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

improwise said:
Yes, max brightness was enabled but still.

After having looked at some recent reviews, I am actually leaning now towards the Cooler Master GP27U instead, seems to be a faster display (a bit) and also the smaller size should make text crisper and local dimming zones a bit smaller. Have an OLED G9 on the way as well as two 42" C2s from before so I guess it will be kind of a showdown if I get another LCD as well :)

If I didn't game the PG32UQX would be nice but the slow panel rules it out for me and would not consider getting it today in the same way I wouldn't buy the X27 today either (regardless of price). If you mostly play slow paced HDR games it could perhaps be an alternative though but don't think it is still being sold.
Click to expand...
Be aware that the GP27U does not have a so called low glow panel like the X32 FP, XG321UG and PG32UQX. So halo's will be more obvious especially from an angle. See Rtings, quoted here: ''They both use 576 dimming zones, and each have a decent local dimming feature, but the Acer has less blooming, especially when viewed from the sides.''
 
DegraderS said:
Be aware that the GP27U does not have a so called low glow panel like the X32 FP, XG321UG and PG32UQX. So halo's will be more obvious especially from an angle. See Rtings, quoted here: ''They both use 576 dimming zones, and each have a decent local dimming feature, but the Acer has less blooming, especially when viewed from the sides.''
Click to expand...
Are you misunderstanding something?

Halo being more obvious from an angel is due to the lacking of ATW.

And the only "low glow panel" you said is Sony M9 or PG27UQ or X329UCG, not on X32 FP, XG321UG or PG32UQX or PA32UCG.

Other miniLEDs monitors are all dialed to have deep 0-nits black.
 
DegraderS said:
Be aware that the GP27U does not have a so called low glow panel like the X32 FP, XG321UG and PG32UQX. So halo's will be more obvious especially from an angle. See Rtings, quoted here: ''They both use 576 dimming zones, and each have a decent local dimming feature, but the Acer has less blooming, especially when viewed from the sides.''
Click to expand...
Yes, I noticed that, but how do we know the difference isn't just because the X32 is less bright? I recall it seemed to favor suppressing blooming/haloing at the expense of brightness. There seems to be some kind of "warping" though at the edges as I understand it, but note clear on exactly what it means as I have not seen it myself.
 
improwise said:
Yes, I noticed that, but how do we know the difference isn't just because the X32 is less bright? I recall it seemed to favor suppressing blooming/haloing at the expense of brightness. There seems to be some kind of "warping" though at the edges as I understand it, but note clear on exactly what it means as I have not seen it myself.
Click to expand...
When disabling the local dimming and viewing a black screen in SDR from diagonal angle, then you will see the difference between a low glow panel and a regular panel like the GP27U has.
 
DegraderS said:
When disabling the local dimming and viewing a black screen in SDR from diagonal angle, then you will see the difference between a low glow panel and a regular panel like the GP27U has.
Click to expand...
If that is what it takes to spot the difference it seems kind of pointless. I doubt that any LCD could do acceptable black levels without local dimming. Hopefully there are other differences as well.
 
improwise said:
If that is what it takes to spot the difference it seems kind of pointless. I doubt that any LCD could do acceptable black levels without local dimming. Hopefully there are other differences as well.
Click to expand...
Well, I had to say then you'll see the differences clearly, it is more to detemine easily if you have a low glow panel or not. Here's an example between a low glow panel and a 'normal' one (to be clear both are viewing a completly black screen and ofcourse it is way more expressed due to the camera lens):
PXL_20230321_201447724~2.jpg
PXL_20230321_201415062~2.jpg


This applies also to HDR as halo's are more visible when viewed from an angle. As a low glow panel has less IPS glow the halo's are less obvious.

I think it is possible to distinguish three levels of glow for the miniled monitors.
The best are the expensive PA-series of Asus (e.g. PA32UCG) with their OCO technology, halo's are very well suppressed when viewed from an angle.
Then the low glow panels used in the PG32UQX, XG321UG and X32 FP (while this is a different panel, it is a low glow panel). Halo's are more visible, but not extremely obvious.
And then the regular panels as used in the GP27U where halo's are very obvious from the sides.
 
Last edited:
DegraderS said:
Well, I had to say then you'll see the differences clearly, it is more to detemine easily if you have a low glow panel or not. Here's an example between a low glow panel and a 'normal' one (to be clear both are viewing a completly black screen and ofcourse it is way more expressed due to the camera lens):
View attachment 581042View attachment 581043

This applies also to HDR as halo's are more visible when viewed from an angle. As a low glow panel has less IPS glow the halo's are less obvious.

I think it is possible to distinguish three levels of glow for the miniled monitors.
The best are the expensive PA-series of Asus (e.g. PA32UCG) with their OCO technology, halo's are very well suppressed when viewed from an angle.
Then the low glow panels used in the PG32UQX, XG321UG and X32 FP (while this is a different panel, it is a low glow panel). Halo's are more visible, but not extremely obvious.
And then the regular panels as used in the GP27U where halo's are very obvious from the sides.
Click to expand...
Not sure exactly what you are referring to with "low glow panel"? You say that both monitors are viewing a completely black screen but I hope not unless the black levels are REALLY bad :)

If a panel, or rather it's software, prioritize to minimize blooming/haloing by lowering brightness instead, it would seem reasonable that it also does at the expense of lower brightness. I know Samsung seems to have gone this way the last couple of years, and also Acer in the X32. But then it's more of a different algorithm in software rather than different panel types.
 
improwise said:
Not sure exactly what you are referring to with "low glow panel"? You say that both monitors are viewing a completely black screen but I hope not unless the black levels are REALLY bad :)

If a panel, or rather it's software, prioritize to minimize blooming/haloing by lowering brightness instead, it would seem reasonable that it also does at the expense of lower brightness. I know Samsung seems to have gone this way the last couple of years, and also Acer in the X32. But then it's more of a different algorithm in software rather than different panel types.
Click to expand...
These virtual players start to hallucinate again to talk like how their eyes can see all the black level close to 0nits aka against infinite black contrast?

The upper image of XG321UCG has a black level of 0.02nits overexposured by camera. It's a bit stretched and It's not as deep as PG32UQX of 0.0019nits but human eyes can hardly tell the difference between 0.02nits vs 0.0019ntis vs 0nits, especially 0.0019nits vs 0nits.

Open the HDR image on whatever your infinite OLED to see if you can see the difference easily. Most OLED TVs cannot even display them correctly as they usually have fullfield crashed black instead.



0 vs 0.0019 vs 0.02 copy.png
 
CrankyTech said:
Did you turn the Max Brightness option "On"? The monitor is unusable without it.
The monitor still requires increasing brightness and contrast in in Nvidia control panel for a bright HDR experience.

I am not exactly blown away by the monitor, but having tried out the Samsung Neo G7 and the LG 32GQ950 there's sadly nothing else that's overall better than X32 FP available in Europe. Asus PG32UQX is $4k if you are lucky to even find one, while the InnoCN screens will never be sold in Europe and they are actually worse in some regards your might find important to you than the X32 FP.
Click to expand...

no need to mess with software correction on my X32FP.
the monitor goes up to 1300 nits on scenes that are capable of.

I am testing both the X32FP and PG32UQX and the PG32UQX will go back for a full refund for this reasons.

1) Fan is not really noisy but clearly audible and I'm pretty sure that it will break over time, like every other monitors with fans inside
2) X32FP is much much faster than PG32UQX, going from X32FP to PG32UQX is like enabling motion blur xD
3) Blooming in more distracting on PG32UQX due to the bright bias even if it has more zones than X32FP
4) IPS Glow is much more pronaunced on PG32UQX

For my tastes the X32FP is the better monitor between the two...

I continue to test both monitors for some days but I think that this is my final decision
 
sblantipodi said:
no need to mess with software correction on my X32FP.
the monitor goes up to 1300 nits on scenes that are capable of.

I am testing both the X32FP and PG32UQX and the PG32UQX will go back for a full refund for this reasons.

1) Fan is not really noisy but clearly audible and I'm pretty sure that it will break over time, like every other monitors with fans inside
2) X32FP is much much faster than PG32UQX, going from X32FP to PG32UQX is like enabling motion blur xD
3) Blooming in more distracting on PG32UQX due to the bright bias even if it has more zones than X32FP
4) IPS Glow is much more pronaunced on PG32UQX

For my tastes the X32FP is the better monitor between the two...

I continue to test both monitors for some days but I think that this is my final decision
Click to expand...
Thanks for the comparison, much appreciated (although not by everyone here I suspect :D ). Didn't know you even could buy the PG32UQX new these days, would assume prices have dropped significantly?

Maybe I should give the X32 a try again, as the PG32UQX while being a bit outdated definately has it's strengths.
 
improwise said:
Thanks for the comparison, much appreciated (although not by everyone here I suspect :D ). Didn't know you even could buy the PG32UQX new these days, would assume prices have dropped significantly?

Maybe I should give the X32 a try again, as the PG32UQX while being a bit outdated definately has it's strengths.
Click to expand...
why try it again? if you didn't liked before you'll not like it this time. firmware has been upgraded but the monitor is the same :)
in any case, I think that there are very few to prefer on PG32UQX :)
 
I feel at this point, we've all waited for so long for a good 32" 4K monitor that we may as well keep waiting lol. I wonder when the PG32UQXR will be out... Unless there is an immediate need, I think waiting for DP 2.1 and the next iteration of monitors is our best bet.
 
Better compare more monitors in the first place.

At first glance X32FP already has less contrast than PG35VQ from 2019. The contrast looks less than half of PG35VQ or even less. It has more color volume and faster response time if that's what you are going for but HDR performance doesn't look as good.

The same cutdown version of PG32UQXR won't be far away. It better has G-sync to optimize the backlight.
 
sblantipodi said:
why try it again? if you didn't liked before you'll not like it this time. firmware has been upgraded but the monitor is the same :)
in any case, I think that there are very few to prefer on PG32UQX :)
Click to expand...

Prices have gone down and firmwares have gone up - my biggest gripes with the X32 was the lack of brightness. But main reason is probably that I am a monitor nerd and a brigtness junkia and have yet to find anything that has really improved on the 42" C2. This includes the OLED G9 based on initial impressions when I got it, sure 240 hz is nice but brightness is really poor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xar
like this
kramnelis said:
Better compare more monitors in the first place.

At first glance X32FP already has less contrast than PG35VQ from 2019. The contrast looks less than half of PG35VQ or even less. It has more color volume and faster response time if that's what you are going for but HDR performance doesn't look as good.

The same cutdown version of PG32UQXR won't be far away. It better has G-sync to optimize the backlight.
Click to expand...

It is actually listed now

https://www.alza.sk/EN/32-asus-rog-swift-pg32uqxr-d7811399.htm

(From r/monitors)
 
improwise said:
It is actually listed now

https://www.alza.sk/EN/32-asus-rog-swift-pg32uqxr-d7811399.htm

(From r/monitors)

Prices have gone down and firmwares have gone up - my biggest gripes with the X32 was the lack of brightness. But main reason is probably that I am a monitor nerd and a brigtness junkia and have yet to find anything that has really improved on the 42" C2. This includes the OLED G9 based on initial impressions when I got it, sure 240 hz is nice but brightness is really poor.
Click to expand...
I've already said ASUS was waiting for G-sync variation but it turns out there is none. If UQXR is sold without G-sync then the backlight won't look anywhere as good. Basically you buy a cutdown X32FP/PG32UQXR with less contrast than 2019 PG35VQ.

If you've compared a bit more, X32FP can have even less contrast in HDR than what PG32UQX has in SDR. What X32FP can have is less response time at lower price with cutdown image quality.

And these C2 OLED TVs or whatever OLED is out of HDR without proper color and brightness in the first place.
 
Just saying there is preorder link of a 9162-zone 4K 144Hz miniLED from Snowman.

Guy has torn apart enough monitors and decided to make a flagship of his own.

But the grain of salt is that it's very much 1 miniLED per zone unlike 4 miniLEDs per zone as well as some open source FPGA backlight solution.
 
kramnelis said:
Better compare more monitors in the first place.

At first glance X32FP already has less contrast than PG35VQ from 2019. The contrast looks less than half of PG35VQ or even less. It has more color volume and faster response time if that's what you are going for but HDR performance doesn't look as good.

The same cutdown version of PG32UQXR won't be far away. It better has G-sync to optimize the backlight.
Click to expand...

you can't compare a VA with an IPS, they have different features and VA is a lower end solution with much more problems than IPS.
if you want the best contast possible, buy an OLED, IPS are meant for other things.
 
sblantipodi said:
you can't compare a VA with an IPS, they have different features and VA is a lower end solution with much more problems than IPS.
if you want the best contast possible, buy an OLED, IPS are meant for other things.
Click to expand...
Why not? You buy both of them to compare then you can see the contrast immediately. I saw the difference long time ago. PG35VQ doesn't even have many problems as X32FP except the scanline issue which is being fixed.

Don't you have PG32UQX? If you want to compare IPS contrast then PG32UQX can have even more contrast in SDR than X32FP in HDR. The backlight of X32FP simply doesn't go as deep.

And OLED doesn't even have correct brightness in the first place. Without brightness, infinite contrast is useless.
 
SoCali said:
Such a tragedy that the PG32UQX thread got locked. There was so much good information being shared in there until the OLED vs LCD warrior came along.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I don't mind debates about technology, as long as they are not personal. Obviously, I am no Moderator here, but you would think there would be a way to lock individuals out of a thread to allow the thread to continue. Seems overkill to just kill a thread when others can continue a productive discussion, but maybe there is not specific way to do that without banning people. That thread had A LOT of useful information from all camps, and I enjoyed keeping up with it, adding to it and reading it. :(
 
sblantipodi said:
you can't compare a VA with an IPS, they have different features and VA is a lower end solution with much more problems than IPS.
if you want the best contast possible, buy an OLED, IPS are meant for other things.
Click to expand...

Not only that, the PG35VQ isn't even the same form factor. It's a 1440p curved ultrawide and not a flat 4K 16:9. Someone who is in the market for a 4K 16:9 isn't going to be looking at 1440p ultrawides. Apples to oranges. Why don't we just start throwing in giant 4K TV's too for comparison while we're at it then :ROFLMAO:
 
MistaSparkul said:
Not only that, the PG35VQ isn't even the same form factor. It's a 1440p curved ultrawide and not a flat 4K 16:9. Someone who is in the market for a 4K 16:9 isn't going to be looking at 1440p ultrawides. Apples to oranges. Why don't we just start throwing in giant 4K TV's too for comparison while we're at it then
Click to expand...
Have you even compared PG35VQ vs X32FP before?

Their screen size is not dramatically different and you can put them side by side.

Even with lower resolution you will easily find out a 3440x1400 or a 1440P image has higher contrast than a 4K image from X32FP.
 
kramnelis said:
Have you even compared PG35VQ vs X32FP before?

Their screen size is not dramatically different and you can put them side by side.

Even with lower resolution you will easily find out a 3440x1400 or a 1440P image has higher contrast than a 4K image from X32FP.
Click to expand...

I don't need to compare a PG35VQ, I already owned a 34" ultrawide monitor before and it's literally nothing more than a 27" 1440p screen with some extra pixels on the side. PPI and clarity is nowhere NEAR a 32" 4K even though the physical screen size is not dramatically different. I would never go back to a measely 1440p screen after being on 4K for so long. I don't care about higher contrast of a VA panel if it means reduced PPI. But if you give me a flat 32" 4K VA panel with FALD and fast response times (That doesn't have shitty QC like Samsung) I would happily take it any day over an IPS.
 
refirb acer x32 FP on walmart and ebay for $900. the innocn 32M2V has more zones but I think worse motion clarity. I'm not sure which one is better, motion clarity is important to me for gaming. problem is video card prices. I think I'll wait for prime day and see if any deals can be had.
 
Gabe3 said:
refirb acer x32 FP on walmart and ebay for $900. the innocn 32M2V has more zones but I think worse motion clarity. I'm not sure which one is better, motion clarity is important to me for gaming. problem is video card prices. I think I'll wait for prime day and see if any deals can be had.
Click to expand...

Then get the Neo G8 because the X32FP's motion clarity is nothing to write home about. Being faster than the 32M2V doesn't take much as that monitor doesn't exactly set the bar high for motion clarity.
 
MistaSparkul said:
I don't need to compare a PG35VQ, I already owned a 34" ultrawide monitor before and it's literally nothing more than a 27" 1440p screen with some extra pixels on the side. PPI and clarity is nowhere NEAR a 32" 4K even though the physical screen size is not dramatically different. I would never go back to a measely 1440p screen after being on 4K for so long. I don't care about higher contrast of a VA panel if it means reduced PPI. But if you give me a flat 32" 4K VA panel with FALD and fast response times (That doesn't have shitty QC like Samsung) I would happily take it any day over an IPS.
Click to expand...
So X32FP suddenly has more contrast than PG35VQ in your head or in your imagination?

Do you even know why I bring up PG35VQ? It has 512 dimming zone similar to 572 zone of X32FP. When it displays 16:9 1440P it has less than 382 zone. But with 2.5x native VA contrast even with 382-zone backlight at 1440P it still has more contrast than X32FP thanks to the lifted backlight.

Have you ignored that I said PG32UQX can have more contrast than X32FP even in SDR if you want to compare the same format?
 
kramnelis said:
So X32FP suddenly has more contrast than PG35VQ in your head or in your imagination?

Do you even know why I bring up PG35VQ? It has 512 dimming zone similar to 572 zone of X32FP. When it displays 16:9 1440P it has less than 382 zone. But with 2.5x native VA contrast even with 382-zone backlight at 1440P it still has more contrast than X32FP thanks to the lifted backlight.

Have you ignored that I said PG32UQX can have more contrast than X32FP even in SDR if you want to compare the same format?
Click to expand...

Dude, learn to read. I said I don't give a SHIT about contrast if the PPI is sacrificed for it. You are the one imagining shit, I didn't say the X32FP has BETTER contrast, no shit it has WORST contrast. And I don't give a shit, also because I don't own the monitor. Plenty happy with my 32M2V.
 
Gabe3 said:
I dont want curved
Click to expand...

The curve on the Neo G8 isn't bothersome at all in my experience. I was concerned about it too, but it didn't turn out to be an issue for me. If anything, I actually like it.

The motion clarity on this monitor is excellent - a great choice for fast games.
 
kramnelis said:
It's you better learn to read and understand what I said and stop imaging shit. I talk about HDR capability.

Do I say some shit implying PG35VQ from AUO is identical to Samsung monitors from CSOT that has much less color volume as well as less brightness?

You put PG35VQ next to X32FP then PG35VQ easily looks better overall with higher contrast, better backlight dimming even with less color volume and less dimming zones and less PPI. The PPI is lower then what? You have 8K monitors available, why don't use that?
Click to expand...

Why does a moron like you with zero reading skills still allowed to post here? For the sake of not letting this thread get locked just like the PG32UQX thread I'll do us all a favor and stop replying to your dumbass.
 
Gabe3 said:
I dont want curved
Click to expand...

Then the X32FP is your best bet but again the motion clarity on that is nothing stellar. Being faster than the 32M2V in pixel response times is like being faster than a corolla in a drag race, doesn't really take much.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Except some retard who likes to whip out a 1440pee VA monitor in a thread about 4K IPS monitors :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
LOL who's actual retard busted out PPI to compare HDR performance in the wrong category?

Don't forget you belong to the guys come from 42" OLED crap with the same PPI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top