The 32 inch 4k IPS 144hz's...(Update - this party is started) (wait for it...)

pootify

n00b
Joined
Aug 11, 2021
Messages
11
Oh man I didn't know that - I didn't test the KVM feature on it. I already boxed it back up - it will be going to the store tomorrow. The OSD buttons are truly terrible - I have no idea why they would still go with that when pretty much every display now has a joystick implementation. Even if everything else was perfect I'd have to really think about sticking with it long term just because of that.

I did grab a rated thunderbolt cable but wasn't able to get 144hz - Windows and Nvidia Control Panel capped out at 100hz for some reason. I didn't spend too much time on it but thinking it's probably more a limitation of my laptop than the display itself. My laptop also has a dedicated GPU and it seems as though 65W isn't enough juice to power it anyway so the single cable solution seems like a moot point for me I guess. If I unplug the power cord from my PC the screen would continually turn off. Plugging the power back in fixed the issue.

So even with the uniformity issues you prefer the FI32U? Or are you still on the hunt for something else.

It's a really a shame that the Acer build quality and KVM function sucks so much, because it's otherwise so close. Good panel and uniformity, 65w charging, 4K/144hz over USBC...
 
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
653
So even with the uniformity issues you prefer the FI32U? Or are you still on the hunt for something else.

It's a really a shame that the Acer build quality and KVM function sucks so much, because it's otherwise so close. Good panel and uniformity, 65w charging, 4K/144hz over USBC...

I returned both of my FI32Us but would take them over the Acer any day if the uniformity had been fine. I pre-ordered a Gigabyte M32U before the listed got taken down so will wait to see what that one brings at this point.
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,838

Oof. Sucks to anyone who was waiting for the PG32UQ. FI32U seems like the better buy to me with such a huge difference in response times which are you going to notice more clearly vs a wider color gamut.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20210914-102833_YouTube.jpg
    Screenshot_20210914-102833_YouTube.jpg
    248.3 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:

T_A

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
484
Not pleased at all with the response times, gonna wait for more reviews but its not looking good.
2021 failed to bring us the goods ('fast' ips , 144hz , (real) hdmi2.1 32")
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,838
Not pleased at all with the response times, gonna wait for more reviews but its not looking good.
2021 failed to bring us the goods ('fast' ips , 144hz , (real) hdmi2.1 32")

For purely PC gaming I think the FI32U is good enough since you would be using DP 1.4 most likely anyways. I really don't agree with HUB when he says the PG32UQ is the better choice over than FI32U because honestly I don't think anyone would be able to notice the wider color gamut of the Asus over the Aorus. Just look at this video from Linus (lol I know) where he compares a "professional" OLED monitor with "mega wide color gamut" against other monitors and couldn't even tell the difference. If there is not much difference in a side by side comparison like that, nobody is going to miss the Asus's wider colors over the Aorus.



You will however, be able to tell the difference in response times between the two.
 

les_garten

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
361

Oof. Sucks to whoever was actually waiting for the PG32UQ.

IMO a poor review.

He should have had all the test Panels show the peers to this monitor. When he harangued it for any parameter relating to HDR, he omitted the GB FI32U, it just freakin' disappeared. He did not have the current Acer 32" 4K 144 hz monitor that just came out. These reviews should be a comparison of 32" 4K monitors 60hz and up. Any 27, 28, 35, 43" monitors or monitors that are 1440P should be brought in separately as an analysis of do you buy now or wait for later. I think comparing 32" 4K 144hz monitors to 27, 43, 49, or 28" anything is confusing and disingenuous. For me at least, 32" is the "Desktop" endpoint. I've been an early adopter of the largest best displays since 1985 when I started with a 13" NEC Multisync. But 32" is the end for me on the Desktop, and I suspect for a lot of others as well. It is the sweetest sweet spot.

I am an early adopter of 32" 4k, a long time ago relatively speaking. I want to hear about how that is developing. I moved from 27" a long time ago and have been waiting for these monitors to get better for some time. I also don't give a Rat's azz about 49" monitors?? Or 27, 28, or 21, or 19 or whatever. These should not have been mudding up the graph matrices, IMO they should have been brought in as separate arguments and separate test panels.

He did come to the same conclusion I was looking for, that this is the number one monitor in this space currently. There is no foreseeable monitor that is on the horizon that I can see to beat it at it's price point.

So I will buy this one the minute it becomes available, unless someone can point out a better monitor to me with these parameters/wish list requirements:

1) 4k, 32", 144Hz
2) HDMI 2.1
3) HDR 600 or better, (these numbers are more interesting to me)
4) around $1000
5) Not really a gamer, at least not enough to be bothered by 10ms times.
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,838
IMO a poor review.

He should have had all the test Panels show the peers to this monitor. When he harangued it for any parameter relating to HDR, he omitted the GB FI32U, it just freakin' disappeared. He did not have the current Acer 32" 4K 144 hz monitor that just came out. These reviews should be a comparison of 32" 4K monitors 60hz and up. Any 27, 28, 35, 43" monitors or monitors that are 1440P should be brought in separately as an analysis of do you buy now or wait for later. I think comparing 32" 4K 144hz monitors to 27, 43, 49, or 28" anything is confusing and disingenuous. For me at least, 32" is the "Desktop" endpoint. I've been an early adopter of the largest best displays since 1985 when I started with a 13" NEC Multisync. But 32" is the end for me on the Desktop, and I suspect for a lot of others as well. It is the sweetest sweet spot.

I am an early adopter of 32" 4k, a long time ago relatively speaking. I want to hear about how that is developing. I moved from 27" a long time ago and have been waiting for these monitors to get better for some time. I also don't give a Rat's azz about 49" monitors?? Or 27, 28, or 21, or 19 or whatever. These should not have been mudding up the graph matrices, IMO they should have been brought in as separate arguments and separate test panels.

He did come to the same conclusion I was looking for, that this is the number one monitor in this space currently. There is no foreseeable monitor that is on the horizon that I can see to beat it at it's price point.

So I will buy this one the minute it becomes available, unless someone can point out a better monitor to me with these parameters/wish list requirements:

1) 4k, 32", 144Hz
2) HDMI 2.1
3) HDR 600 or better, (these numbers are more interesting to me)
4) around $1000
5) Not really a gamer, at least not enough to be bothered by 10ms times.

He's only tested a total of three 32" 4k 144Hz monitors, and one of them is basically in an entirely different price bracket anyways so the only real competitor here is the FI32U, wouldn't be that difficult to just look up the FI32U review seperately for a quick comparison on your own. My guess is the Acer is going to end up being the exact same thing anyways because it's using the same panel but they might fine tune the overdrive better than Asus. Wouldn't it be better to at least wait on a review of that instead of pulling the trigger on the PG32UQ?
 

T_A

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
484
Whats the point of 144hz if the average response time is so high? Tearing is probably irrelevant anyway since this is freesync and gsync compatible. this looks closer in reality to 100\120hz panel
Not terrible but not exactly future proof and for 1000$ , well damn.
 

les_garten

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
361
He's only tested a total of three 32" 4k 144Hz monitors, and one of them is basically in an entirely different price bracket anyways so the only real competitor here is the FI32U, wouldn't be that difficult to just look up the FI32U review seperately for a quick comparison on your own. My guess is the Acer is going to end up being the exact same thing anyways because it's using the same panel but they might fine tune the overdrive better than Asus. Wouldn't it be better to at least wait on a review of that instead of pulling the trigger on the PG32UQ?

FI32U has been reviewed quite a while ago as well as the Acer. Both HDR400 unfortunately.
 

simontomi

n00b
Joined
Sep 15, 2021
Messages
1
I'm hoping the Acer XB323K (non Q) uses a different panel than the PG32UQ. The reported specs all point to this: should be 1ms GtG instead of 1ms MPRT, and 1200:1 contrast instead of 1000:1. But for me personally, the most important feature would be a single variable overdrive mode for VRR gaming, as keeping 144 fps in 4K isn't really possible in all games, with any GPU. I hope Acer gets it right, or I might have to wait even more...
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,838
So the M32U listing on Newegg is now sold out. Really hope you guys know what you got yourselves into if you pre ordered. If you end up not liking it then you are stuck with it or gotta get rid of it by selling.

1631745258963.png
 
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
653
So the M32U listing on Newegg is now sold out. Really hope you guys know what you got yourselves into if you pre ordered. If you end up not liking it then you are stuck with it or gotta get rid of it by selling.

View attachment 395537

Yeah there's no way I would order a display these days with that condition attached. Waaaay too many quality control issues out there. I ordered an M32U from B&H but who knows when (or if) it will ship.
 

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
11,827
The Gigabyte M32U is in-stock at Newgg today. There is a $10 gift card with purchase. It shows 30 days for "no hassle" returns!

https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16824012042
Was just coming here to post this.

Got one $749.99 with GPay 15% code. Will prob buy a couple more once I confirm no weirdness with the first set.

(Install GPay for Android, there's a Newegg promo code in Explore Deals)
 
Last edited:

GoPocky

n00b
Joined
Sep 16, 2021
Messages
4
Was just coming here to post this.

Got one $749.99 out the door with GPay 15% code. Will prob buy a couple more once I confirm no weirdness with the first set.
Did you have to remove the $10 gift card? Newegg won't apply the GPay code with the promo gift card in my cart.
 

GoPocky

n00b
Joined
Sep 16, 2021
Messages
4
Yes, got rid of gift card
I bought one for $830 out the door with GPay code. Delivery date shows 9/20. Hoping this is a good monitor until the Acer XB323K is released. I really want the USB-C PD 65W + HDR600.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DPI
like this

VistaVick2

n00b
Joined
Apr 6, 2021
Messages
14

M32U isn't perfect by any means, but can't deny it's a great value for it's feature set at 799.

 

les_garten

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
361
I bought one for $830 out the door with GPay code. Delivery date shows 9/20. Hoping this is a good monitor until the Acer XB323K is released. I really want the USB-C PD 65W + HDR600.

I'm confused why you don't just wait a few weeks for the ASUS PG32UQ which has what you are looking for I think.
 

ssj3rd

n00b
Joined
Aug 30, 2021
Messages
7
I'm confused why you don't just wait a few weeks for the ASUS PG32UQ which has what you are looking for I think.
Hmm look at the videos some posts above here, did you really miss it?

I mean this thread is not really that long…
 

les_garten

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
361
The ASUS PG32UQ doesn't have the USB-C port. I need this for my Mac.
Ahhh, I see what you are saying. I thought from watching the videos about the Asus PG32UQ that it did that through it's KVM stuff in some matter.
 

les_garten

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
361
Hmm look at the videos some posts above here, did you really miss it?

I mean this thread is not really that long…

The specs look practically identical, so the tests may be identical when someone actually get's their hands on one of these. That was my point. Even the button controls are in the same place and "practically" identical. 4 buttons and a joystick on the bottom right side.
 

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
11,827
Well M32U is a great monitor, mine has no dead pixels or weirdness, a solid buy @ $799 - 15% off. Will definitely be an adjustment going from an LG CX 48", to 32" at 4K and no text scaling. Have to have it 18"-20" from my face. This monitor is also PLENTY bright. I actually had to turn it down and this in a very brightly lit room.

I'm not going to game on the M32U however; that remains the domain of an LG OLED that will be kept off to the side.
 
Last edited:

T_A

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
484

Oof. Sucks to anyone who was waiting for the PG32UQ. FI32U seems like the better buy to me with such a huge difference in response times which are you going to notice more clearly vs a wider color gamut.

After watching this a more times going into the data more deeply , I believe this review was neither fair nor properly done
Sure he had some very valid argument regarding some issues , but this whole test was made using 155hz overclock (which he himself states was not in the official specs) which could easily skew the numbers as the monitor was optimized for 144hz
also he was comparing it to too many irrelevant monitors ( 27" and 32" 2k) , but they are a completely different segment.

From all I've seen so far , I believe this monitor still is the best option until 8-12 months into the future when something else will popup.
I will be buying it as soon as they start to sell it over here.

If only Gigabyte wouldn't have screwed the HDMI 2.1 (I want this for XSX on my desk) I'd probably already gotten the FI32U or the M32U as I'm not too bothered by HDR.
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,838
After watching this a more times going into the data more deeply , I believe this review was neither fair nor properly done
Sure he had some very valid argument regarding some issues , but this whole test was made using 155hz overclock (which he himself states was not in the official specs) which could easily skew the numbers as the monitor was optimized for 144hz
also he was comparing it to too many irrelevant monitors ( 27" and 32" 2k) , but they are a completely different segment.

From all I've seen so far , I believe this monitor still is the best option until 8-12 months into the future when something else will popup.
I will be buying it as soon as they start to sell it over here.

If only Gigabyte wouldn't have screwed the HDMI 2.1 (I want this for XSX on my desk) I'd probably already gotten the FI32U or the M32U as I'm not too bothered by HDR.

Well if you value full bandwidth HDMI 2.1 that much, then sure. If you only use the monitor purely for PC gaming and again aren't bothered by low end HDR specs, the Gigabyte monitors are the better choice. So I would actually say that there is NO best option and that it entirely depends on your use case scenario.
 

Drags

Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2005
Messages
977
If only Gigabyte wouldn't have screwed the HDMI 2.1 (I want this for XSX on my desk) I'd probably already gotten the FI32U or the M32U as I'm not too bothered by HDR.
There shouldn’t be any issue with Xbox on the FI32U as it should support DSC and so that gives you 4k 120Hz 444 chroma anyway. I believe Gigabyte were testing that to be sure and then planned to update their spec page

https://tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/gigabyte-aorus-fi32u#Console-Gaming-and-HDMI-21
 

T_A

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
484
There shouldn’t be any issue with Xbox on the FI32U as it should support DSC and so that gives you 4k 120Hz 444 chroma anyway. I believe Gigabyte were testing that to be sure and then planned to update their spec page

https://tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/gigabyte-aorus-fi32u#Console-Gaming-and-HDMI-21
And amazingly enough , no current review or user here or anywhere that bought that monitor seems to have even tested it on XSX , so its a bit of a leap of faith to shell out 800-1000$ + taxes etc.
 

Drags

Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2005
Messages
977
And amazingly enough , no current review or user here or anywhere that bought that monitor seems to have even tested it on XSX , so its a bit of a leap of faith to shell out 800-1000$ + taxes etc.
Yeah I know. It’s a shame no one has been able to confirm :(
 

JRod0802

n00b
Joined
Aug 19, 2021
Messages
2
Listings for the PG32UQ should begin to go up around the first or maybe second week of October, per ASUS North America (at 25:12):
 

T_A

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
484
TFTCentral review paywall lifted , you can read now

https://tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus-rog-swift-pg32uq



*edit*
So i finished reading the whole review , i can say this review seems much more in depth than HWUB did , and the issue with response times doesn't even seem half as bad as HWUB painted
not sure if they measure better or what not , but the data TFTCentral looks more within the specs of the monitor, its not super-fast but defiantly not as slow as HWUB said it was.



I've attached the G2G test they did , on 144hz with OD level 4 it had average 6.6ms refresh well within the 6.9ms window of 144hz with virtually 0 overshoot
pretty far from the 8.8ms with overshoot HWUB claims , even at the 155Hz they do 6.5 average
Input lag was also virtually non existing and was all pixel response rather then signal processing

there are some downsides to this monitor like no variable overdrive which is a problem but i believe not much an issue considering future hardware will be able to push higher framerate than what we have today

TLDR
This monitor does deliver , I WILL be getting this as soon as I can.


p.s
if HDMI 2.1 and consoles 4k/120@4:4:4 doesn't matter to you the FI32U is better in some areas even if 'hdr400' vs 'hdr600' (which is b.s on both imo)
 

Attachments

  • response_1b.png
    response_1b.png
    120.7 KB · Views: 0
  • response_2b.png
    response_2b.png
    79 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:

les_garten

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
361
TFTCentral review paywall lifted , you can read now

https://tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus-rog-swift-pg32uq



*edit*
So i finished reading the whole review , i can say this review seems much more in depth than HWUB did , and the issue with response times doesn't even seem half as bad as HWUB painted
not sure if they measure better or what not , but the data TFTCentral looks more within the specs of the monitor, its not super-fast but defiantly not as slow as HWUB said it was.



I've attached the G2G test they did , on 144hz with OD level 4 it had average 6.6ms refresh well within the 6.9ms window of 144hz with virtually 0 overshoot
pretty far from the 8.8ms with overshoot HWUB claims , even at the 155Hz they do 6.5 average
Input lag was also virtually non existing and was all pixel response rather then signal processing

there are some downsides to this monitor like no variable overdrive which is a problem but i believe not much an issue considering future hardware will be able to push higher framerate than what we have today

TLDR
This monitor does deliver , I WILL be getting this as soon as I can.


p.s
if HDMI 2.1 and consoles 4k/120@4:4:4 doesn't matter to you the FI32U is better in some areas even if 'hdr400' vs 'hdr600' (which is b.s on both imo)

What areas does the FI32 better the PG32UQ in?

I'm wanting this one as well. Where is the best place to monitor to know when it is released? I only know about this thread.
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,838
TFTCentral review paywall lifted , you can read now

https://tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus-rog-swift-pg32uq



*edit*
So i finished reading the whole review , i can say this review seems much more in depth than HWUB did , and the issue with response times doesn't even seem half as bad as HWUB painted
not sure if they measure better or what not , but the data TFTCentral looks more within the specs of the monitor, its not super-fast but defiantly not as slow as HWUB said it was.



I've attached the G2G test they did , on 144hz with OD level 4 it had average 6.6ms refresh well within the 6.9ms window of 144hz with virtually 0 overshoot
pretty far from the 8.8ms with overshoot HWUB claims , even at the 155Hz they do 6.5 average
Input lag was also virtually non existing and was all pixel response rather then signal processing

there are some downsides to this monitor like no variable overdrive which is a problem but i believe not much an issue considering future hardware will be able to push higher framerate than what we have today

TLDR
This monitor does deliver , I WILL be getting this as soon as I can.


p.s
if HDMI 2.1 and consoles 4k/120@4:4:4 doesn't matter to you the FI32U is better in some areas even if 'hdr400' vs 'hdr600' (which is b.s on both imo)

The reason why HUB got slower results is because they are using level 3 OD which is more useful to people who won't be getting consistently over 100fps. If you can always ensure you will get 100+ fps then level 4 OD is better which is what TFTC uses.
 

T_A

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
484
The reason why HUB got slower results is because they are using level 3 OD which is more useful to people who won't be getting consistently over 100fps. If you can always ensure you will get 100+ fps then level 4 OD is better which is what TFTC uses.

Check again , beside the fact that they didnt even test 144hz on a 144hz monitor (155hz is undocumented oc that is nice to have but shouldnt be used for review) , they tested 155hz with OD lvl4 and got this:

1632419639266.png



vs TFTCentral 155hz

1632419679856.png


and its clearly shows that 144hz is better 'on target' than 155hz at 73% within the window vs. 53%.
1632419816807.png


now, would i buy this for esport CS:GO ? lol no , but come on , it did not deserve the clickbait title 'why so slow?'
 
Top