ASUS ROG Swift PG35VQ: Massive 35" 3440x1440 200Hz HDR

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,003
Once again, I am having trouble locking down the panel type, but ASUS may have checked off all the right boxes here for gamers who are looking to update their display: the PG35VG is big, refreshes at 200Hz, offers tear-free gameplay courtesy of G-Sync, and even includes localized dimming technology for deeper blacks. Acer also has a take on this panel with their Predator X35; both monitors are covered here in an NVIDIA posting.

The ROG Swift PG35VQ conforms to the HDR10 standard and draws from both an expansive palette of colors and a wide range of contrast. We employ quantum dots to broaden the spectrum of tones the display can produce, making gradients smoother and images more lifelike overall. Using these luminescent nanoparticles allows the monitor to support the wider DCI-P3 color space typically associated with cinema projectors. In addition to satisfying gamers, the PG35VQ is likely to entice content creators who want to mix work and play on the same display.
 

Nebell

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
1,866
What's this going to cost? A healthy liver? Guess I won't ever own this monitor. But then again, I think it's too small.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,681
They just checked all the boxes I needed to upgrade from my Samsung 40ju7500 . Little smaller but with gsync and 200hz. I'm in. Sure it will be over 1k , but if it's not to much over 1k I'll be picking one up.
 

cvinh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2009
Messages
1,705
The 34" ROG and Predators are still selling for ~$1200 so I doubt these will cost anything less than $1500. But how many 1080 Ti's will be necessary to power these beasts? This is one expensive build.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
22,819
What's this going to cost? A healthy liver? Guess I won't ever own this monitor. But then again, I think it's too small.
512 FALD zones... Probably going to cost the same or close to the 27" 4K. I'm going to say between $1,500 and $2,000.
The 34" ROG and Predators are still selling for ~$1200 so I doubt these will cost anything less than $1500. But how many 1080 Ti's will be necessary to power these beasts? This is one expensive build.
A single Ti is plenty for 3440x1440.
 

v6maro

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 10, 2002
Messages
1,552
The 34" ROG and Predators are still selling for ~$1200 so I doubt these will cost anything less than $1500. But how many 1080 Ti's will be necessary to power these beasts? This is one expensive build.
I have an x34 and a single 1080 works fine

I'll be upgrading to this!
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
22,819
Better not be TN
Probably another AHVA (IPS-type) panel since it's AUO. We haven't seen any "high-end" displays use a TN since the PG278Q and S2716DG. Plus, I'm pretty sure there has never been an ultrawide display that uses a TN panel to date. The gamma shift would start to be a problem with that aspect ratio.
 

BlackManx

n00b
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
48
Getting close to the mark... I currently have a HP Omen 32" 2560x1440 with a GTX 1080... Upgrading to a 1080 Ti and getting this monitor is very tempting but I really would like the same monitor specs at 40" since I really love having more vertical real estate. At 35" diagonal, it's still too skinny.
 

Simmonz

2[H]4U
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
2,506
I couldn't afford one right now but I love the combo of high refresh rate and high resolution. Hopefully the price drops while I am saving up money. Need a GPU and CPU upgrade first.
 

ricson

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
66
At 60 FPS maxed, yes. A single 1080ti will not remotely be enough for high refresh gaming at UW 1440p w/ maxed settings.
I have a gtx 1080 and it will run most games at uw 1440p easily, several like dirt rally are over 100fps with ultra settings, very rare for it to drop below 80 fps.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
22,819
At 60 FPS maxed, yes. A single 1080ti will not remotely be enough for high refresh gaming at UW 1440p w/ maxed settings.
And? You don't have to hit 200 FPS with G-Sync. You'll be able to go 60-100 FPS in a lot of games without compromises. And you don't always need to run Ultra with 8x TRSSEQOMGWTFBBQ AA.
 

Gatecrasher3000

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
324
The 34" ROG and Predators are still selling for ~$1200 so I doubt these will cost anything less than $1500. But how many 1080 Ti's will be necessary to power these beasts? This is one expensive build.
I have an x34 and a TI, and I only get 90fps on games when maxed out, so I'm assuming this screen is more for Volta/Navi generation.
 

Sufu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Messages
2,007
35" and only 1440p still. I'm holding out for the 38" 3840x1600 monitors like the LG one, but with G-Sync. 75-144hz for me is fine though. I don't expect to hit 200+ fps in most games I play at these resolutions even with two 1080 Ti in SLI.
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Messages
783
I hope they will start making these in the 34 inch wide screen with 3440x1440. I really like my LG UM95. I only wish it had a had higher refresh rate. I like that resolution. I have been able to run most games either at max or near max settings. I am running on a 980ti at the moment.
I used to run three 1920x1200 HP monitors in Surround mode at 5760x1200. I actually like the continuous screen of the ultra wide enough to forfeit the extra pixels of multi-monitor gaming.
If they released a 34-36 inch version of either monitor and they are VESA mountable, I would probably get one. Not sure about the curve though. I have never gamed on a curved monitor. I wonder if it would be similar to using three monitors in an array?
 

Sufu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Messages
2,007
I hope they will start making these in the 34 inch wide screen with 3440x1440. I really like my LG UM95. I only wish it had a had higher refresh rate. I like that resolution. I have been able to run most games either at max or near max settings. I am running on a 980ti at the moment.
I used to run three 1920x1200 HP monitors in Surround mode at 5760x1200. I actually like the continuous screen of the ultra wide enough to forfeit the extra pixels of multi-monitor gaming.
If they released a 34-36 inch version of either monitor and they are VESA mountable, I would probably get one. Not sure about the curve though. I have never gamed on a curved monitor. I wonder if it would be similar to using three monitors in an array?
I think you are confused sir. This is a 3440x1440 monitor running at 200hz.

Higher refresh rates have a big impact on fast-paced gameplay, and the PG35VQ doesn’t disappoint. It’s capable of refreshing at a whopping 200Hz, which works out to a new frame every five milliseconds! Thanks to NVIDIA’s G-Sync technology, you don’t need to sustain a corresponding 200 FPS to maintain fluid frame delivery. The refresh rate of the display synchronizes with the frame rate of compatible GeForce GPUs to prevent natural performance variations from inducing perceptible stuttering.

The display’s UQWHD 3440x1440 resolution adds up to about five megapixels, so you won’t need ridiculous graphics horsepower to get the most out of the display. Hitting higher frame rates—and corresponding refresh rates—will be much easier than on a 4K monitor.
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Messages
783
I think you are confused sir. This is a 3440x1440 monitor running at 200hz.
What am I confused about?

Edit: I see now. I misread on the Nvidia page. I thought it said these were 27" monitors.
Well damn. Now I may have to consider one.
Price pending.
 
Last edited:

Teenyman45

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
2,467
Why only 1440p? I refuse to step down in resolution.

If we must use an X:9 size ration instead of X:10, then give me 21:9 with 2160P and cables with appropriate bandwidth. At least that would give me a solid reason to upgrade my videocards even without playing first person shooters.
 

EODetroit

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
1,485
Beastly specs. And here I was considering that new Predator Z35P (or whatever it is). HDR is the clincher here.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,266
Why only 1440p? I refuse to step down in resolution.

If we must use an X:9 size ration instead of X:10, then give me 21:9 with 2160P and cables with appropriate bandwidth. At least that would give me a solid reason to upgrade my videocards even without playing first person shooters.
1440p ultrawide is the ideal sweet spot for ultrawide gaming right now. 2160p ultrawide would be bonkers. You're talking almost 11 million pixels at that point. And the cost of a monitor like that would be insane.
 

Tych-0

Gawd
Joined
Jul 7, 2010
Messages
544
This sounds very interesting indeed, it might be time to sell my PG278Q.

Does this have a ULMB/strobing option? I much prefer that to GSync.
 

Sycraft

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
4,707
I keep giving these new high frame rate G-Sync monitors the side-eye but I don't know if I can bring myself to trade off my nice calibrated pro monitor. I wish I could get one to test out and see if I miss the nicer colour (or if maybe these ones are just as good). While I would like smoother motion, and the local dimming would be cool, I spend more time looking at a desktop so having a nice image is a higher priority than nice motion.
 

Teenyman45

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
2,467
1440p ultrawide is the ideal sweet spot for ultrawide gaming right now. 2160p ultrawide would be bonkers. You're talking almost 11 million pixels at that point. And the cost of a monitor like that would be insane.
Remember back when a whole lot of surplus Dell 2560x1600 monitors went on the market after online poker took a hit in popularity/legality? There were plenty of people with triple landscape or triple portrait arrays pushing approximately 13 million pixels with much older video cards. It can be done and 5K monitors are 16:9 with about 14.75 million pixels.
 
Top