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

I’m waiting too for the X32S, but if the monitor fails again in various reviews I will go for the 42er OLED from LG (42C2).

But maybe there are other candidates at the CES 2022 in January.
 
Finally got my hands on the PG32UQX from Amazon because I just had to see how this was in comparison to my old PG27UQ (which I consider one of the best monitors ever made). This is my direct comparison with the PG27UQ (used it for 2+ years every day, recently died, however) and my LG 32EP950 OLED.

TLDR: PG32UQX fails in direct comparison to PG27UQ and 32EP950. PG32UQX is packaged up and ready to be dropped off at the UPS Store for return tomorrow. Response time is god awful (you can actually SEE the slow response time.....). Halo/bloom is atrocious in some scenarios and MOST scenarios unless you have a perfect viewing angle at all times. PG32UQX is straight trash in dark content compared to 32EP950. PG32UQX Brightness advantage over the 32EP950 is there, but it is not enough to mitigate the other serious issues.

So my progression of monitors has been PG27UQ (used for 2+ years, recently died) -> 32EP950 (daily use for past 3 months) - > PG32UQX today.

Spent all day with the PG32UQX going between FALD levels 1,2,3. Here are my impressions:

*First thing I noticed instantly when hitting the Windows desktop was the severe lack of crispness in the display over the 32EP950 and my old PG27UQ. How can this be possible when everything is 4K? It appears to me that the PG32UQX has an anti-reflective coating that is largely causing this. The 32EP950 doesn't really have an anti-reflective coating AND is semi-glossy. This makes a HUGE difference in crispness. PG27UQ probably had a better choice in coating, and I am guessing the higher PPI helped out, too.

*If you increase the brightness of the PG32UQX beyond default, you will notice an effect similar to an OLED ABL occasionally. Basically, it's obvious the PG32UQX can't sustain a high full screen brightness for more than a second or so. So, on very bright sustained content, you will notice the nits drop off visibly. The 32EP950 does this (obviously, it is OLED), but the PG27UQ never did (at least not visibly like this). This is very noticeable and really is annoying.

*PG32UQX brightness is superior to the 32EP950 (obviously). However, what surprised me the most is how little the advantage here is. On a side by side comparison, apart from very bright specular highlights in HDR content, the difference is simply NOT that apparent. 32EP950 measures around 750 nits in HDR content. PG32UQX is around double that. I tried side by side comparison on multiple types of content connected to two different computers and a PS5/Xbox One X. The difference just is NOT that pronounced.... this is similar to my experience with the 32EP950 and PG27UQ.

*32EP950 destroys the PG32UQX in dark content. I am talking NO comparison here. You can see details in dark scenes that are literally invisible on the PG32UQX. Bloom/halo is ridiculous when compared to an OLED. I mean, I am talking image destroying trash level difference here.... the difference is HUGE.

*Bloom/halo when compared to the PG27UQ is worse in some scenes.... not quite as bad as I feared based on reports from others here, but it's worse than the PG27UQ.... which is really unacceptable given the massive increase in dimming zones.

*The massive contrast difference of the 32EP950 over the PG32UQX can't be overstated. Even though the FALD drastically improves contrast over a regular IPS panel, it just can't compete with the OLED contrast advantage.

*Fan noise is drastically better than the PG27UQ and is largely non-audible even in a quiet room. 32EP950 has no fan, and is ultra thin and light, however....

*PG32UQX response time is god-awful. I saw comments to this effect and figured they were exaggerated. They aren't. You can literally SEE the slow response time. The last time I remember being able to see slow response time on a high cost panel was on a 15 year old TFT LCD. How do you regress this far behind the PG27UQ?

So, what is my conclusion here? PG32UQX is getting returned tomorrow. Apart from the brightness advantage (which isn't even there most of the time in most content....), the 32EP950 wins hands down in my opinion. If I didn't have the 32EP950 and only had my PG27UQ (assuming it was still working), I would STILL return the PG32UQX in favor of the PG27UQ. The 144hz vs 60hz advantage isn't even there because the god-awful response time completely mitigates it. It's like watching a delicious sirloin steak get slowly covered in fancy feast gravy lovers cat good. You see the delicious steak, but can't stop seeing the nasty cat food covering it up.

****Let me say this.... if you have never used the 32EP950 or PG27UQ (or related FALD like the X27), PG32UQX still DESTROYS ALL OTHER MONITORS in terms of picture quality. If you want very nice HDR image quality, and aren't coming from one of these monitors, PG32UQX is a still a win. Just saying, IMO, PG27UQ and 32EP950 are still the better monitors overall.

As an owner of the PG32UQX, the Acer X27, and have owned every LG OLED TV ever made, plus the Dell OLED monitor; just a few thoughts based off your comments. There is quite a bit of hyperbole here to address, with actual objective results.

The PG32UQX response times are poor compared to modern "fast-IPS". At 7.3ms, they can only keep up with 137 Hz. While this isn't that far from the panels max refresh of 144 Hz, we'd definitely like to see it faster. By the way, TFTCentral tested the PG27UQ at 5.3ms response time. Not exactly screaming either. 5.3 vs 7.3 ms isn't exactly an Earth shattering difference like you elude to and still quite aways from todays fastest IPS.

Not sure what you are referring to with lack of "crispness". The PG32UQX AR film is actually quite good. Literally no one has complained about the AR Film on the PG32UQX that I am aware of, review or personal. You are probably just liking the higher PPI of the PG27UQ.

And no mention of the huge fault of the PG27UQ/X27's; can't even run 144 Hz without lowering chroma. PG32UQX can run Full RGB HDR 12-bit color at 4K/144 Hz.

The PG32UQX doesn't have ABL. Either you had a defective unit or some settings are wrong. Reviewers like TFTCentral got their brightness measurements from sustained outputs.

Just more random thought on the LG 32EP950 OLED as I was considering testing one:

This is the SDR brightness:
1639490852523.png


265 is just simply terrible max brightness. Makes it basically unusable in a room with any amount of windows/decent light.

And on top of that you get PWM flicker at 120 Hz.

You mention the HDR highlights of the LG OLED aren't noticeably worse in use than the PG32UQX:

LG OLED:
1639490995167.png


PG32UQX:
1639491012467.png


The PG32UQX isn't around twice as bright as the LG OLED in HDR, it's actually more like three times in most usage scenarios and almost four times as bright full field. Yes, OLEDs infinite contrast helps but to say these numbers visually appear similar in person is quite silly.

Also, no one is cross-shopping the LG OLED monitor and the PG32UQX for gaming. Due to OLEDs incredibly fast pixels and sample-and-hold use, you can see every individual frame and 60 Hz OLED looks like a slide show in movement.

I too was thinking about returning the PG32UQX after I first got it due to the slow pixels and blooming. Then the little bugger starts to grow on you with that amazing picture quality and HDR capabilities. It's overpriced for what you get, but really nothing gives quite the same cinematic HDR gaming experience.

Next up on the docket for dethroning the PG32UQX on my desk; the forthcoming Samsung 34" OLED, Acer X32S and the LG 42C2 OLED.
 
Last edited:
*PG32UQX brightness is superior to the 32EP950 (obviously). However, what surprised me the most is how little the advantage here is. On a side by side comparison, apart from very bright specular highlights in HDR content, the difference is simply NOT that apparent. 32EP950 measures around 750 nits in HDR content. PG32UQX is around double that. I tried side by side comparison on multiple types of content connected to two different computers and a PS5/Xbox One X. The difference just is NOT that pronounced.... this is similar to my experience with the 32EP950 and PG27UQ.
This probably shouldn't be a big surprise. Your eyes have a roughly logarithmic response not a linear one. To look twice as bright you need roughly ten times the intensity. Log (base 10) of 2, is 0.3, so 2x the nits should only look about 30% brighter. (Before corrections like your retina's response not being exactly the same as a calculators math; or sufficiently large changes in intensity being countered by pupil size changes.) So noticable but meh sounds about right; as with almost everything diminishing returns are a fact of life.
 
Finally got my hands on the PG32UQX from Amazon because I just had to see how this was in comparison to my old PG27UQ (which I consider one of the best monitors ever made). This is my direct comparison with the PG27UQ (used it for 2+ years every day, recently died, however) and my LG 32EP950 OLED.

TLDR: PG32UQX fails in direct comparison to PG27UQ and 32EP950. PG32UQX is packaged up and ready to be dropped off at the UPS Store for return tomorrow. Response time is god awful (you can actually SEE the slow response time.....). Halo/bloom is atrocious in some scenarios and MOST scenarios unless you have a perfect viewing angle at all times. PG32UQX is straight trash in dark content compared to 32EP950. PG32UQX Brightness advantage over the 32EP950 is there, but it is not enough to mitigate the other serious issues.

So my progression of monitors has been PG27UQ (used for 2+ years, recently died) -> 32EP950 (daily use for past 3 months) - > PG32UQX today.

Spent all day with the PG32UQX going between FALD levels 1,2,3. Here are my impressions:

*First thing I noticed instantly when hitting the Windows desktop was the severe lack of crispness in the display over the 32EP950 and my old PG27UQ. How can this be possible when everything is 4K? It appears to me that the PG32UQX has an anti-reflective coating that is largely causing this. The 32EP950 doesn't really have an anti-reflective coating AND is semi-glossy. This makes a HUGE difference in crispness. PG27UQ probably had a better choice in coating, and I am guessing the higher PPI helped out, too.

*If you increase the brightness of the PG32UQX beyond default, you will notice an effect similar to an OLED ABL occasionally. Basically, it's obvious the PG32UQX can't sustain a high full screen brightness for more than a second or so. So, on very bright sustained content, you will notice the nits drop off visibly. The 32EP950 does this (obviously, it is OLED), but the PG27UQ never did (at least not visibly like this). This is very noticeable and really is annoying.

*PG32UQX brightness is superior to the 32EP950 (obviously). However, what surprised me the most is how little the advantage here is. On a side by side comparison, apart from very bright specular highlights in HDR content, the difference is simply NOT that apparent. 32EP950 measures around 750 nits in HDR content. PG32UQX is around double that. I tried side by side comparison on multiple types of content connected to two different computers and a PS5/Xbox One X. The difference just is NOT that pronounced.... this is similar to my experience with the 32EP950 and PG27UQ.

*32EP950 destroys the PG32UQX in dark content. I am talking NO comparison here. You can see details in dark scenes that are literally invisible on the PG32UQX. Bloom/halo is ridiculous when compared to an OLED. I mean, I am talking image destroying trash level difference here.... the difference is HUGE.

*Bloom/halo when compared to the PG27UQ is worse in some scenes.... not quite as bad as I feared based on reports from others here, but it's worse than the PG27UQ.... which is really unacceptable given the massive increase in dimming zones.

*The massive contrast difference of the 32EP950 over the PG32UQX can't be overstated. Even though the FALD drastically improves contrast over a regular IPS panel, it just can't compete with the OLED contrast advantage.

*Fan noise is drastically better than the PG27UQ and is largely non-audible even in a quiet room. 32EP950 has no fan, and is ultra thin and light, however....

*PG32UQX response time is god-awful. I saw comments to this effect and figured they were exaggerated. They aren't. You can literally SEE the slow response time. The last time I remember being able to see slow response time on a high cost panel was on a 15 year old TFT LCD. How do you regress this far behind the PG27UQ?

So, what is my conclusion here? PG32UQX is getting returned tomorrow. Apart from the brightness advantage (which isn't even there most of the time in most content....), the 32EP950 wins hands down in my opinion. If I didn't have the 32EP950 and only had my PG27UQ (assuming it was still working), I would STILL return the PG32UQX in favor of the PG27UQ. The 144hz vs 60hz advantage isn't even there because the god-awful response time completely mitigates it. It's like watching a delicious sirloin steak get slowly covered in fancy feast gravy lovers cat good. You see the delicious steak, but can't stop seeing the nasty cat food covering it up.

****Let me say this.... if you have never used the 32EP950 or PG27UQ (or related FALD like the X27), PG32UQX still DESTROYS ALL OTHER MONITORS in terms of picture quality. If you want very nice HDR image quality, and aren't coming from one of these monitors, PG32UQX is a still a win. Just saying, IMO, PG27UQ and 32EP950 are still the better monitors overall.
I'm curious - what PC/XsX/PS5 games did you try and did you modify the HDR settings in those games?
 
I just found an availability from the monitor this below on the amazon.
Anybody from the forum have a personal experience with this device?
https://www.amazon.de/-/en/MPG321UR...&qid=1639467718&sprefix=Mpg321,aps,270&sr=8-2
If you have it, please advise me, why you like it or hate it!
Now i have a ASUS PG279Q monitor and i planing to change it to a 4K (at least) 144Hz 32 inch monitor, but to be honest im not sure which one would be the best solution for the upgrade since according some reviewer non of the available monitors (m32U, FI32U, PG32UQ...) is good enough, on the other hand i don't want to wait till of the end of ethernity.
I read lot of reviews connected to this topic but i think the personal experience worth more than any of them.
https://www.displayninja.com/msi-mpg321ur-qd-review/
Please help :)!
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
The 32EP950 is 60hz...WTF....that is an automatic disqualifier right there. STOP REWARDING THESE SHITBAG COMPANIES FOR PRODUCING 60hz DISPLAYS. 120hz is SLOW ENOUGH. WTF. STOP IT.....STOP BUYING THIS SLOW TRASH....make them spend the extra two dollars and twelve cents to put in 120hz+ circuitry....seriously....FUCK.


And I DONT WANNA HEAR THAT SHIT...BUT BUT BUT ITS A PROFESSIONAL DISPLAY....OH REALLY...so professionals like feeling wrist arthritis aids from the horrific lack of precision with 60hz mouse movements....uhhhggggg....60hz needs to die already...FUCKING DIE!
 
I'm curious - what PC/XsX/PS5 games did you try and did you modify the HDR settings in those games?

Uncharted 4, Ratchet & Clank, FF 7 Remake PS5, Halo Infinite. Yes, of course did the HDR calibration for the consoles when switching monitors.
 
The 32EP950 is 60hz...WTF....that is an automatic disqualifier right there. STOP REWARDING THESE SHITBAG COMPANIES FOR PRODUCING 60hz DISPLAYS. 120hz is SLOW ENOUGH. WTF. STOP IT.....STOP BUYING THIS SLOW TRASH....make them spend the extra two dollars and twelve cents to put in 120hz+ circuitry....seriously....FUCK.


And I DONT WANNA HEAR THAT SHIT...BUT BUT BUT ITS A PROFESSIONAL DISPLAY....OH REALLY...so professionals like feeling wrist arthritis aids from the horrific lack of precision with 60hz mouse movements....uhhhggggg....60hz needs to die already...FUCKING DIE!
Someone forgot to take his medication today.
 
The 42" oled will kill off any monitor, that is below 144hz refresh rate. Stakes are rising.
 
Finally got my hands on the PG32UQX from Amazon because I just had to see how this was in comparison to my old PG27UQ (which I consider one of the best monitors ever made). This is my direct comparison with the PG27UQ (used it for 2+ years every day, recently died, however) and my LG 32EP950 OLED.

I also have all three: PG32UQX, PG27UQ, and 32EP950.

TLDR: PG32UQX fails in direct comparison to PG27UQ and 32EP950. PG32UQX is packaged up and ready to be dropped off at the UPS Store for return tomorrow. Response time is god awful (you can actually SEE the slow response time.....). Halo/bloom is atrocious in some scenarios and MOST scenarios unless you have a perfect viewing angle at all times. PG32UQX is straight trash in dark content compared to 32EP950. PG32UQX Brightness advantage over the 32EP950 is there, but it is not enough to mitigate the other serious issues.

I find the halos to be acceptable when playing games or watching movies in HDR on the PG32UQX. I don't use the dynamic backlight in SDR.

So my progression of monitors has been PG27UQ (used for 2+ years, recently died) -> 32EP950 (daily use for past 3 months) - > PG32UQX today.

Spent all day with the PG32UQX going between FALD levels 1,2,3. Here are my impressions:

*First thing I noticed instantly when hitting the Windows desktop was the severe lack of crispness in the display over the 32EP950 and my old PG27UQ. How can this be possible when everything is 4K? It appears to me that the PG32UQX has an anti-reflective coating that is largely causing this. The 32EP950 doesn't really have an anti-reflective coating AND is semi-glossy. This makes a HUGE difference in crispness. PG27UQ probably had a better choice in coating, and I am guessing the higher PPI helped out, too.

I don't see a difference in coating between the PG32UQX and the PG27UQ, and the crispness is fine on the PG32UQX. The difference in text quality is due to the lower PPI. It's true that the image looks a bit clearer on the 32EP950 thanks to its semi-glossy coating, but this is only true in a pretty dark room. If you have light in the room, the semi-glossy coating makes things worse not better due to reflections.

*If you increase the brightness of the PG32UQX beyond default, you will notice an effect similar to an OLED ABL occasionally. Basically, it's obvious the PG32UQX can't sustain a high full screen brightness for more than a second or so. So, on very bright sustained content, you will notice the nits drop off visibly. The 32EP950 does this (obviously, it is OLED), but the PG27UQ never did (at least not visibly like this). This is very noticeable and really is annoying.

I haven't seen this on mine.

*PG32UQX brightness is superior to the 32EP950 (obviously). However, what surprised me the most is how little the advantage here is. On a side by side comparison, apart from very bright specular highlights in HDR content, the difference is simply NOT that apparent. 32EP950 measures around 750 nits in HDR content. PG32UQX is around double that. I tried side by side comparison on multiple types of content connected to two different computers and a PS5/Xbox One X. The difference just is NOT that pronounced.... this is similar to my experience with the 32EP950 and PG27UQ.

The difference in brightness is evident to me on high-quality HDR videos on YouTube.

*32EP950 destroys the PG32UQX in dark content. I am talking NO comparison here. You can see details in dark scenes that are literally invisible on the PG32UQX. Bloom/halo is ridiculous when compared to an OLED. I mean, I am talking image destroying trash level difference here.... the difference is HUGE.

This is highly exaggerated. There's a noticeable difference, but it's nowhere near huge.

*Bloom/halo when compared to the PG27UQ is worse in some scenes.... not quite as bad as I feared based on reports from others here, but it's worse than the PG27UQ.... which is really unacceptable given the massive increase in dimming zones.

Overall, I'd say the PG32UQX is better than the PG27UQ in this regard, actually.

*The massive contrast difference of the 32EP950 over the PG32UQX can't be overstated. Even though the FALD drastically improves contrast over a regular IPS panel, it just can't compete with the OLED contrast advantage.

Again, I think you're making too much of this. Yes, the OLED is better on this, but I haven't found this to be something that I notice much if I don't look for it.

*Fan noise is drastically better than the PG27UQ and is largely non-audible even in a quiet room. 32EP950 has no fan, and is ultra thin and light, however....

The fan on my PG32UQX is audible. Not as bad as on my PG27UQ, but definitely noticeable. My computer is silent when it's not under heavy load, so any noise is noticeable on my setup, and the fan noise does annoy me somewhat. I wouldn't want it to be there on my work setup, but I'm ok with it on a gaming setup.

*PG32UQX response time is god-awful. I saw comments to this effect and figured they were exaggerated. They aren't. You can literally SEE the slow response time. The last time I remember being able to see slow response time on a high cost panel was on a 15 year old TFT LCD. How do you regress this far behind the PG27UQ?

Yes, it's a bit slower, but not a meaningful issue for me. I'm fine with gaming on this.

So, what is my conclusion here? PG32UQX is getting returned tomorrow. Apart from the brightness advantage (which isn't even there most of the time in most content....), the 32EP950 wins hands down in my opinion. If I didn't have the 32EP950 and only had my PG27UQ (assuming it was still working), I would STILL return the PG32UQX in favor of the PG27UQ. The 144hz vs 60hz advantage isn't even there because the god-awful response time completely mitigates it. It's like watching a delicious sirloin steak get slowly covered in fancy feast gravy lovers cat good. You see the delicious steak, but can't stop seeing the nasty cat food covering it up.

****Let me say this.... if you have never used the 32EP950 or PG27UQ (or related FALD like the X27), PG32UQX still DESTROYS ALL OTHER MONITORS in terms of picture quality. If you want very nice HDR image quality, and aren't coming from one of these monitors, PG32UQX is a still a win. Just saying, IMO, PG27UQ and 32EP950 are still the better monitors overall.

Your conclusion doesn't correspond to my experience. I'm happy to keep mine - I find it better overall than both the 32EP950 and the PG27UQ.
 
The 42" oled will kill off any monitor, that is below 144hz refresh rate. Stakes are rising.
a 42" screen no matter how perfect in every way will have zero impact on my next purchase because it's far larger than I want for a display. It's just as irrelevant as oleds several times its size.
 
a 42" screen no matter how perfect in every way will have zero impact on my next purchase because it's far larger than I want for a display. It's just as irrelevant as oleds several times its size.
The majority of gamers will find space for the affordable 42".
 
The majority of gamers will find space for the affordable 42".
Full size a 42 puts stuff too far into my peripheral vision to be acceptable, I could maybe run 1440p at 1:1 with giant black bars all around and my side screens placed partially in front of it to keep them usefully close: but that would look ridiculous 🤢, 1440p is a downgrade I'm not interested in making🤮, and seems likely to eventually damage the screen by having other monitors jostled into its display surface. 🤦‍♂️

Shoving it far enough back to be the same angular size as my current display would have it falling off the back of my desk, and/or impacting the wall, and would make my side displays too small. Replacing them isn't an option, 16:9/10 is too narrow in portrait mode, and 26/27" 4:3 panels have never existed.
 
Acer X32S had a name change, now called X32 FP. Might also be a price drop from $1700 to $1300 (based on Chinese prices).
 
Monitors are not just for gamers or gaming.
If all you do is game and watch movies on your monitor then sure, LG's WRGB OLED will be unbeatable.
Well, if it's not for entertainment I don't know why you even here.
 
Acer X32S had a name change, now called X32 FP. Might also be a price drop from $1700 to $1300 (based on Chinese prices).
This rocks. I've been waiting for this monitor to appear for 1.5 years, I think. The 38 S is mind-blowing, but, daym it's expensive.
 
Likely using the same AUO panel as UQ/UQX and MPG321whatever. In other words - don't hold your breath.

But that panel doesn't have FALD while this one does so how can they be the same panel? Unless I'm missing something here about how it works.
 
But that panel doesn't have FALD while this one does so how can they be the same panel? Unless I'm missing something here about how it works.
UQX does have FALD. The panel itself isn't a part of FALD and likely is the same panel but with a FALD component attached to it.
 
UQX does have FALD. The panel itself isn't a part of FALD and likely is the same panel but with a FALD component attached to it.

Ah I thought you were talking bout the UQ none X version that doesn't have FALD. Anyways if it ends up using the same slowass panel then at least it costed $1300 and not $3000 lol.
 
Nice, it does have a KVM! This may actually be a different monitor from the X32S...I thought I read freesync on that one and in the other article there was no mention of a KVM switch. Looks enticing to me...
Im also excited it seems it worth to wait till february. Until now i had a plan to buy a msi mpg321ur-qd but to be honest i wasn't really sure on that.
This Acer monitor looks better to me hopefully comming with faster panel than the PG32UQ(X)
 
Your point being? AHVA is what AUO is calling their IPS panels.
Panel p/n for X32 FP is M320QAN02.8
Panel p/n for PG32UQ is M320QAN02.3
Panel p/n for PG32UQX is M320QAN02.6
Note the similarities.

This right here proves the x32 is going to be a blur machine. The "." after the model number is revision almost ALWAYS only a backlight change. This is going to have the same panel.
 
This right here proves the x32 is going to be a blur machine. The "." after the model number is revision almost ALWAYS only a backlight change. This is going to have the same panel.

I'm still holding my breath because take a look at this:

1639605142179.png


The UQ has the same panel as the UQX right? Well despite being the same panel, the UQ still has noticeably less smearing than the UQX so who knows maybe the Acer will do even better. Maybe.
 
I'm still holding my breath because take a look at this:

View attachment 422314

The UQ has the same panel as the UQX right? Well despite being the same panel, the UQ still has noticeably less smearing than the UQX so who knows maybe the Acer will do even better. Maybe.
Differences in tuning, the PG32UQ is going to be a best case scenario, the UQX worst case. My guess is it will fall in-between the two. The native pixel response of the AUO panels is just abysmal. Innolux needs to pair their panel with a QD FALD backlight, then we would have something.
 
Has anyone here got any experience with the MSI Optix MPG321UR-QD?
It got a positive review from Tom's Hardware and I'm in the market for a better but affordable monitor.
 
Has anyone here got any experience with the MSI Optix MPG321UR-QD?
It got a positive review from Tom's Hardware and I'm in the market for a better but affordable monitor.
Same as PG32UQ. i.e slow response times. Does have very nice colors though. And it's true HDMI 2.1 unlike the Gigabyte monitors.
Mine had pixel inversion artifacting, but that could have been due to bad panel lottery.
 
Back
Top