG coatings can. There are no visible cross hatching patterns on the panel coating."
.............................Q9FN has a glossy finish but has some kind of mild anti-reflective coating.
.............................LG C8 and C9 OLED are glossy but have a mild anti-reflective coating that adds a slight purple tint (according to rtings).
.............................DELL Alienware Gaming OLED will probably be a similar coating to the LG OLED TVs
.............................= = = pretty similar overall but make sure about the reported purple tint on the OLED coating to see if it would bother you.



PRICING....
....................................BFGD reportedly upwards of $5000
....................................DELL Alienware OLED gaming monitor .. $ ??????
....................................Q9FN tier FALD LCD TV (65") ~ $3200 (at release)
....................................LG C9 tier OLED 55" $2500 (at release), 65" $3500 (at release)


========================================================================================


I know there are more spec categories than this but I wanted to compare some of the most important ones to me.
Click to expand...

There is hope in the following years if this dual layer using 2nd layer as a backlight ever starts to get implemented into hdmi 2.1 (VRR, 120hz 4k, low input lag) TVs or gaming monitors. It's similar in a way to how OLED uses a mix of oleds to make an all white array as per pixel emissive backlighting.. The dual layer lcd tv hisense dual layer lcd tv they are making for china this year reportedly can do 3000nit HDR without risk of burn in, and .0003 black depth utilizing the dual screen light blocking.

NVsBTV1.png
Click to expand...


Click to expand...


You can see in that video link how the FALD works by comparison. FALD does have a glow or dim "halo" depending on which way the firmware offsets it.. but it also can do 1000nit HDR color brightness (HDR color volume) or more (the samsung Q9FN can do ~1800nit).. and doesn't have burn in risk without warrany or the burn in chance reducing ABL limitation, and is available in more sizes.

More Dual layer lcd info:
NJxFoUK.png
Click to expand...


It's better to just get a normal high refresh display right now and wait until OLED or an alternative technology is made available at reasonable prices.
Click to expand...

I wish one of the 43" 120hz - 144hz 4k VRR ones coming out had a FALD model. But if they are $1200 that is a hell of a lot more digestible to me for something to hold me over a few years, especially considering none of the displays I've heard of have hdmi 2.1 other than the DELL 55" OLED monster(and likely monster price) . I wouldn't expect very good HDR 1000 color out of the asus/acer 43" edge lit displays but then again there really aren't that many HDR PC games yet either.
 
Last edited:
Armenius said:
Current OLED technology has its limitations that doesn't make it optimal for gaming. Color, of course, is wonderful, and HDR highlights are nice to have at the pixel level. But overall my PG27UQ provides a much better gaming experience than my 55" C8.

You know you can rotate your monitor to portrait orientation and have all the vertical space you want. 16:10 is a dead aspect ratio and has been for quite some time, so you need to get over it.
Click to expand...

16:9 displays are HORRIFIC in portrait mode. Resolution is the solution. I have the X27 and it kicks alot of ass, but @27" its just a tad too small....32" would be the perfect size for me.
 
elvn said:
I wouldn't expect very good HDR 1000 color out of the asus/acer 43" edge lit displays but then again there really aren't that many HDR PC games yet either.
Click to expand...


It won't be at the level of FALD of course, but there's a good chance these monitors will be using a similar if not identical backlight solution as the Philips 436M6VBPAB (which was also 1000-nit)... and that didn't do a bad job. Add what will hopefully be a superior panel, and these 43" models could be very solid monitors for the price. They'll certainly appear a bargain in light of the PG35VQ. We do have the X35 and Agon AG353UCG to come yet though, which will be cheaper.
 
bananadude said:
It won't be at the level of FALD of course, but there's a good chance these monitors will be using a similar if not identical backlight solution as the Philips 436M6VBPAB (which was also 1000-nit)... and that didn't do a bad job. Add what will hopefully be a superior panel, and these 43" models could be very solid monitors for the price. They'll certainly appear a bargain in light of the PG35VQ. We do have the X35 and Agon AG353UCG to come yet though, which will be cheaper.
Click to expand...


Considering how the FALD looks on the desktop in the linus vids I'm thinking better off that the 43" asus/acer 4k 144hz ones aren't FALD after all. Between that and the omission of hdmi 2.1 in practically all of the upcoming monitors I'm feeling road-map forced into fewer options unless I wait another calendar year. More desnse mini LED FALD arrays and better yet XD / Dual layer LCD tech (using 2nd lcd in monochrome as the backlight and as extra light filtering) hopefully will come around to monitors or pc capable tvs eventually. It's one thing buying for a fun upgrade to tide you over for some fun gaming for another year or so when the monitor is $450 - $650 , but quite another when thef monitor is $1500 - $3500 - $5000 and isn't all that it could be, at least to me. That pricing becomes living room TV territory where I go much longer between purchases and have to be a lot smarter about when to buy.
 
The upcoming 37.5" LG G-Sync at 3840x1600 smokes this monitor, and it's "only" $2,000. HDR isn't worth it.
 
I'm looking more toward the 43" ones since they match the other 43" screens in my array and are 4k. They might go for $1200 - $1500 too.
 
Proper HDR is the best technology I've experienced in a long time. I don't regret my OLED or X27 at all despite paying over $2500 and $2200 for them. Blooming is a non-issue in games on the X27. The OLED is totally unusable for PC games due to the horrendous input lag even in game mode. I'll take refresh rate, response time, and input lag over any other aspect of image quality.
 
So do you think the PG35VQ 's backlight performance is the same as your X27 after watching that Linus vid?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top