![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
PG32UQX - ASUS 32" 4K 144 Hz HDR1400 G-Sync Ultimate
- Thread starter Vega
- Start date
- Status
Pretty high chance HDMI 2.1 GPU's will be released before this thing does. Heard June 2020 somewhere for this monitor but probably more like holiday 2020 or 2021 at best knowing ASUS' track record.
Think I'd rather stick to the 48" C10 OLED once I know exact improvements over the C9. Think the best they could do at this point would to get it over 800+ nits sustained peak brightness which may be easier on a smaller model.
Think I'd rather stick to the 48" C10 OLED once I know exact improvements over the C9. Think the best they could do at this point would to get it over 800+ nits sustained peak brightness which may be easier on a smaller model.
Last edited:
l88bastard
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2009
- Messages
- 3,768
Too much, too late.......
JosiahBradley
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,791
I'll take whatever hdr1000 model based on this comes out. The current models are a bit old now and want to see the updated ones. Or maybe I'll just get this if it's release anytime this year.
$3600.
I would be aboard on this if they had released a cheaper, regular backlight Freesync 2 model to go with it. The premium is just absurd for mini-LED and G-Sync.
While I generally say that OLED is not the way to go for desktop monitors due to size and burn-in possibility, when the only competition costs 2-3x more you might as well just buy the LG 48" OLED then buy another one a few years later if you have burn-in issues. The prices for these have gotten really out of hand. Acer revealed a similar 32" model at the same pricing and also the X38 which is essentially their version of the LG 38GL950G, again at 2000+ euro pricing.
High refresh rate has an incredible premium right now. 32" 4K 60 Hz screens start from about 400€, maybe 1000€ for a high quality model. 38" 3840x1600 60 Hz screens cost about 1000-1100€ vs 2000-2500€ for the same thing in 175 Hz. It's completely ridiculous.
While I generally say that OLED is not the way to go for desktop monitors due to size and burn-in possibility, when the only competition costs 2-3x more you might as well just buy the LG 48" OLED then buy another one a few years later if you have burn-in issues. The prices for these have gotten really out of hand. Acer revealed a similar 32" model at the same pricing and also the X38 which is essentially their version of the LG 38GL950G, again at 2000+ euro pricing.
High refresh rate has an incredible premium right now. 32" 4K 60 Hz screens start from about 400€, maybe 1000€ for a high quality model. 38" 3840x1600 60 Hz screens cost about 1000-1100€ vs 2000-2500€ for the same thing in 175 Hz. It's completely ridiculous.
This is just a last ditch effort to milk old technology before MicroLED.
The whole argument against MicroLED is price, but if you're going to charge almost 4 grand for a 32" monitor, you might as well go MicroLED anyway. This industry is such a scum sucking disaster.
Mini-LED is new tech though but really just a better version of FALD. At a hefty price.
Micro-LED is not coming to monitors anytime soon. Maybe in TVs at reasonable prices in 2022-2023.
Because they know the people who are going to purchase these will pay the cost; they are targeting premium customers after all.
And yes, this makes no financial sense; just get the 48" LG C10 when it comes out later this year.
It's a stretch to call MiniLED a new technology when it's really just an incremental improvement over existing tech.
Martha Stewart
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2011
- Messages
- 668
ill be first in line for this. 48" is way too big. 32" is the sweat spot for PPI and normal usage.
I feel like this cannot be overstated enough.
DoubleTap
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2010
- Messages
- 3,094
This makes the LG 38" SDR look cheap and boring.
I'm open to a $2k+ monitor, but not one that is 16:9
I'm sure it's great but that early adopter tax is too damn high.
I'm open to a $2k+ monitor, but not one that is 16:9
I'm sure it's great but that early adopter tax is too damn high.
euskalzabe
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,478
Finally, the miniLED age has started, at $4000 - or $2500 if you go for Lenovo's 27" version. It might be short lived until microLED takes the stage, but at least now we have a base initial price for miniLED. Hopefully in the next 2 years these prices will go below $999 for us regular people to be able to contemplate splurging on one.
Microled is only barely doable at the prototype level for 4K @ 75" and can't go any higher ppi than that, and even if it was, $4K isn't expensive. If it were physically possible to manufacture, which it isn't, a microLED monitor would be more like $40K.
Microled is at least 3-5 years away for TVs, depending on whether you count the inevitable first and second gen $25K+ low volume models as 'released'(right now we are at $250K), and probably 10+ years away for monitors.
Also, people who think MicroLED is inevitable should prepare for the fact that it is entirely possible OLED outcompetes it on price forever and thus kills it in the cradle.
Last edited:
euskalzabe
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,478
Entirely possible, but I'd say "greatly delays" more than "kills". OLED can't really solve the degradation issue that gives rise to burn-in.
Yeah, but burn-in isn't some binary thing. It's really just a type of added cost. If a 65" microLED, being EXTREMELY optimistic, can be brought down to $5000 within the next 5 years, and a similar OLED is $500, the fact that the OLED has burn-in risk won't matter to anybody.
I'm sure Samsung will be pushing burn-in fear marketing hard even though it's already a non-issue for almost all practical purposes.
The real question is whether or not microLED can produce better image quality to justify its very high prices, but it's not like OLED is going to stand still. Top emission and other process improvements will occur, so the rate of microLED improvements and cost reduction will have to massively exceed the rate of OLED improvements.
Yeah, MicroLED is going to be a hard sell if it comes out with prices similar to OLED early on. OLED was such a huge improvement over LCDs that the premium was justifiable, but I'm not convinced MicroLED will be that much better.
And I have not experienced burn in on any OLED set yet but even if I did, it would not be worth paying that much more to get a MicroLED. I would just buy another OLED set like you pointed out.
It's IPS, which has a poor native contrast ratio, even with lots of zones you're never going to control the bloom when trying to push 1000+nits, the light bleeds in surrounding pixels because IPS cannot block the light well enough. This is why most HDR tvs are VA panels and even those panels with 3-4 times contrast ratio over IPS struggle to control blooming.
euskalzabe
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,478
That's an excellent point. At $500, I'd happily buy a new OLED every 2-3 years. Right now, I'd be happy with a sub-999 one. Meanwhile, I'm still happy with my Vizio P55-F1. It ain't perfect, but looks pretty good.
No my point is when I had my X27 with 1/3rd the FALD zones I don't remember blooming that bad. Those small flames are turning the entire bottom left corner of the monitor purple with glow.
Armenius
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2014
- Messages
- 46,818
It's the camera exaggerating it.
Furious_Styles
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2013
- Messages
- 4,860
Damn that does not look good. Maybe my hopes for a gaming monitor with good HDR implementation just isn't in the cards right now and I should just forget about it.
MistaSparkul
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,277
I don't think the blooming looks that bad in person but let's be honest here even 1152 dimming zones is simply nowhere near enough to make blooming completely go away. Perhaps that Innolux panel that's being developed with over 1 million zones will do the trick. This monitor ain't the one.
LG OLED is the only game in town that does it all. Everything else is a varying set of compromises. Yeah I know, not small, burn in and all that jazz but you can just buy another and still spend less than one of this thread's monitors.
I'm fine with trying to come out with "halo" products, but seriously it's just a crap idea to not also release a SDR version of the screen if the mini-LED is going to be this damn expensive.
I was about to call it DOA too, but at least this monitor has local dimming with a ton of zones, 1100 is more than almost all high end tvs on the market. And this is on a small 32 inch display. Being able to hit 1400 nits on highlights is a nice touch, so people who prefer brighter displays and game in brighter rooms have something to go for. I'm not going for it, but at least it's not some zero local dimming high priced monitor.
See that? Once they can't get away with garbage anymore now that tv inputs have caught up, the monitor makers are starting to offer more now.
Furious_Styles
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2013
- Messages
- 4,860
Yeah I might just end up buying a slightly better version of my XB270HU honestly. The 4k version is nice but even the 2080 ti will struggle to push that thing.
Blade-Runner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2013
- Messages
- 4,852
When the hell are they going to release an ultrawide version of these 4K monitors!? My X34 is getting long in the tooth.
Armenius
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2014
- Messages
- 46,818
4K HDR at 144 Hz is about 37-38 Gbps uncompressed. HDMI 2.1 has a max data rate of 42.6 Gbps.
My guess is 1-3 years. The only one out right now is the 34" 5120x2160 LG and it's 60 Hz only. When DP 2.0 and HDMI 2.1 are in play those kind of resolutions become easier to do with high refresh rate support.
Considering that in addition to the LG CX48 you will have to buy a 3080Ti, that supports HDMI 2.1, while you already have a 2080Ti, the price of $3600 is not that bad. G-Sync on these things starts with 1Hz of refresh rate.
And the shitty FALD can be disabled...
And the shitty FALD can be disabled...
This logic is silly, though, the 3080TI will have many benefits other than HDMI 2.1. I cannot imagine anyone who bought a 2080TI who wants to game at 4K _not_ buying a 3080TI for the increased performance alone.
Also technically there may be adapters, but I haven't heard any news of that chip making its way into a real product.
- Status