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

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
755
Regarding the 'Q' version of this... When they describe edge lit dimming in 16 or 18 zones - is that a 2x8 or 2x9 grid?

(and - does anyone know of any panels with 16/18 edge lit zones where I can read about haloes, etc?)



(QX has the 1500 zones and GSync. Q is edge lit.) from TFT:
"
  • The QX model has a very high end Mini LED backlight with 1,152 local dimming zones designed for optimal HDR performance (for an LCD display). On the other hand the Q model has only a normal edge-lit dimming backlight with a far more limited number of zones (expected 16 zones but not confirmed). The QX will offer much better local dimming and HDR performance with smaller halos, less blooming and the capability to offer superior brightness levels and dynamic range.
  • As a result of the backlight the QX model conforms to the VESA DisplayHDR 1400 standard, including a peak brightness capability of 1400 cd/m2. The Q model meets the HDR600 standard with a peak brightness of 600 cd/m2 possible. Remember the limitations above though related to the number of dimming zones (1,152 vs 18).
...
The QX model is expected to retail for around $2999.99 USD if early pre-orders from Asus’ website are anything to go by. This is a very high end display with the price impacted significantly by the Mini LED backlight and Native G-sync module. The Q model should be a fair bit lower cost than this,
/"
 
Last edited:

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,237
So based on that review, it looks like it's pretty good, but is it $3000 great? The only things it really has going for it vs OLED is the size, higher peak and sustained brightness in HDR and burn-in being a non-issue.

Personally I'd rather get a non-mini-LED version of this for a much lower cost despite the hit you take in HDR quality. Or use that monitor on the desktop and get an LG OLED for HDR gaming and movies.
 

Murzilka

Gawd
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
935
The only things it really has going for it vs OLED is the size, higher peak and sustained brightness in HDR and burn-in being a non-issue.
I think it's just the size and hardware gsync, that makes sure the performance is buttery smooth in the whole fps range from 0 to the max and back. Max brightness is nice but not something to write home about and burn-in is rather mental issue. Given that VRR on the new C1 starts at 20fps, instead of 45fps like on the older models, the 48" OLED is even harder to beat than it was before. And definitely not with a $3000+ price tag... But if someone is rich and such purchase does not tank one's budget - no question about getting the PG32UQX.
FALD reaction time is still a mystery btw.
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
755
I think it's just the size and hardware gsync, that makes sure the performance is buttery smooth in the whole fps range from 0 to the max and back. Max brightness is nice but not something to write home about and burn-in is rather mental issue. Given that VRR on the new C1 starts at 20fps, instead of 45fps like on the older models, the 48" OLED is even harder to beat than it was before. And definitely not with a $3000+ price tag... But if someone is rich and such purchase does not tank one's budget - no question about getting the PG32UQX.
FALD reaction time is still a mystery btw.
Yeah... for that we have to await actual reviews, not just previews.

I'm honestly excited by this... now just to win the Lottery so I can buy one without explaining to my wife why I missed two mortgage payments.
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,677

Oof...that's quite a slow IPS panel.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20210429-104036_YouTube.jpg
    Screenshot_20210429-104036_YouTube.jpg
    89.6 KB · Views: 0

Cali3350

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
4,699
Hmmmmmmmm. I can deal with the slower pixel response times easy enough, I'm not super sensitive to that.

The noise though. That is a big bummer for me.

I might have to reconsider a LG OLED.
 

oledguy1

Weaksauce
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
68
I saw the optimum tech review. I was disappointed with the fan noise. I wish we had a better idea when the 42" LG OLED TVs would be released because I think I would lean to that at this point even though 42" is still probably too big for me.
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,677
So based on that review, it looks like it's pretty good, but is it $3000 great? The only things it really has going for it vs OLED is the size, higher peak and sustained brightness in HDR and burn-in being a non-issue.

Personally I'd rather get a non-mini-LED version of this for a much lower cost despite the hit you take in HDR quality. Or use that monitor on the desktop and get an LG OLED for HDR gaming and movies.

Yeah I agree. I still plan to pick up a non FALD 32 incher for desktop use because like optimum, I also find FALD to be even more distracting to use in a desktop monitor vs a straight edge lit display. I honestly never notice the haloing that much in games on my X27 but on the desktop it was certainly more noticeable.
 

shadow2761

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 11, 2016
Messages
260
Ill stick to the OLED CX aftet that quick review.
Possibly trade it in for a 42" when they release.
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,237
I saw the optimum tech review. I was disappointed with the fan noise. I wish we had a better idea when the 42" LG OLED TVs would be released because I think I would lean to that at this point even though 42" is still probably too big for me.
If they reveal the 42" next year around CES then it's most likely available around the following summer. At least that was the case for the CX.
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
755
If they reveal the 42" next year around CES then it's most likely available around the following summer. At least that was the case for the CX.
Also the fan noise is from the GSync - so as long as the 42 doesn't have one...

Also the non-1500 zones screens are likely coming in at a reasonable price point... In the Gigabyte thread it looks like next month and @ $1200.

Edit - the above statement is likely based on poor understanding... I thought the Gigabyte 32 was a contender - but it looks like it is only QHD.

That said - Viewsonic is releasing the 32 4k edge dimming version in Q3.
 
Last edited:

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
25,326
Regarding the 'Q' version of this... When they describe edge lit dimming in 16 or 18 zones - is that a 2x8 or 2x9 grid?

(and - does anyone know of any panels with 16/18 edge lit zones where I can read about haloes, etc?)



(QX has the 1500 zones and GSync. Q is edge lit.) from TFT:
"
  • The QX model has a very high end Mini LED backlight with 1,152 local dimming zones designed for optimal HDR performance (for an LCD display). On the other hand the Q model has only a normal edge-lit dimming backlight with a far more limited number of zones (expected 16 zones but not confirmed). The QX will offer much better local dimming and HDR performance with smaller halos, less blooming and the capability to offer superior brightness levels and dynamic range.
  • As a result of the backlight the QX model conforms to the VESA DisplayHDR 1400 standard, including a peak brightness capability of 1400 cd/m2. The Q model meets the HDR600 standard with a peak brightness of 600 cd/m2 possible. Remember the limitations above though related to the number of dimming zones (1,152 vs 18).
...
The QX model is expected to retail for around $2999.99 USD if early pre-orders from Asus’ website are anything to go by. This is a very high end display with the price impacted significantly by the Mini LED backlight and Native G-sync module. The Q model should be a fair bit lower cost than this,
/"
No, it would be 2x16 or 2x18. They would be columns of light that extend vertically from the opposing edges of the screen toward the center. Here is a video showing the type of backlighting in action on the Samsung CRG9. Do note that this monitor only has 10 zones, with each zone covering 4.7 inches versus the 1.7 inches that would be covered on a 16-zone 32" 16:9 monitor. The size of the zones on the CRG9 can give you an idea of what it would be like, though.

 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
755
No, it would be 2x16 or 2x18. They would be columns of light that extend vertically from the opposing edges of the screen toward the center. Here is a video showing the type of backlighting in action on the Samsung CRG9. Do note that this monitor only has 10 zones, with each zone covering 4.7 inches versus the 1.7 inches that would be covered on a 16-zone 32" 16:9 monitor. The size of the zones on the CRG9 can give you an idea of what it would be like, though.

You know... I think I could live with that. Especially if the zones are smaller. Looks like whenever you get an overlap, both zones are lit and there's a bit of delay in the 'trailing' zone turning off.

Would really like to see one of those 'in the wild' where I can turn down the lights and see how it goes myself. Sadly we only have BB - and you can practically get a tan inside those warehouse stores
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,677
Also the fan noise is from the GSync - so as long as the 42 doesn't have one...

Also the non-1500 zones screens are likely coming in at a reasonable price point... In the Gigabyte thread it looks like next month and @ $1200.

Edit - the above statement is likely based on poor understanding... I thought the Gigabyte 32 was a contender - but it looks like it is only QHD.

That said - Viewsonic is releasing the 32 4k edge dimming version in Q3.

? The Gigabyte FI32U is 4k, not 1440p. You must have searched up the FI32Q instead. Monitor makers and their naming...
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
755
? The Gigabyte FI32U is 4k, not 1440p. You must have searched up the FI32Q instead. Monitor makers and their naming...
Yeah - I Googled the U and ended up on the Q page and got all kinds of confused... Then posted.

Can't wait to buy one of these things so I can quit obsessing - the alphanumbers are slowly killing me
 

badmojomk

n00b
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
36
The fan noise from the Optimum Tech review is disappointing, especially for a what's supposed to be a high-end display.

What I wanna know is whether Acer will have their PG32UQX equivalent x32 monitor for release around the same time. I honestly prefer the aesthetics of the Acer model and if I recall correctly, the Acer x27 had a slightly less annoying fan noise profile than the Asus PG27UQ.
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
755
The fan noise from the Optimum Tech review is disappointing, especially for a what's supposed to be a high-end display.

What I wanna know is whether Acer will have their PG32UQX equivalent x32 monitor for release around the same time. I honestly prefer the aesthetics of the Acer model and if I recall correctly, the Acer x27 had a slightly less annoying fan noise profile than the Asus PG27UQ.
If they were both using the (why do I always want to call GSync... NSYNC?) same GEE-SYNC module... why would the noise be much different?
 

burburbur

Weaksauce
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
76
I saw the optimum tech review. I was disappointed with the fan noise. I wish we had a better idea when the 42" LG OLED TVs would be released because I think I would lean to that at this point even though 42" is still probably too big for me.
Its not going to be this year almost certainly. The 48" CX was announced in December 2019 and hit shelves in late spring/early summer 2020. I doubt they'd add the 42" to this year's lineup in the middle of the cycle, particularly because there's no "scrap" in their current fabs to source these from. They cut the 48" panels from the leftovers of the 77" panels and the 55/65 are cut from the same sheet. To make a 42" panel they'd have to make fewer 48" panels. Couple that with the fact that LG hasn't even said they were going to use this panel themselves (something that didn't happen with the 48") and it looks to me like they proposed the 42" size to see what 3rd party customers they could get to see if it was worth it economically to build a fab out that can generate 42" panels. That could mean we won't even see a 42" panel in the next cycle.
 
Last edited:

oledguy1

Weaksauce
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
68
Its not going to be this year almost certainly. The 48" CX was announced in December 2019 and hit shelves in late spring/early summer 2020. I doubt they'd add the 42" to this year's lineup in the middle of the cycle, particularly because there's no "scrap" in their current fabs to source these from. They cut the 48" panels from the leftovers of the 77" panels and the 55/65 are cut from the same sheet. To make a 42" panel they'd have to make fewer 48" panels. Couple that with the fact that LG hasn't even said they were going to use this panel themselves (something that didn't happen with the 48") and it looks to me like they proposed the 42" size to see what 3rd party customers they could get to see if it was worth it economically to build a fab out that can generate 42" panels. That could mean we won't even see a 42" panel in the next cycle.
Yeah. that makes sense. I would think that H1 next year is the soonest we would see it.
 
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
888
Yeah I agree. I still plan to pick up a non FALD 32 incher for desktop use because like optimum, I also find FALD to be even more distracting to use in a desktop monitor vs a straight edge lit display. I honestly never notice the haloing that much in games on my X27 but on the desktop it was certainly more noticeable.

Which one you looking at? Acer XB323QK? At least it shouldn't have a gsync cooling fan...
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,237
Yeah. that makes sense. I would think that H1 next year is the soonest we would see it.
For sure. Whether it's a TV or monitor is a mystery. If a TV, it's going to be C1 electronics with a smaller panel. If a monitor it's most likely reusing whatever they had for their 43" LCDs or an iteration of that.

I expect that they might phase out the 48" model eventually as it's probably popular only as a gaming monitor and less so on the TV market.
 

DanNeely

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
3,873
No, it would be 2x16 or 2x18. They would be columns of light that extend vertically from the opposing edges of the screen toward the center. Here is a video showing the type of backlighting in action on the Samsung CRG9. Do note that this monitor only has 10 zones, with each zone covering 4.7 inches versus the 1.7 inches that would be covered on a 16-zone 32" 16:9 monitor. The size of the zones on the CRG9 can give you an idea of what it would be like, though.

Ugh, that's horrid in an If I can't disable it permanently it's going back as an RMA sort of way. Definitely not going to bother with any low zone count models.
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
755
The more I think about this monitor and the criticisms we are seeing from early reviews... the more I find myself curious as to Asus' choices here. I would think that in-house market analysis and testing could have served them better. If you think about everything we wanted and expected from this panel - it should have been shout-worthy, without caveats. The ONLY critique should have been price. Every other metric should have been out of the park.

  • Out of the gate: a major critique (which does not affect me as a PC user) is the lack of HDMI 2.1 support. This is driven by the choice to use NVidia's GSync module, which in turn opens the panel up to 'fan noise' complaints. Given the strength of the console market and the open secret that the current iteration would be using AMD GPUs with HDMI outputs... This doesn't look very forward thinking - and it looks to me that by this choice, they're leaving money on the table (SeriesX/Sony 'enthusiast' spenders who will skip this because of form factor / connection choices).
  • Fan noise: Acer and Asus previously put out 27s that competed directly against one another and used the GSync modules, but Acer's solution was quieter. Why open yourself up to unnecessary criticism of a high-price panel by not recognizing and fixing such a trivial thing? Do people really care about panel edge-thickness that much? (One justification that I've read for the smaller, louder fans relates to panel thickness)
  • Blur: I don't know enough about the causes / solutions to this... but I'll bet Asus engineers do. If you're going to be the ground-breaker in large desktop, 4k fast IPS... make it look good. For the price, this should have been the crispest 4k Blurbuster ever tested. I'm hoping this is not a 'feature' of the AUO panel, because if so - I'm worried about the 'Q' model.

So - it looks like (to me) that they basically said, "Hey we have this great AUO panel that we want to turn into a ProArt monitor to compete with Apple and get industry people buy at a premium. It's got all these great features - how do we knock it down a bit in price to sell to gamers so we can get above the 'discount threshold' for number of panels purchased from AUO?" -- and the team just took off-the shelf tech from 2019.*




*Panel initially announced CES 2020 (Jan)
 

vegeta535

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
6,323
The more I think about this monitor and the criticisms we are seeing from early reviews... the more I find myself curious as to Asus' choices here. I would think that in-house market analysis and testing could have served them better. If you think about everything we wanted and expected from this panel - it should have been shout-worthy, without caveats. The ONLY critique should have been price. Every other metric should have been out of the park.

  • Out of the gate: a major critique (which does not affect me as a PC user) is the lack of HDMI 2.1 support. This is driven by the choice to use NVidia's GSync module, which in turn opens the panel up to 'fan noise' complaints. Given the strength of the console market and the open secret that the current iteration would be using AMD GPUs with HDMI outputs... This doesn't look very forward thinking - and it looks to me that by this choice, they're leaving money on the table (SeriesX/Sony 'enthusiast' spenders who will skip this because of form factor / connection choices).
  • Fan noise: Acer and Asus previously put out 27s that competed directly against one another and used the GSync modules, but Acer's solution was quieter. Why open yourself up to unnecessary criticism of a high-price panel by not recognizing and fixing such a trivial thing? Do people really care about panel edge-thickness that much? (One justification that I've read for the smaller, louder fans relates to panel thickness)
  • Blur: I don't know enough about the causes / solutions to this... but I'll bet Asus engineers do. If you're going to be the ground-breaker in large desktop, 4k fast IPS... make it look good. For the price, this should have been the crispest 4k Blurbuster ever tested. I'm hoping this is not a 'feature' of the AUO panel, because if so - I'm worried about the 'Q' model.

So - it looks like (to me) that they basically said, "Hey we have this great AUO panel that we want to turn into a ProArt monitor to compete with Apple and get industry people buy at a premium. It's got all these great features - how do we knock it down a bit in price to sell to gamers so we can get above the 'discount threshold' for number of panels purchased from AUO?" -- and the team just took off-the shelf tech from 2019.*




*Panel initially announced CES 2020 (Jan)
I seriously doubt many console gamer are in the market for a pc monitor for their consoles. The average consumer only cares about price and size when it come to displays.
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
755
I seriously doubt many console gamer are in the market for a pc monitor for their consoles. The average consumer only cares about price and size when it come to displays.
I agree with you completely - but every time I criticize console gaming... some wit comes out to say that they spend every bit as much on their hobby as I do on mine. (Smh/shrug)

To me:
  • Console / controller = lounge on the couch / beanbag & game on a (relatively cheap) TV.
  • Desktop / M&K = sit at a desk & game on a quality monitor
Why anyone would choose to hook up a console in place of an actual computer for desktop gaming makes no sense to me at all.

EDIT: I'm guessing the 'hook a monitor up to a console' crowd are playing in dorm rooms, BEQs and small apartments. My kid plays on an XBox and we've got ours set up in a finished basement with a TV on the wall.
 

SoCali

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2020
Messages
187
I mean my choice in display is 100% influenced by whether it's suitable for both my RTX 3080 + PS5. I don't have a "TV" in the traditional sense where media is consumed, all of that is done at my battlestation.

For this reason my ideal display requires HDMI 2.1 as well as a convenient method for switching inputs (no 6 button/joystick menu presses).

I know tons of other people with similar set ups as mine and this idea that a console has to be tied to a couch/living room is really early 2000's.
 

vegeta535

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
6,323
I agree with you completely - but every time I criticize console gaming... some wit comes out to say that they spend every bit as much on their hobby as I do on mine. (Smh/shrug)

To me:
  • Console / controller = lounge on the couch / beanbag & game on a (relatively cheap) TV.
  • Desktop / M&K = sit at a desk & game on a quality monitor
Why anyone would choose to hook up a console in place of an actual computer for desktop gaming makes no sense to me at all.

EDIT: I'm guessing the 'hook a monitor up to a console' crowd are playing in dorm rooms, BEQs and small apartments. My kid plays on an XBox and we've got ours set up in a finished basement with a TV on the wall.
I agree mostly but I think most people use cheap monitors also for PC gaming. Couple years ago I built my nieces a couple decent gaming computers. I come to find out that my brother just got a couple ancient throw away monitors from his work that used vga still ffs. He spent more in the dvi to VGA dongles then those monitors were worth. Both nieces were perfectly happy with the monitors 🤮
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
755
I agree mostly but I think most people use cheap monitors also for PC gaming. Couple years ago I built my nieces a couple decent gaming computers. I come to find out that my brother just got a couple ancient throw away monitors from his work that used vga still ffs. He spent more in the dvi to VGA dongles then those monitors were worth. Both nieces were perfectly happy with the monitors 🤮
Oh yeah. My son and I had to explain to my wife why he should be allowed to buy a 'gaming monitor' to replace the free monitor he got from his grandparents. (60hz cheap and ghastly looking TN panel from 10 years ago).

Go into any box store and most 'monitors' are just cheap.
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
755
I mean my choice in display is 100% influenced by whether it's suitable for both my RTX 3080 + PS5. I don't have a "TV" in the traditional sense where media is consumed, all of that is done at my battlestation.

For this reason my ideal display requires HDMI 2.1 as well as a convenient method for switching inputs (no 6 button/joystick menu presses).

I know tons of other people with similar set ups as mine and this idea that a console has to be tied to a couch/living room is really early 2000's.
Your setup is what I would consider a 'recent development' - and like you, I hear of people who have both Console and Computer hooked to the same monitor. Especially people who stream; makes life easier.

My biases are coming from 25 years of PC gaming / intermittent PC building. I recognize that things are changing and people are using consoles in different ways than my bias suggests...

Hard for these old bones to accept that Consoles have reached the point where they're now the mainstream and we are slipping into niche.
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,237
I agree with you completely - but every time I criticize console gaming... some wit comes out to say that they spend every bit as much on their hobby as I do on mine. (Smh/shrug)

To me:
  • Console / controller = lounge on the couch / beanbag & game on a (relatively cheap) TV.
  • Desktop / M&K = sit at a desk & game on a quality monitor
Why anyone would choose to hook up a console in place of an actual computer for desktop gaming makes no sense to me at all.

EDIT: I'm guessing the 'hook a monitor up to a console' crowd are playing in dorm rooms, BEQs and small apartments. My kid plays on an XBox and we've got ours set up in a finished basement with a TV on the wall.
I own both a powerful gaming PC, a PS4, PS5 and Nintendo Switch. I love playing on all the platforms but the consoles are hooked up to my LG C9 OLED TV in the living room. I really dislike this whole "console gamers are scrubs" stuff when most of the same games come out on both PC and consoles so you can choose whichever is more practical or cost effective for you. I love PC gaming for being able to tune the performance, mod games and play with any input method I like (I use Steam Controller for everything but 1st person games and strategies) but really appreciate how seamless and easy the experience is on PS5. I've had plenty of debates about this with a friend who plays way more than I do but does it exclusively on consoles and he just values the "fire up the console, get back to gaming" ease. Meanwhile on PC you need to launch some stupid store app, then load the game, then load a savegame before I can start playing. But it's still worth it to me like now I am playing Yakuza 6 at native 4K 60 fps which is not possible on consoles.

Even for console gaming enthusiasts choosing a monitor over a larger, cheaper and better performing TV makes little sense. If you just want something purely for gaming the LG CX 48" is a bargain and you can sit just the right distance away from it for gaming with a controller.

So ASUS probably has had little interest catering to that market, especially when HDMI 2.0 can still do 4K 60 Hz and with this display 4K 120 Hz 8-bit 4:2:0 SDR is also supported so that works just fine for console games that support 120 Hz. It's an acceptable compromise when Nvidia does not offer a G-Sync module with HDMI 2.1.

The worst parts of this monitor are that its response times are not particularly fast, it has an audible fan and the super high cost. That would be ok if it didn't cost so much. Pare down the cost to half by using a less capable mini-LED and I could see myself buying one of these. Or just ditch the mini-LED for shittier local dimming so it makes for a good 4K 144 Hz SDR monitor and you can use the money saved for something that does HDR better, like an LG OLED.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
25,326
I mean my choice in display is 100% influenced by whether it's suitable for both my RTX 3080 + PS5. I don't have a "TV" in the traditional sense where media is consumed, all of that is done at my battlestation.

For this reason my ideal display requires HDMI 2.1 as well as a convenient method for switching inputs (no 6 button/joystick menu presses).

I know tons of other people with similar set ups as mine and this idea that a console has to be tied to a couch/living room is really early 2000's.
Sounds like you need a LG 48 CX/C1.
 
Top