• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

XG27UQDMS or wait for 360hz

R

RedCharles9001

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 26, 2025
Messages
137
I picked up an open box XG27UQDMS for $630, normally $800. 29 hrs. Seems fine. Couple of micro scratches that can only be seen under a flashlight. Came with everything. BB warranty for two years. Probably keeping it.

It's a cut down Asus Penta Oled. Doesn't have full DP. Or some charging port. Or dark film. But it's a glossy 240hz 4k 27". Anyone have anything against ASUS QD Oled?

I noticed a lot of guys here are excited for RGB stripe and 360hz 4k oleds. 1H 2027 right?

At 166PPI, what difference is RGB stripe really going to make?

For those that have 500hz monitors, is there really a big difference? Or is it just diminishing returns?
I've read that 1000hz Oled should give motion clarity close to CRT. Is that true?

And there's not a lot of games that go to 500+fps. Most games are capped at 200fps or less. I don't even play CS2.
 
ASUS tends to be the top for monitors. Theirs are the best calibrated and have good features. Not that other brands are bad, but ASUS almost always tops recommendations.

RGB stripe is going to be pretty minor, if visible at all. The smaller sub pixels get, the less it all matters. Unless there is something that visually bothers you, I wouldn't worry about it.

For any frame rate increase, it is always diminishing returns. Each doubling matters less than the one before it. 15fps to 30fps is unplayable to playable. 30fps to 60fps is very choppy to fairly smooth. 60fps to 120fps is fairly smooth to very smooth. 120fps to 240fps is really only noticeable on fast moving objects, scrolling, or the link. 240fps to 480fps you pretty much only see on your eye tracking something moving across the screen. Etc. It's not nothing, and I'll take it if I can get it, but each jump I care much less about. I basically never use my dual mode monitor in 480Hz because I'd rather have the rez and 240Hz. Likewise when I go back on play on my 120Hz TV it does not feel choppy, it still feels good.

Additionally, if you are going to try for those high rates, you really need an nVidia 50 series with MFG. You will rarely, if ever, play a game that can push much over 240fps on its own, and generally much less. So you need frame gen to make use of it and get the smooth motion. If you don't have that, then it really isn't worth worrying about. 500Hz really is a "4x frame gen or more" kind of situation in most titles.

1000Hz is roughly around the limit of our persistence of vision so sample-and-hold becomes unnoticeable. That's great, and I'll take it when we can have it, but I'm also not concerned. Motion looks REALLY GOOD at 240Hz.

If you don't play competitive games then don't worry. Even if you do don't worry. I think most competitive gamers would discover that getting all the highest end, fastest shit would hardly improve their rank at all. Again, diminishing returns. The difference between having a 60Hz and 120Hz monitor is often pretty large not only because it cuts 8.3ms off the frame time but because 60Hz monitors often had a lot of processing and element lag. So you could literally go from something with 25-40ms of total lag down to something with more like 12-15ms which is significant. However a 240Hz OLED to a 500Hz in minor. OLED already has sub-ms element lag and all the good ones have sub-ms processing lag. So really your only lag is frametime. With 240Hz, that's 4.2ms, with 500Hz that's 2ms. So you are getting, at best, like a 2.2ms reduction in latency. You have to be pretty fucking good before that small a gain makes any real difference in how you do.
 
RedCharles9001 said:
I picked up an open box XG27UQDMS for $630, normally $800. 29 hrs. Seems fine. Couple of micro scratches that can only be seen under a flashlight. Came with everything. BB warranty for two years. Probably keeping it.

It's a cut down Asus Penta Oled. Doesn't have full DP. Or some charging port. Or dark film. But it's a glossy 240hz 4k 27". Anyone have anything against ASUS QD Oled?

I noticed a lot of guys here are excited for RGB stripe and 360hz 4k oleds. 1H 2027 right?

At 166PPI, what difference is RGB stripe really going to make?
Click to expand...
At that pixel density I don't think RGB stripe is going to be a big deal. I have an LG 48" 138Hz 4k WOLED gaming monitor and the text on that is ok. I think the text on it actually looks better than the Samsung Odessey Neo G7 (43" 4k VA) I had briefly. That screen was trash & I took it back to Microcenter the next weekend & bought the OLED. I've been using the 48" WOLED for work (writing code) for the last week and a half because my big Dell 43" 60Hz 4k IPS monitor (P4317Q) died & the replacement hasn't come in yet. That Dell IPS screen smoked both of them on text. The people who are interested in RGB stripe are people like me - I go for big and immersive rather than super high detail, hence the 48" fill my whole field of view gaming monitor. I'm also not one to care much about text looking perfect - I just want max readability. OTOH I'm firmly in the multi-monitor club, so I don't really care about RGB stripe since I have a better IPS screen coming for work.
 
Interesting. I agree SRGB is significantly better.

I think the Samsung stands are the best, most attractive, but some people apparently don't care for the silver border around the screen. This stand is good enough for me.

I run both my oled monitors in SDR. Maybe I'm missing out on HDR and should give it a go again.

But I'm keeping the monitor. I like it. Its a glossy oled, and it's significantly brighter than my G95SC. Two key factors for me are 4:3 mode for XP gaming, and I can read a set of blueprints without scrolling around.
 
RedCharles9001 said:
Interesting. I agree SRGB is significantly better.

I think the Samsung stands are the best, most attractive, but some people apparently don't care for the silver border around the screen. This stand is good enough for me.

I run both my oled monitors in SDR. Maybe I'm missing out on HDR and should give it a go again.

But I'm keeping the monitor. I like it. Its a glossy oled, and it's significantly brighter than my G95SC. Two key factors for me are 4:3 mode for XP gaming, and I can read a set of blueprints without scrolling around.
Click to expand...
I think your price is much more reasonable, it was about 1k when I bought mine which it was really hard to justify keeping it.
 
RedCharles9001 said:
Interesting. I agree SRGB is significantly better.
Click to expand...
Something to note about the sRGB black crush behavior is that it is not necessarily wrong for that to happen. On a 2.2 gamma curve, the darkest 2 or 3 shades will generally fall below your visual perception. The idea is that things should should seamlessly fade to black, no perceptible jump. So a display that you can only see the first box at 3 or 4, when set to 2.2 gamma, aren't actually wrong that's how it should be and many games are actually designed for a 2.2 gamma curve.

sRGB is different since it has a linear range at the low end it brightens up the darkest shades and even symbol 1 should be visible. That means there's more shadow detail, but it means raised near-black levels. Here's a graph from TFTCentral (for 200 nits peak brightness):

1782364099812.png


Roughly speaking your threshold of perception is 0.01 nits. That's not hard and fast, depends on your eyes, how bright the overall setting is, the scene, etc but in general that's what you'll find. Hence if something implements the sRGB curve properly, all symbols will be visible in all circumstances. If it properly implements a 2.2 curve then the darkest will fade to perceptible black, even though they are not totally off.

Which is "correct" depends on what the game was designed for. While Windows is canonically sRGB for SDR content, many, many monitors are 2.2 gamma instead and many games are designed with that in mind. You can find information online if you search around where people figure out what is what, and there are reshade shaders to map one to the other.

However ultimately whatever looks the best to you is the right answer. Ultimately do what looks best to you.


With regards to HDR mode you should try it for games that support HDR. Some are crap, but most look better, and many look great. HDR is one of the biggest improvements in displays in a long time. I love it, and I'll go out of the way to mod games to support HDR when possible. Also of note is that if you have this display in HDR mode, and run an SDR title, it will run in sRGB gamma by default. Windows handles the sRGB to ST.2048 mapping. That's why some people say SDR games look worse in HDR mode, because they are used to a 2.2 gamma (or often 2.4 gamma if playing on a TV) and so shadows look too bright. However if you like the sRGB gamma, well that's what you get in HDR mode for SDR games.

When I was using my PG32UQX as my monitor it did sRGB in SDR by default, and was exceedingly accurate at it. When I switched to HDR I didn't see any difference in SDR content because the gamma didn't change at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sethk
like this
Sycraft said:
Something to note about the sRGB black crush behavior is that it is not necessarily wrong for that to happen. On a 2.2 gamma curve, the darkest 2 or 3 shades will generally fall below your visual perception. The idea is that things should should seamlessly fade to black, no perceptible jump. So a display that you can only see the first box at 3 or 4, when set to 2.2 gamma, aren't actually wrong that's how it should be and many games are actually designed for a 2.2 gamma curve.

sRGB is different since it has a linear range at the low end it brightens up the darkest shades and even symbol 1 should be visible. That means there's more shadow detail, but it means raised near-black levels. Here's a graph from TFTCentral (for 200 nits peak brightness):

View attachment 811224

Roughly speaking your threshold of perception is 0.01 nits. That's not hard and fast, depends on your eyes, how bright the overall setting is, the scene, etc but in general that's what you'll find. Hence if something implements the sRGB curve properly, all symbols will be visible in all circumstances. If it properly implements a 2.2 curve then the darkest will fade to perceptible black, even though they are not totally off.

Which is "correct" depends on what the game was designed for. While Windows is canonically sRGB for SDR content, many, many monitors are 2.2 gamma instead and many games are designed with that in mind. You can find information online if you search around where people figure out what is what, and there are reshade shaders to map one to the other.

However ultimately whatever looks the best to you is the right answer. Ultimately do what looks best to you.


With regards to HDR mode you should try it for games that support HDR. Some are crap, but most look better, and many look great. HDR is one of the biggest improvements in displays in a long time. I love it, and I'll go out of the way to mod games to support HDR when possible. Also of note is that if you have this display in HDR mode, and run an SDR title, it will run in sRGB gamma by default. Windows handles the sRGB to ST.2048 mapping. That's why some people say SDR games look worse in HDR mode, because they are used to a 2.2 gamma (or often 2.4 gamma if playing on a TV) and so shadows look too bright. However if you like the sRGB gamma, well that's what you get in HDR mode for SDR games.

When I was using my PG32UQX as my monitor it did sRGB in SDR by default, and was exceedingly accurate at it. When I switched to HDR I didn't see any difference in SDR content because the gamma didn't change at all.
Click to expand...
That's true but it's not even close to how these monitors are set up in reality. 2.2 gamma curve is not the problem, the problem is they're not even in the same universe lol.

1782407738213.png
 
D-EJ915 said:
That's true but it's not even close to how these monitors are set up in reality. 2.2 gamma curve is not the problem, the problem is they're not even in the same universe lol.
Click to expand...
I can't speak to this particular monitor as I don't have it, and TFTCentral doesn't seem to have tested it but it is not a thing all OLEDs have issue with, some are quite well tuned. My PG32UCDP follows a 2.2 gamma pretty well from my measurements and here's an example from a new ASUS 27"
1782420423409.png


Not following it perfect, but not bad. Just a little bright in the lowest symbols and almost a dead on match past that.

RedCharles9001 said:
I've been running 2.4 gamma. You're saying I should be running 2.2?
Click to expand...
Up to you. Remember: It is all about what looks best to you, it is YOUR monitor, game in a way that makes you happy. 2.4 is the closest to TV settings. BT.1886 is the actual standard for that and there a bunch of technical shit you don't need to care about but basically it describes how CRTs actually work and they tended to have a roughly 2.4 power gamma curve.

2.2 is what most LCDs (and OLEDs) are calibrated to by default because it approximated the sRGB response but is a simple power curve. Because it is so common, a ton of games are designed for it. Not even really on purpose, many (most?) games never have any reference color grading or anything, it is just the devs and artists are using monitors that are set to 2.2 gamma, they design things to look "right" for that, so that is what ends up looking "right".

sRGB is a complex gamma curve, a linear section at the low tones followed by a 2.4 power curve for the rest, giving an overall 2.2 response. Means that the darkest tones are brightened. It is actually the spec for Windows and has been forever, but like I said rare that people actually used a monitor that actually follows that curve so the general appearance is over-brightened.


Something else to be aware of is that "sRGB" can refer to more than one thing, depending on what you are talking about in the monitor. There's the gamma curve, which some monitors support, others don't (usually you have to set them to a special "sRGB cal" mode to get an sRGB curve) but there's also the color space. sRGB defines color primaries and they are the "standard gamut" or SDR color primaries. So your monitor probably has a gamut selection that is something like sRGB or Wide Gamut. If you set it to wide gamut, things will look over saturated since they were designed with those more limited color primaries in mind. That said, some people like that particular for games, they find the over saturated colors to look more vivid. But sRGB is the "correct" choice for SDR content.

For HDR, none of this applies. HDR has its own highly complex gamma curve, the ST.2048 curve which the monitor will change to, and it is defined in the BT.2020 color space which is wider than your monitor can handle so the monitor will run wide gamut the whole time. HDR games will then make use of that increased dynamic range and color space, if they choose to, and Windows will handle mapping SDR games to it properly.
 
Sycraft said:
I can't speak to this particular monitor as I don't have it, and TFTCentral doesn't seem to have tested it but it is not a thing all OLEDs have issue with, some are quite well tuned.
Click to expand...
I wasn't speaking to any others in my notes about my experience.

RedCharles9001 said:
I've been running 2.4 gamma. You're saying I should be running 2.2?
Click to expand...
No really this is personal preference unless you are making content for others to view, most content is for 2.2 but macs for example used different gamma in the past as well.
 
Last edited:
Wow that was a really detailed explanation. Thanks. I've only ever messed with the gamma settings on my projector, and that was daytime vs nighttime viewing.
 
RedCharles9001 said:
Wow that was a really detailed explanation. Thanks. I've only ever messed with the gamma settings on my projector, and that was daytime vs nighttime viewing.
Click to expand...
In practice what it'll do is the higher the gamma (sRGB -> 2.2 -> 2.4) is make shadows darker. Tends to make the image look higher contrast, but crush shadow detail. It changes more than just the dark tones, of course, but that is the most noticeable thing.

One other twist to be aware of is that gamma varies with refresh rate on OLED, as that graph I posted shows. It's an unfortunate side effect of how they work and is what causes VRR flicker. It also means that you might prefer a different gamma for a game with lower FPS than you do for one with higher FPS.
 
RedCharles9001 said:
Interesting. I had no idea that the gamma could change with the hz.
Click to expand...
Neither did I. I came across it testing and TFTCentral confirmed it. They had already been looking in to it and were developing new testing for it. It is mostly an OLED problem, and is why VRR flicker happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
Sycraft said:
I'd disagree with RTings when they say QD-OLED doesn't have it, they do but less. It is the largest problem on WOLED, less on QD-OLED, least on LCD.
Click to expand...
I'm sure they would be happy to know about your experiences then.

tft central also shows similar result, they also confirmed the panels are calibrated using 60Hz at the factory (well at least one factory) https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/d...-understanding-and-testing-oled-shadow-detail

Our theory here, which we’ve validated with several display manufacturers, is that what is happening here is that these WOLED screens are being calibrated at 60Hz in the factory. That refresh rate shows a much better performance than the higher refresh rates. The Gigabyte MO27Q28G is a perfect example of this, it’s basically spot on to 2.2 gamma in native wide gamut mode, and basically spot on to sRGB gamma in the sRGB mode – but only at 60Hz.

This is because the factory calibration process involves instruments and external pattern generators that operate at 60Hz, especially for HDR calibration. That’s very common for those devices and so it’s a device constraint at play here. So, the screens end up being very well calibrated, but only at that 60Hz refresh rate. Beyond that, on WOLED at least, you then get gamma shift as the refresh rate varies, leading to unwanted luminance variation and black crush at higher refresh rates. Manufacturers are calibrating the screen well, it’s just not accounting for the refresh rate-linked gamma shift.

This same factory calibration process doesn’t matter on QD-OLED as the calibration at 60Hz is still relevant at other refresh rates as they don’t show this gamma shift, it’s just WOLED that seems to be variable, and therefore a challenge.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
Interesting. I am well aware that the gamma is pinned on LG's OLEDs, and that it gets some VRR gamma shift which in a highly variable frame rate graph, especially with bad 10% and 1% lows, can show what amounts to flicker.

I'm not as knowledgeable about QD-OLEDs, and I've never owned one, but I'd like to know this for sure regarding the QD-OLEDs, at least out of curiosity . Samsung's matte layers on their QD-OLED are a turnoff to me though, anyway, for all of their current offerings.

Here is some info from RTings, with a few quotes (same link that D-EJ915 replied with) https://www.rtings.com/monitor/learn/gamma-shift-investigation

As you can see with the WOLED monitors, their gamma shift causes an increase in brightness as the frame rate drops. While there's gamma shift with any shade of gray, the shift is most noticeable with dark grays because of how we perceive the differences in light more with darker colors than brighter ones. QD-OLEDs still exhibit VRR flicker, but the gamma range of these displays is more variable, allowing for higher and lower values.
Click to expand...

. .

Sadly, there's nothing you can do if you have a WOLED with gamma shift at low refresh rates. It's an unfortunate downside of this panel type, and it's something that QD-OLEDs don't have. If you have a WOLED monitor, the best way to avoid this problem is by using it at its max refresh rate. If you game at low refresh rates and you want the best picture quality, it's better to avoid WOLED altogether.
Click to expand...

.
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
Interesting. I am well aware that the gamma is pinned on LG's OLEDs, and that it gets some VRR gamma shift which in a highly variable frame rate graph, especially with bad 10% and 1% lows, can show what amounts to flicker.

I'm not as knowledgeable about QD-OLEDs, and I've never owned one, but I'd like to know this for sure regarding the QD-OLEDs, at least out of curiosity . Samsung's matte layers on their QD-OLED are a turnoff to me though, anyway, for all of their current offerings.

Here is some info from RTings, with a few quotes (same link that D-EJ915 replied with) https://www.rtings.com/monitor/learn/gamma-shift-investigation
Click to expand...
Ya, Samsung's matte coatings are supposed to be the least shitty matte coatings, but they're still matte coatings. I also have a G95SC, and it's not matte, but everything they've done in the last few years has been a matte coating. But Asus uses a Samsung panel, and fortunately, they chose a glossy panel.


There's videos of people scraping the matte coating off samsung panels.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ita9y8LWeGU


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itRqSmpG8SA
 
D-EJ915 said:
I'm sure they would be happy to know about your experiences then.

tft central also shows similar result, they also confirmed the panels are calibrated using 60Hz at the factory (well at least one factory) https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/d...-understanding-and-testing-oled-shadow-detail
Click to expand...
It may be less with dark tones, but they still have VRR flicker, and that is because of gamma differences. If you have a look at the reviews on TFTCentral they find VRR flicker on QD-OLEDs as well. It is less than W-OLED, but it is there.
 
Sycraft said:
It may be less with dark tones, but they still have VRR flicker, and that is because of gamma differences. If you have a look at the reviews on TFTCentral they find VRR flicker on QD-OLEDs as well. It is less than W-OLED, but it is there.
Click to expand...
That's great but not what we were discussing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top