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

Status
Not open for further replies.
RogerL7 said:
I have both a PG27UQ and this PG32. In that same scene the PG27 had bigger halos than the PG32. Again you can't judge a monitor from a photo. Not just for FALD's but even edge lit IPS will show more glow on camera than in person.

For those that are curious below is the PG27 that you can compare Hubba's photo above. Ignore the line of lights in the bottom it's reflecting the RGB keyboard. Keep in mind the halos are not that b
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that PG27UQ would have less haloing to be honest because I have seen a lot of people discrediting PG32UQX reviews and saying that haloing is actually worse on the PG32UQX.
 
Hubba Bubba said:
What is the point of comparing OLED with FALD exactly, it's different technologies, we know that OLED beats everything else in this type of scenario.
Click to expand...
I don’t know. You were the one saying you can’t compare photos because they will all have halo while the 32EP950 has none in the photo.

The fact is the PA32UCG has drastically less halo on the picture than the PG32UQX while the 32EP950 has none.
 
TsbitPrik said:
I don’t know. You were the one saying you can’t compare photos because they will all have halo while the 32EP950 has none in the photo.

The fact is the PA32UCG has drastically less halo on the picture than the PG32UQX while the 32EP950 has none.
Click to expand...
What? When did I say that you cannot compare photos?? You must be thinking of another user.

I am not disputing any of the points you made, the PA32UCG clearly looks better than the PG32UQX and, by its very design, the OLED 32EP950 is the best at least for this scenario.
It's just that I found the side by side photo exaggerated the haloing of the PG32UQX based on my experience, this is why I shared a photo of what mine looks like.

The only open point for me is how the person who posted the comparison managed to get HDR working on two monitors off the same PC.
I had a replacement PG32UQX sent to me a few weeks earlier and I was trying to compare side by side HDR on my original PG32UQX unit and the replacement, at which point I discovered that HDR on multiple displays was not supported by Windows.
 
TsbitPrik said:
I don’t know. You were the one saying you can’t compare photos because they will all have halo while the 32EP950 has none in the photo.

The fact is the PA32UCG has drastically less halo on the picture than the PG32UQX while the 32EP950 has none.
Click to expand...
lol, i have no halo on pa32ucx on this scene (0:04sec) but i can't do photo with my phone without halo and of course you can't shot hdr highlight brightness for comparison
 
amonakira said:
lol, i have no halo on pa32ucx on this scene (0:04sec) but i can't do photo with my phone without halo and of course you can't shot hdr highlight brightness for comparison
Click to expand...
How is a photo on the phone of 32EP950 with no halo possible then?
 
TsbitPrik said:
Ok, and here is the same scene on the 32EP950. Where are the halos on the photo?
Click to expand...
What 32EP950 peak ? 400 or something ? If his PG27UQ peak 400nit there, halo's would not be visible to human eye, at least not this much. You can't beat brightness and color volume capability of these miniled monitors. 99% of the time they don't have problem anyway. It just have weakness in some specific scenarios.
 
Hubba Bubba said:
What? When did I say that you cannot compare photos?? You must be thinking of another user.

I am not disputing any of the points you made, the PA32UCG clearly looks better than the PG32UQX and, by its very design, the OLED 32EP950 is the best at least for this scenario.
It's just that I found the side by side photo exaggerated the haloing of the PG32UQX based on my experience, this is why I shared a photo of what mine looks like.

The only open point for me is how the person who posted the comparison managed to get HDR working on two monitors off the same PC.
I had a replacement PG32UQX sent to me a few weeks earlier and I was trying to compare side by side HDR on my original PG32UQX unit and the replacement, at which point I discovered that HDR on multiple displays was not supported by Windows.
Click to expand...
Hey there. It works with 2 different gpu. Displayport connected to each.
Does UQX still look worse than UCG if you sit in the center(no off angle) ? I wonder if it's because they intentionally made it worse or they had to it for input lag and better miniled response in games. Most TV's skrew up miniled in game mode for example. Curious if it's neccessity or just product segmentation.
 
amonakira said:
lol, i have no halo on pa32ucx on this scene (0:04sec) but i can't do photo with my phone without halo and of course you can't shot hdr highlight brightness for comparison
Click to expand...
Yeah i have no halo on my Acer X27 in SDR mode (fald enabled). It looks amazing. In HDR, i believe those little leds in the video are 1000nits+ so FALD goes nuts.
 
4589E42E-885E-4E49-A336-3AB75342566B.jpeg

Here is my picture taken with my iPhone 11 Pro max. I can say that there is very little haloing to the naked eye. The picture makes it look way worse.
 
TsbitPrik said:
Ok, and here is the same scene on the 32EP950. Where are the halos on the photo?
Click to expand...
TsbitPrik said:
I don’t know. You were the one saying you can’t compare photos because they will all have halo while the 32EP950 has none in the photo.

The fact is the PA32UCG has drastically less halo on the picture than the PG32UQX while the 32EP950 has none.
Click to expand...

There's a misunderstanding. I said photos make the haloing worse because I actually have both monitors here. I was replying to this specific comment "This scene looks drastically better on the older PG27UQ with far less zones and being the first real FALD gaming monitor." I assume you don't have the PG32UQX and judging the FALD halo on these photos? That's what I am saying - the halo is not that bad in person and it is definitely better than the PG27 because I have both monitors. I didn't say the PG32 is better looking compare to PA32 or OLED and I'm not sure why the 32EP950 was brought up in the first place when the discussion started when someone was comparing two FALD monitors - in a topic about FALD monitor.
 
Have been busy so haven't been posting but to answer those asking about HDR on multiple monitors, it is possible when you choose the extend option in Display settings. If you are mirroring/duplicating, then yes, Windows 10 only supports HDR on a single monitor. I extended the display and had two Chrome browsers running the YouTube video simultaneously.

And yes, as it has been pointed out many times, haloing is always worse in pictures than in real life. On top of that, I was using option 2 for FALD on the PG32UQX which is the middle setting. Option 3 for FALD does reduce the haloing further in these edge cases but it does have some other downsides as has been mentioned in this thread.

One last thing is at least to my eyes, the PA32UCG pixel response times don't seem slower than on the PG32UQX. The specs do claim a slightly slower response time though. But again, take that with a grain of salt as I'm not really playing eSports titles or focused on super competitive play.
 
32 inch 4k is really nice format. I hope they keep improving on this with glossy panel, off axis contrast thing, more zones, higher brightness and better color gamut/volume along with up to par response times/input lag and maybe true native 10 bit in the future. This is probably the way moving forward. OLED is best but have huge technical obstacles for both HDR and desktop PC monitor usage. Curious how Samsung's QD OLED will turn out.
 
badmojomk said:
Have been busy so haven't been posting but to answer those asking about HDR on multiple monitors, it is possible when you choose the extend option in Display settings. If you are mirroring/duplicating, then yes, Windows 10 only supports HDR on a single monitor. I extended the display and had two Chrome browsers running the YouTube video simultaneously.

And yes, as it has been pointed out many times, haloing is always worse in pictures than in real life. On top of that, I was using option 2 for FALD on the PG32UQX which is the middle setting. Option 3 for FALD does reduce the haloing further in these edge cases but it does have some other downsides as has been mentioned in this thread.

One last thing is at least to my eyes, the PA32UCG pixel response times don't seem slower than on the PG32UQX. The specs do claim a slightly slower response time though. But again, take that with a grain of salt as I'm not really playing eSports titles or focused on super competitive play.
Click to expand...
Thanks for clarifying all that, my picture was taken with Option 3 for FALD.
It's a shame to see how much better ASUS could have made the PG32UQX since there is this dramatic difference in haloing with the PA when it is in fact the same panel.
Even though overall I like the monitor, intentionally crippling its potential pisses me off.

Out of curiosity, what is the purpose of having both the PA32UCG and the PG32UQX (except to annoy other PG32UQX owners 😁 that is)?
 
RogerL7 said:
There's a misunderstanding. I said photos make the haloing worse because I actually have both monitors here. I was replying to this specific comment "This scene looks drastically better on the older PG27UQ with far less zones and being the first real FALD gaming monitor." I assume you don't have the PG32UQX and judging the FALD halo on these photos? That's what I am saying - the halo is not that bad in person and it is definitely better than the PG27 because I have both monitors. I didn't say the PG32 is better looking compare to PA32 or OLED and I'm not sure why the 32EP950 was brought up in the first place when the discussion started when someone was comparing two FALD monitors - in a topic about FALD monitor.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean.

From my own personal use, I have the X27, PG27UQ, and 32EP950 for comparison. I have not yet been able to try the PG32UQX or PA32UCG. My point of posting the 32EP950 screen shot was to demonstrate what zero bloom/halo looks like on a photo so that we have a zero baseline to compare to. It is obvious that there is a linear relationship here - the more halo/bloom we see in a photo compared to other monitors, the worse halo/bloom is likely to be in comparison. Yes, we all know that the halo/bloom doesn't look exactly like that in real life.... but, the more we see in the photo, the worse it is compared to other monitors.

I have seen basically pretty consistent reports both on this forum and in reviews on retailer sites saying that halo/bloom is substantially worse on the PG32UQX compared to the X27/PG27UQ.... basically, no one here (until basically the past 48 hours) has ever disputed those reports.

So, now I am unsure what to believe. If the PG32UQX is indeed noticeably worse with halo/bloom than the X27/PG27UQ, then I do not see how anyone can consider this level of bloom/halo acceptable on a $3000 monitor; especially when it is a REGRESSION from $2000 monitors with LESS zones.

If this is NOT true - and the PG32UQX does NOT have worse bloom/halo than the X27/PG27UQ.... then, what were all the reports posted here on these forums saying exactly the opposite? What were all the screen shots/videos showing horrible/bloom halo? Was that all fake?

I'm not being sarcastic - serious question. What were all the original reports of massive bloom/halo that is way worse than the PG27UQ/X27? What were all the screenshots/videos? Were these trolls or something?
 
I decided to test out my PG32uqx with the Christmas Lights video and I can confirm what many have already said, that in picture the Halos appear and make it look much worse. With my eyes there is barely any Haloing at all. I am using Level 2 for the backlight setting. The Bright light on the right hand side is a lamp reflection.
 

Attachments

  • test.jpg
    test.jpg
    434.4 KB · Views: 0
Skyhopper01 said:
I decided to test out my PG32uqx with the Christmas Lights video and I can confirm what many have already said, that in picture the Halos appear and make it look much worse. With my eyes there is barely any Haloing at all. I am using Level 2 for the backlight setting. The Bright light on the right hand side is a lamp reflection.
Click to expand...

exactly, plus you got hdr highlights sustained fullscreen brightness 1000+nits and this make the real difference on bright hdr scenes, colour volume too bt2020 85%+ is another plus
 
amonakira said:
exactly, plus you got hdr highlights sustained fullscreen brightness 1000+nits and this make the real difference on bright hdr scenes, colour volume too bt2020 85%+ is another plus
Click to expand...
Without a doubt this monitor blows my previous PG27uq out of the water.
 
Skyhopper01 said:
Without a doubt this monitor blows my previous PG27uq out of the water.
Click to expand...
I have both too Skyhopper (gave my pg27uq to my son) and the pg32uqx blows it out of the water in HDR performance. The pixel density being lower is a little to get used to, but the 32 inch size is perfect and a big upgrade from 27 in my opinion.
 
TsbitPrik said:
I see what you mean.

From my own personal use, I have the X27, PG27UQ, and 32EP950 for comparison. I have not yet been able to try the PG32UQX or PA32UCG. My point of posting the 32EP950 screen shot was to demonstrate what zero bloom/halo looks like on a photo so that we have a zero baseline to compare to. It is obvious that there is a linear relationship here - the more halo/bloom we see in a photo compared to other monitors, the worse halo/bloom is likely to be in comparison. Yes, we all know that the halo/bloom doesn't look exactly like that in real life.... but, the more we see in the photo, the worse it is compared to other monitors.

I have seen basically pretty consistent reports both on this forum and in reviews on retailer sites saying that halo/bloom is substantially worse on the PG32UQX compared to the X27/PG27UQ.... basically, no one here (until basically the past 48 hours) has ever disputed those reports.

So, now I am unsure what to believe. If the PG32UQX is indeed noticeably worse with halo/bloom than the X27/PG27UQ, then I do not see how anyone can consider this level of bloom/halo acceptable on a $3000 monitor; especially when it is a REGRESSION from $2000 monitors with LESS zones.

If this is NOT true - and the PG32UQX does NOT have worse bloom/halo than the X27/PG27UQ.... then, what were all the reports posted here on these forums saying exactly the opposite? What were all the screen shots/videos showing horrible/bloom halo? Was that all fake?

I'm not being sarcastic - serious question. What were all the original reports of massive bloom/halo that is way worse than the PG27UQ/X27? What were all the screenshots/videos? Were these trolls or something?
Click to expand...
I have both monitors and I don't feel that the haloing/bloom is worse on the pg32uqx. I am going to have to go back and look at the pg27uq and see to compare. Unfortunately it is with my sons system, so hard to do a side by side comparison, but I don't feel like there is much difference between the two. I think there is a huge difference in desktop use though, as I feel the pg32uqx looks way better in HDR in windows. Maybe its just me but the applications all look way better. And in my opinion, it isn't even close in gaming...the pg32uqx blows the pg27uq out of the water on all fronts.
 
Hubba Bubba said:
Wherefrom did you draw the conclusion that it will be more affordable?
Click to expand...
Viewsonic versions are always the cheaper ones and my local shop has it listed for ~65% the price of the Asus with delivery date of November 1st. Their price may change when the actual sales start but it is already clear that it will cost less.
 
Murzilka said:
Viewsonic versions are always the cheaper ones and my local shop has it listed for ~65% the price of the Asus with delivery date of November 1st. Their price may change when the actual sales start but it is already clear that it will cost less.
Click to expand...
Yikes, it looks like a bunch of us will be getting buyer's remorse if it is so much cheaper for the same features...
 
Skyhopper01 said:
I decided to test out my PG32uqx with the Christmas Lights video and I can confirm what many have already said, that in picture the Halos appear and make it look much worse. With my eyes there is barely any Haloing at all. I am using Level 2 for the backlight setting. The Bright light on the right hand side is a lamp reflection.
Click to expand...
Just to say that the 0:04 and 0:03 scenes have a significant difference in haloing for me (see attached), meaning that I see almost no haloing at 0:03 (especially in person) but one of the worse case scenarios at 0:04.
I agree however that haloing always looks much worse in the pictures than in person.
 

Attachments

  • IMG20210930204052.jpg
    IMG20210930204052.jpg
    442.1 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG20210930203631.jpg
    IMG20210930203631.jpg
    452.8 KB · Views: 0
jake1977 said:
I have both monitors and I don't feel that the haloing/bloom is worse on the pg32uqx. I am going to have to go back and look at the pg27uq and see to compare. Unfortunately it is with my sons system, so hard to do a side by side comparison, but I don't feel like there is much difference between the two. I think there is a huge difference in desktop use though, as I feel the pg32uqx looks way better in HDR in windows. Maybe its just me but the applications all look way better. And in my opinion, it isn't even close in gaming...the pg32uqx blows the pg27uq out of the water on all fronts.
Click to expand...
Can anyone share service menu screenshot of 32UQX ? I have the X27 and tonemapping behaviour is inconsistent. I really like to have input of other users. There are 2 modes this monitor inconsistently use. One is 1015 nits, the other one is 4000 tonemapped. It's random. With 4000 nits tonemapped mode i get 600 actual nits for 1000 nits content. With 1015 nits mode i get accurate results but clipping above 1k nits content. It's annoying. Can anyone confirm they have the same behaviour (you maybe didn't noticed this). You either need to measure it with colorimeter or use in game hdr calibration window.

For example with 1015 nits profile Forza Horizon 4 HDR calibration window disappears at 1300 nits (that's the peak brightness of my unit. i've measured it). With 4000 nits profile it disappear around 3500 nits. Real downside of tonemapping is not that the brightness. It's color loss. You lose the color volume/intensity. It's reserved for tonemapped 4k nits.
 
Last edited:
Hubba Bubba said:
Just to say that the 0:04 and 0:03 scenes have a significant difference in haloing for me (see attached), meaning that I see almost no haloing at 0:03 (especially in person) but one of the worse case scenarios at 0:04.
I agree however that haloing always looks much worse in the pictures than in person.
Click to expand...
I can confirm it looks worse on my X27 even in real life, not just in pictures. Those leds in the picture very bright. If you push 1000 nits, you have 1 nit blacks on ips. That's bad. However in SDR mode i see no blooming with this video. It looks great.
 
Murzilka said:
Viewsonic versions are always the cheaper ones and my local shop has it listed for ~65% the price of the Asus with delivery date of November 1st. Their price may change when the actual sales start but it is already clear that it will cost .
Click to expand...
I really hope this is not the case.
 
Does anyone know how to get into the service menu on this thing? I really want to turn the fan down as it's very distracting to me when doing just daily tasks and not gaming.
 
inabsentia_111 said:
Does anyone know how to get into the service menu on this thing? I really want to turn the fan down as it's very distracting to me when doing just daily tasks and not gaming.
Click to expand...
No Idea. But I have been in front of multiple samples of the 32UQX and not one had a noisy fan, even during Intense HDR sessions. You might have a faulty fan. Are you sure its the monitor?
 
Skyhopper01 said:
No Idea. But I have been in front of multiple samples of the 32UQX and not one had a noisy fan, even during Intense HDR sessions. You might have a faulty fan. Are you sure its the monitor?
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure it's the monitor. Initially, I thought it was my power supply, so I switched it out to a Seasonic Prime Titanium PSU which is zero RPM until 50% load.

My PC is pretty quiet and I can definitely hear the fan going at it over my PC with an AIO and 7 fans. It's also a sort of higher pitched "whirring" sound which isn't pleasant at all.

My PG32UQX is less than 30 days old. It's a very similar sound to what was recorded in the OptimumTech review of it. I do want to enter the service menu to see if I can turn the fan duty cycle down and get this thing to not give me migraines.
 
Probably not a big deal for most but no HDMI 2.1 for Xbox 4k120 on the Viewsonic info page.
 
inabsentia_111 said:
I'm pretty sure it's the monitor. Initially, I thought it was my power supply, so I switched it out to a Seasonic Prime Titanium PSU which is zero RPM until 50% load.

My PC is pretty quiet and I can definitely hear the fan going at it over my PC with an AIO and 7 fans. It's also a sort of higher pitched "whirring" sound which isn't pleasant at all.

My PG32UQX is less than 30 days old. It's a very similar sound to what was recorded in the OptimumTech review of it. I do want to enter the service menu to see if I can turn the fan duty cycle down and get this thing to not give me migraines.
Click to expand...
Interesting, it looks like a few samples might have gotten out with a bad fan.
 
This monitor is capable of doing 1600 1700 nits but rated for hdr1400. Are you guys using 1700 or 1400 when using in game hdr calibration ?
 
sethk said:
Probably not a big deal for most but no HDMI 2.1 for Xbox 4k120 on the Viewsonic info page.
Click to expand...
this panel on viewsonic asus acer version have gsync ultimate and for this reason there isnt hdmi2.1...ucg is vrr with 2.1

ps. 4k 120fps with console is a joke (native rendering can be 1080p at 120fps), i have 3080 and is already hard catch 4k 60 :)
 
So do I (3090) but there are a few nice games like Ori and Touryst, Minecraft etc that take good advantage and look great at 4k120. Not a big deal for most as I said.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top