PG32UQX - ASUS 32" 4K 144 Hz HDR1400 G-Sync Ultimate

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,039
I went back to TFT's PG35VQ review to compare and that VA is on average around 1ms faster overall compared to this IPS which is pretty sad. It does still suffer from 30ms+ black smear though.
The "slow" pixels are a non factor with this monitor. If you want faster then go with a PG27UQ....but IMHO the pros of the PG32 outweigh the PG27

As for the PG35...Ewwwww Gross....VA & ultrawide.....uuuggghhhhh.....gag me with a spoon!
 

AgentAnon

n00b
Joined
May 18, 2021
Messages
16
I was considering buying two because I need two monitors, but it would be pretty ridiculously costly.

With that in mind, what is a good second monitor to pair this with? I can't stand mismatched bezels and mismatched color temperatures. Maybe I'll see if the counterpart version without the Mini-LED could serve as a relatively similar secondary display.

In any case extremely excited for the PG32UQX, it is more or less everything I've been waiting for. Just need to find a 3090.
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,039
I was considering buying two because I need two monitors, but it would be pretty ridiculously costly.

With that in mind, what is a good second monitor to pair this with? I can't stand mismatched bezels and mismatched color temperatures. Maybe I'll see if the counterpart version without the Mini-LED could serve as a relatively similar secondary display.

In any case extremely excited for the PG32UQX, it is more or less everything I've been waiting for. Just need to find a 3090.
PG27UQ makes good second display..dual 32s would be massive.

I bought my 3090 from a 15 year old scalper in a Starbucks parking lot
 

badmojomk

n00b
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
46
My impressions: Whoa.

I didn’t get as much of a chance to play with the monitor over the weekend as I’d have liked but man, pushing the HDR experience was the right call even if it cost reduced pixel response. Watching and playing HDR content is like pumping your retinas with ecstasy. Bright colorful, content is great but even with large bright objects against a black background, it still does really well. As has been noted multiple times, it’s only when you get tiny bright objects e.g. star field effects where you run into issues with haloing. But I’ve been playing Doom Eternal, Horizon Zero Dawn, Red Dead Redemption 2 and they look incredible on this display save for some night scenes in RDR2. Just really mesmerizing.

I have noticed that switching the FALD mode can help reduce blooming in certain content vs others. For instance, FALD level 2 seemed better and had less haloing than level 3 in Horizon Zero Dawn whereas I preferred level 3 in Doom Eternal.
And yeah, no way I’d get anything smaller than 32” especially at 4K. I may consider a 42” display but frankly, 32” is just perfect for a large monitor on a desktop.

Haven’t noticed the fan noise when my PC is on and definitely did not notice it in games. Frankly, if you have the budget, don’t need to use it with a console or at least not with a PS5, this is an incredible display to get. I’m really happy with it. I don’t care much for the aesthetics of the physical look (actually preferred the look of the Acer X32) and the stand was basically useless for my setup and table. But there are some nice features built in like FPS counters, graphs etc that I’m OK with the PG32UQX.
 

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,615
Ya I cannot find a rhyme or reason to the operation of the three FALD levels and what they do. From what I can tell, Level 3 works the best for most games.
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,039
My impressions: Whoa.

I didn’t get as much of a chance to play with the monitor over the weekend as I’d have liked but man, pushing the HDR experience was the right call even if it cost reduced pixel response. Watching and playing HDR content is like pumping your retinas with ecstasy. Bright colorful, content is great but even with large bright objects against a black background, it still does really well. As has been noted multiple times, it’s only when you get tiny bright objects e.g. star field effects where you run into issues with haloing. But I’ve been playing Doom Eternal, Horizon Zero Dawn, Red Dead Redemption 2 and they look incredible on this display save for some night scenes in RDR2. Just really mesmerizing.

I have noticed that switching the FALD mode can help reduce blooming in certain content vs others. For instance, FALD level 2 seemed better and had less haloing than level 3 in Horizon Zero Dawn whereas I preferred level 3 in Doom Eternal.
And yeah, no way I’d get anything smaller than 32” especially at 4K. I may consider a 42” display but frankly, 32” is just perfect for a large monitor on a desktop.

Haven’t noticed the fan noise when my PC is on and definitely did not notice it in games. Frankly, if you have the budget, don’t need to use it with a console or at least not with a PS5, this is an incredible display to get. I’m really happy with it. I don’t care much for the aesthetics of the physical look (actually preferred the look of the Acer X32) and the stand was basically useless for my setup and table. But there are some nice features built in like FPS counters, graphs etc that I’m OK with the PG32UQX.
^^^^ Spot on....man this things got me playing BF1 again....that one reviewer was right, the night maps are INCREDIBLE on this baby!
 
Last edited:

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,039
Good job teaching the kid some capitalism!
Well *cracks knuckles* opportunistic middle men who bring nothing to the table in terms of labor, capital or production, while charging holding transfer fees is not capitalisms. But hey what do I know, I only hold a degree in economics / finance.

Y'all mistankenly think the very basic law of supply and demand is in action here, but its not. The law of supply and demand is NOT to charge a price so exorbinant that tons of inventory sits unsold on ebay waiting for desperate buyers, rather its to reach that critical price point of equilibrim between all the factors of production and need.

If you want to get technical, its actually communism. Product shortages and exorbinant goughing fees charged by a useless non wholesaler middleman is actually the realm of communism because in communism only "The HAVES" have access to the goods, while the "have nots" are left out in the cold. The beauty of capitalism is to make the absolute most efficient use of resources to achieve the most desireable price point in order to make goods accessible to the maxim market base @ maximum profit.

If you were a child in the 80's you would remember stories of product shortages in the soviet union, and how in demand "american" items such as $15 levi jeans could fetch as much as $100 a pair over there in MOZER RUSSIA thru the black market.

But anyhoo...I had introduced that young whippersnapper to the terms of barter as I had a 3080 on hand and he agreed to trade the 3090 for my 3080 + $1000 cash.....as his russian father nervously overwatched the situation with his hand in his fanny pack fingerfucking (no doubt) a firearm much inferior to the half dozen or so on my person and in car.
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
875
Does this warrant over 2x the price of a LG OLED CX 48?
The ultimate answer is highly subjective (price / value /desire)

That said, objectively It's about what works best as a desktop monitor

CX is too big with text that's not as clear. Similarly, 27s are too small for certain productivity applications and not ideal for 4k. 34 inch ultrawides are limited in vertical real estate like 27s. 38s are too big and the ultrawides are curved.

So when looking for the perfect size, flat screen with top quality stats - currently this is it.

Early adoption has a price - and this is arguably the best PC work & gaming monitor ever made
 
Last edited:

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,039
The ultimate answer is highly subjective (price / value /desire)

That said, objectively It's about what works best as a desktop monitor

CX is too big with text that's not as clear. Similarly, 27s are too small for certain productivity applications and not ideal for 4k. 34 inch ultrawides are limited in vertical real estate like 27s. 38s are too big and the ultrawides are curved.

So when looking for the perfect size, flat screen with top quality stats - currently this is it.

Early adoption has a price - and this is arguably the best PC work & gaming monitor ever made

Or to summarize. The 48cx is a fucking Teeeee Veeee!
 

AgentAnon

n00b
Joined
May 18, 2021
Messages
16
Does this warrant over 2x the price of a LG OLED CX 48?
The price should be lower, but it's a far better monitor any of those LG TVs. It's up to you to make the dollar value judgement, but for me there is no point in buying an OLED TV at 1500 dollars when I wouldn't enjoy using it and it doesn't at all meet the bar for a top-tier HDR experience.

-The HDR capabilities are entire class ahead of OLED (this is a Mini-LED monitor certified at DisplayHDR 1400 but with an actual peak brightness of 1600 nits).
-G-Sync ultimate module and a higher refresh rate.
-Much better colorspace coverage.
-Better build quality and misc body features (kind of gimmicky, but still nice to have).

Not to mention the terrible pixel density of those large TVs (unless you're willing to sit across the room and forfeit your desk) and the burn-in issues make that OLED panels unsuitable for use as a PC monitor. With 1152 zones there is some visible blooming in worst case scenarios, but when you compare it to the OLED worst case scenario (sunrises) you will see what I mean.
 
Last edited:

penny80

n00b
Joined
May 28, 2021
Messages
16
The price should be lower, but it's a far better monitor any of those LG TVs. It's up to you to make the dollar value judgement, but for me there is no point in buying an OLED TV at 1500 dollars when I wouldn't enjoy using it and it doesn't at all meet the bar for a top-tier HDR experience.

-The HDR capabilities are entire class ahead of OLED (this is a Mini-LED monitor certified at DisplayHDR 1400 but with an actual peak brightness of 1600 nits).
-G-Sync ultimate module and a higher refresh rate.
-Much better colorspace coverage.
-Better build quality and misc body features (kind of gimmicky, but still nice to have).

Not to mention the terrible pixel density of those large TVs (unless you're willing to sit across the room and forfeit your desk) and the burn-in issues make that OLED panels unsuitable for use as a PC monitor. With 1152 zones there is some visible blooming in worst case scenarios, but when you compare it to the OLED worst case scenario (sunrises) you will see what I mean.
this is exactly what bring me to sell my cx and buy the PG32... but the price is really really a pinecone butt
 

AzixTGO

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 21, 2016
Messages
109
The price should be lower, but it's a far better monitor any of those LG TVs. It's up to you to make the dollar value judgement, but for me there is no point in buying an OLED TV at 1500 dollars when I wouldn't enjoy using it and it doesn't at all meet the bar for a top-tier HDR experience.

-The HDR capabilities are entire class ahead of OLED (this is a Mini-LED monitor certified at DisplayHDR 1400 but with an actual peak brightness of 1600 nits).
-G-Sync ultimate module and a higher refresh rate.
-Much better colorspace coverage.
-Better build quality and misc body features (kind of gimmicky, but still nice to have).

Not to mention the terrible pixel density of those large TVs (unless you're willing to sit across the room and forfeit your desk) and the burn-in issues make that OLED panels unsuitable for use as a PC monitor. With 1152 zones there is some visible blooming in worst case scenarios, but when you compare it to the OLED worst case scenario (sunrises) you will see what I mean.
I see this HDR point a lot. Are people really looking at a screen that bright up close? 700 nits is the last figure I saw for the c1. That's not enough? it looks plenty bright even in pictures. The refresh rate I can live with. My main concern with frequency was how smooth animations would be in windows since most of the time games aren't going up to 144hz anyway.

Text readability is the only real potential deal breaker I have. and brightness seems to be the only real benefit that monitor has (not sure about color) I'm running a much lower brightness monitor at <30% so I am not sure I care.
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,707
I see this HDR point a lot. Are people really looking at a screen that bright up close? 700 nits is the last figure I saw for the c1. That's not enough? it looks plenty bright even in pictures. The refresh rate I can live with. My main concern with frequency was how smooth animations would be in windows since most of the time games aren't going up to 144hz anyway.

Text readability is the only real potential deal breaker I have. and brightness seems to be the only real benefit that monitor has (not sure about color) I'm running a much lower brightness monitor at <30% so I am not sure I care.

It's bright enough but only for dark rooms really. There's also content that's mastered for 4000 nits HDR so a brighter monitor with good local dimming like the PG32 is probably going to deliver a better HDR experience than OLED overall for those type of content.
 

amonakira

n00b
Joined
Nov 9, 2019
Messages
13
700nit c1 lol, in a real full bright scene maybe catch 200nit with abl ^^'
color accuracy too isnt great with wrgb, gamut catch only 65% bt2020 vs 85

the lg 32 oled is much better with real rgb and 400nit fullscene without abl but is 60hz and is priced 4000$
 

AzixTGO

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 21, 2016
Messages
109
700nit c1 lol, in a real full bright scene maybe catch 200nit with abl ^^'
color accuracy too isnt great with wrgb, gamut catch only 65% bt2020 vs 85

the lg 32 oled is much better with real rgb and 400nit fullscene without abl but is 60hz and is priced 4000$
Doesn't seem too bad. I take your point on the color but at what point is that only important for professionals and doesn't really affect content enjoyment? Plus I'm colorblind and color retarded so I can only care on a practical level up to a point. Then its just about wanting the best specs.

Screenshot 2021-06-04 171038.jpg
 

SoCali

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2020
Messages
233
Just to put into perspective, this monitor is capable of 1200nits full field which is absolutely ridiculous compared to a CX that barely musters 700nits (48" size) in game mode for 2/10% windows. Of course this doesn't tell the entire story because you know, contrast matters but still it's super impressive.

I've said here multiple times that my X27 offered a way more impactful HDR experience in 70% of scenarios compared to my CX so for those who have this monitor in front of them it must be a real treat.

EDIT: I'd like to also note that the CX being limited in HDR brightness is a gift in the sense that I don't really get eye strain with HDR content where as my X27 required taking breaks. Not sure how much my distance to the display played a role in this compared to the CX but I still feel like being blasted @ 1000nit+ can cause eye strain.
 
Last edited:

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,707
Just to put into perspective, this monitor is capable of 1200nits full field which is absolutely ridiculous compared to a CX that barely musters 700nits (48" size) in game mode for 2/10% windows. Of course this doesn't tell the entire story because you know, contrast matters but still it's super impressive.

I've said here multiple times that my X27 offered a way more impactful HDR experience in 70% of scenarios compared to my CX so for those who have this monitor in front of them it must be a real treat.

EDIT: I'd like to also note that the CX being limited in HDR brightness is a gift in the sense that I don't really get eye strain with HDR content where as my X27 required taking breaks. Not sure how much my distance to the display played a role in this compared to the CX but I still feel like being blasted @ 1000nit+ can cause eye strain.

Well you aren't alone. My X27 also gave me eye strain after long HDR gaming sessions. But then again I game in a dark room so that's probably a big contributing factor to why I find the CX way more comfortable when it comes to hours long HDR gaming.
 

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,615
Ya but remember brightness measurements have a surface area component. Example: since something like a 48CX has over twice the screen surface area as the PG32, with it being able to do 800 nit 10% window and the PG32 able to do 1600 nit 10 % window, the 48CX is actuality throwing more photons at your eyes in that scenario for eye fatigue.
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,039
Hooked up my PG27UQ next to PG32UQX and did some visual starfield tests. Here is SDR 100% brightness on both. 4k120 8 bit RGB

First is PG32
1622905686747.png



Second is PG27.....It could not handle test and went crazy artifacting
1622905782826.png
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,039
So basically:

PG32 wins in Halos, Wins in HDR, wins in size

PG27 wins in motion clarity, wins in SDR + Fald on Desktop

I think its a toss up, which on would be better in competetive FPS. On one hand the PG27 has better motion, but on the other the 32 has larger, more useable picture space.
for me...I notice the 32" allows me to see more distance in games like PUBG and BF1 & 5
 

penny80

n00b
Joined
May 28, 2021
Messages
16
So basically:

PG32 wins in Halos, Wins in HDR, wins in size

PG27 wins in motion clarity, wins in SDR + Fald on Desktop

I think its a toss up, which on would be better in competetive FPS. On one hand the PG27 has better motion, but on the other the 32 has larger, more useable picture space.
for me...I notice the 32" allows me to see more distance in games like PUBG and BF1 & 5
fantastic man!!!! great job, and finally we can see both the 2 best monitor in the market as concern the picture quality, great
 

AzixTGO

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 21, 2016
Messages
109
The glow is not great. Might as well not have the zones if its going to produce results like that. Looks defective
the screen at the back of the pg32 is the cx?
very likely. Based on the stand.
Which begs the question... why is it not in the comparison. Was hoping for a side by side of the 2.
 

AgentAnon

n00b
Joined
May 18, 2021
Messages
16
So basically:

PG32 wins in Halos, Wins in HDR, wins in size

PG27 wins in motion clarity, wins in SDR + Fald on Desktop

I think its a toss up, which on would be better in competetive FPS. On one hand the PG27 has better motion, but on the other the 32 has larger, more useable picture space.
for me...I notice the 32" allows me to see more distance in games like PUBG and BF1 & 5
PG32 also wins in resolution and color space coverage. And probably some other areas (light uniformity, banding, etc) too do it being a newer panel.

https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_rog_swift_pg32uqx.htm

If the PG27 has a tftcentral review you can use this to compare in more detail.
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,285
The glow is not great. Might as well not have the zones if its going to produce results like that. Looks defective

very likely. Based on the stand.
Which begs the question... why is it not in the comparison. Was hoping for a side by side of the 2.
I can guess the answers for you, correct me if I am wrong:
  • CX wins in motion clarity, starfield tests, black levels, viewing angles, HDR detail in dark scenes and SDR image quality on desktop.
  • PG27/32 wins in text clarity
  • PG32 wins in HDR brightness, showing more detail in bright areas
 

penny80

n00b
Joined
May 28, 2021
Messages
16
I can guess the answers for you, correct me if I am wrong:
  • CX wins in motion clarity, starfield tests, black levels, viewing angles, HDR detail in dark scenes and SDR image quality on desktop.
  • PG27/32 wins in text clarity
  • PG32 wins in HDR brightness, showing more detail in bright areas
as an ex owner of the CX and owner of the x27p, and waiting for the pg32 i can say

CX wins ONLY in that frametime, of that video above, where there are stars in a black sky, but PAY ATTENTION, is a MICRO SECOND of that video you have to freeze the video and take the screenshot to see it, the defect time is less than 1 second of time, in the whole video the pg32 >>>>>> CX

HDR detail in dark scenes is pretty there where the PG32 and pg27 wins over the cx, on the cx the details in dark area CRUSH


see there, in the part where he compare on RDR2 , we can see the acer x27 is way way way better, expecially in details in dark area, on the cx you can see the black crushing
the cx and x27 are both not calibrated well to my opinion in that video, but from real life you can understand what i just say
 
Last edited:

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,039
I don't get this constant obsession to reach for the oled TV as MONITOR champion.
I get that its its the most affordable, readily available option and lord knows I love my current stable of oleds (55C9,48CX & C177).

However, we are far from an oled panel covering all the needed basis.
1) 48" sucks, its too big and ppi blows
2) WRGB pixel structure gets annoying for long session desktop use
3) Its HDR is weak as fuck compared to PG32
4) They are dim, the upcoming 32" oled 144hz monitors are reported to only have 250nits

If you love your 48cx, great! But you also need a PG32/27 or your missing out.

The sad state of the current monitor situation is like being married 20 years....having the wife is great, makes a good companion, takes care of the kids, makes you sammys in the kitchen, however, spends your money, naggs you all into high hell, bitches when you buy that 77 tv and dwindles sexual escapades as time goes on....which is why one needs a mistress to cover all the basis of hot crazy sex so that you can keep all the benefits of having the wife over there and hot sex over there. And don't worry about divorce, that is an inevitability anyway!
 

amonakira

n00b
Joined
Nov 9, 2019
Messages
13
as an ex owner of the CX and owner of the x27p, and waiting for the pg32 i can say

CX wins ONLY in that frametime, of that video above, where there are stars in a black sky, but PAY ATTENTION, is a MICRO SECOND of that video you have to freeze the video and take the screenshot to see it, the defect time is less than 1 second of time, in the whole video the pg32 >>>>>> CX

HDR detail in dark scenes is pretty there where the PG32 and pg27 wins over the cx, on the cx the details in dark area CRUSH


see there, in the part where he compare on RDR2 , we can see the acer x27 is way way way better, expecially in details in dark area, on the cx you can see the black crushing
the cx and x27 are both not calibrated well to my opinion in that video, but from real life you can understand what i just say
here the real problem are the colors...like you see u can't do pure white and you get always unaccurate colors in commercial oled cuz the wrgb layout.

professional oled like the lg 32 are rgb but are 60hz and 4000dollars and then we can discuss on dark hdr scene vs bright hdr scene.
 

SoCali

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2020
Messages
233
That comparison video is pretty dumb. They should have been filmed individually to make it a fair comparison because that "black crush" that appears on video beside a far brighter LCD is not what it looks like in person.

This is also ignoring just how terrible RDR2's HDR implementation is.
 

penny80

n00b
Joined
May 28, 2021
Messages
16
That comparison video is pretty dumb. They should have been filmed individually to make it a fair comparison because that "black crush" that appears on video beside a far brighter LCD is not what it looks like in person.

This is also ignoring just how terrible RDR2's HDR implementation is.
Yeah that video show the problem of the cx in a strong way, but you need to see in real life and it is what i did. Cx is not bad as in that video but x27 is > CX in all, less than microsecond where you can spot some blooming in particular scenario. I repeat i had cx and x27 both, now only x27p, cause cx is worst i sell it. Next week i will receive the pg32 and go forward with it and sell the x27p
 

AgentAnon

n00b
Joined
May 18, 2021
Messages
16
I can guess the answers for you, correct me if I am wrong:
  • CX wins in motion clarity, starfield tests, black levels, viewing angles, HDR detail in dark scenes and SDR image quality on desktop.
  • PG27/32 wins in text clarity
  • PG32 wins in HDR brightness, showing more detail in bright areas
The only thing the CX wins in are starfield tests and motion clarity but the latter is something where they're all past the threshold where that matters. The PG32 wins in everything else: pixel density, peak brightness, sustained brightness, HDR detail in all scenes, SDR quality, color (it wins hands down in Adobe RGB coverage, DCI-P3 coverage, and Rec.2020 coverage (which is also VERY important for a good HDR experience)), refresh rate, no burn-in, and so on.

It's also important to consider that not all of these wins are equal. Peak brightness for HDR is make or break important IMO and OLED TVs get destroyed there.
 

AzixTGO

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 21, 2016
Messages
109
as an ex owner of the CX and owner of the x27p, and waiting for the pg32 i can say

CX wins ONLY in that frametime, of that video above, where there are stars in a black sky, but PAY ATTENTION, is a MICRO SECOND of that video you have to freeze the video and take the screenshot to see it, the defect time is less than 1 second of time, in the whole video the pg32 >>>>>> CX

HDR detail in dark scenes is pretty there where the PG32 and pg27 wins over the cx, on the cx the details in dark area CRUSH


see there, in the part where he compare on RDR2 , we can see the acer x27 is way way way better, expecially in details in dark area, on the cx you can see the black crushing
the cx and x27 are both not calibrated well to my opinion in that video, but from real life you can understand what i just say
I was almost with you guys on some of this till I looked more closely. Pictures below.

Image below. The brightness seems to be reducing detail to the left of the 1 and 6. It looks less clean, less clear. The inside of the bottle isn't as dark as it probably should be.
Screenshot (81).png


Obvious glow around. The dripping honey is brighter than it should be.

Screenshot (67).png


Image below. Again the brightness is affecting detail. The liquid is brighter than it should be. Looks cloudy. Image from the monitor seems softer too but it might be down to size.

Screenshot (79).png


Cloudy liquid again. Glow around the glass isn't as obvious.

Screenshot (80).png


I think the brightness might actually be working against image quality since its LEDs. There's a common trend of the brightness decreasing image quality. If OLED could get as bright it would probably be ideal. The little issues might not be noticeable during action on screen but maybe when consuming the right content it will definitely be inferior.

IMO the main disadvantage in comparison remains text, black crush and I guess size. Is the monitor white-crushing?

A comparison with the pg32 would be nice. Should produce better results
 

SoCali

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2020
Messages
233
Like I said, you can't use that video for comparison at all. To get one of the displays looking as it does to the eye means the exposure is messed up for the other and vice versa.

The majority of the discrepancies between them that you're describing are a result of the camera/setup.
 
Top