Asus ROG Swift PG32UQX - 32" 4K, 144Hz, HDR-1400, G-Sync, 1152 Mini-LED zones

Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
17,594
HUB doesn't like it as a gaming monitor.

tldr: great hdr, great color production, terrible pixel response and terrible input lag

 
Man of Honour
Joined
12 Jan 2003
Posts
20,568
Location
UK
tldr: great hdr, great color production, terrible pixel response and terrible input lag

“Tldr”?

I guess you didn’t read (or in this case watch) it either?

At no point does he say that pixel response times are “terrible”. That’s a complete over exaggeration. At worst he says they are moderate and more akin to the last gen of 4K 144Hz IPS panels from a few years ago. They are clearly not “terrible”, just not as fast as they could be or as fast as some modern IPS panels.

and “terrible input lag”?! It has a Gsync module and has basically zero input lag as they all do. And by that I mean the lag you feel in games and motion which is what this measure is all about. Even HUB list 0.1ms as the signal processing lag.
 
Associate
Joined
17 Jan 2007
Posts
146
“Tldr”?

I guess you didn’t read (or in this case watch) it either?

At no point does he say that pixel response times are “terrible”. That’s a complete over exaggeration. At worst he says they are moderate and more akin to the last gen of 4K 144Hz IPS panels from a few years ago. They are clearly not “terrible”, just not as fast as they could be or as fast as some modern IPS panels.

and “terrible input lag”?! It has a Gsync module and has basically zero input lag as they all do. And by that I mean the lag you feel in games and motion which is what this measure is all about. Even HUB list 0.1ms as the signal processing lag.

Yeah, love these 'hot takes'! It's a tiny bit slower refreshing the states of pixels compared to the latest and greatest. With my experience with it, this is completely imperceptible unless you run synthetic tests.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Jun 2008
Posts
11,618
Location
Finland
At no point does he say that pixel response times are “terrible”. That’s a complete over exaggeration. At worst he says they are moderate and more akin to the last gen of 4K 144Hz IPS panels from a few years ago.
For its super hyper high price tag that's still terrible result.
At that price buyer should be getting all around top level product, not something from five years ago!

And what he says is it being clearly step behind modern panels and with response time speed+RTC artefact level measuring value being 50% worser.
https://youtu.be/mwj0GbbQZqU?t=602
(lower value better with transition closer to ideal and without overshoots)

Hope that isn't hinting about performance of AUO's 32" non-FALD panel...
But again non-FALD 2560x1440 panel does very well.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
17,594
Apart from pricing of course, what hurts this monitor is that it's 2 years late. It appears to have issues that IPS panels from 2 years ago had and it's completely devoid of future proof HDMI 2.1 connectivity - scratch that, even current technology from the Xbox and ps5
 
Associate
Joined
12 Dec 2010
Posts
1,837
Location
Washington D.C.
HUB doesn't like it as a gaming monitor.

tldr: great hdr, great color production, terrible pixel response and terrible input lag

Uh what? The input lag was tested at 0.1ms which is about as good as it gets, located at timestamp 11:50 titled "processing lag".

As for the pixel speeds; they are disappointing but "terrible" is not the correct adjective.
 
Soldato
Joined
26 Aug 2004
Posts
5,032
Location
South Wales
HUB doesn't like it as a gaming monitor.

tldr: great hdr, great color production, terrible pixel response and terrible input lag
That's why I've always had fast and good TN displays, no doubt if a gamer moved to this they would probably notice a bit of blur/ghosting during fast movement if they previously had a fast TN panel.

Even the new 4k IPS screens have only now pretty much caught up.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
12 Jan 2003
Posts
20,568
Location
UK
Apart from pricing of course, what hurts this monitor is that it's 2 years late. It appears to have issues that IPS panels from 2 years ago had and it's completely devoid of future proof HDMI 2.1 connectivity - scratch that, even current technology from the Xbox and ps5
Future proof for what though? Apart from console, what do you need HDMI 2.1 for?
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Jun 2008
Posts
11,618
Location
Finland
Future proof for what though? Apart from console, what do you need HDMI 2.1 for?
While it might not be necessary for PC use, once again for that super high price all the bases should be covered.

You wouldn't be satisfied to paying price of Jaguar/Rolls Royce only to notice that half the car is some Morris Mini, or would you?
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Dec 2011
Posts
5,449
Location
Belfast
The more I read about this monitor the more I realise it's overpriced for what you get. True HDR and higher refresh that no GPU can actually drive for £3400 is hardly a step up from existing 4K 32" monitors that can be bought for £500 - £600.

I am not a pure gamer and do a lot of productivity work and was hoping this monitor would deliver but realistically Asus have overpriced this for the arguably pointless improvements over existing much cheaper monitors and much cheaper and better TVs.
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
12 Jan 2003
Posts
20,568
Location
UK
While it might not be necessary for PC use, once again for that super high price all the bases should be covered.

You wouldn't be satisfied to paying price of Jaguar/Rolls Royce only to notice that half the car is some Morris Mini, or would you?
By that same logic why doesn’t a Rolls Royce have four wheel drive off road capabilities? Or a top speed of 200mph? Because they are different target markets. It’s the same thing here. The target market for this screen, PC gamers, don’t need HDMI 2.1.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
17,594
While it might not be necessary for PC use, once again for that super high price all the bases should be covered.

You wouldn't be satisfied to paying price of Jaguar/Rolls Royce only to notice that half the car is some Morris Mini, or would you?


Not to mention that there are other cheaper 32 inch 4K 144hz monitors for sale that DO have HDMI 2.1

The reality is that Hdmi 2.1 didn't exist when this monitor was suppose to launch that's why it's missing
 
Associate
Joined
17 Jan 2007
Posts
146
If HDMI 2.1 is important to you, don't buy it! If you require 360 hz and some panel where every pixel updates G2G in 1ms (and your eyes can even perceive that), don't buy it.

If you want a desktop-format screen with the best colour gamut in a PC gaming panel & the best-rated HDR & 144hz & g-synch, you literally have no other choice. Which is why I bought it.

And, for the comparisons above - look at new EQS previews. Amazing car, with a car infotainment system off of the 90s. No product is ever perfect.
 
Associate
Joined
12 Dec 2010
Posts
1,837
Location
Washington D.C.
Ya people also forget that with the 1,300:1 native contrast ratio, direct FALD LED's (even if FALD is off) prevent virtually all IPS glow and back light bleed. A regular IPS panel cannot come close to the PG32's image quality.
 
Associate
Joined
25 Aug 2020
Posts
49
I bought the Acer x27 for £1500 and regretted it quite quickly. This for double the price is insanity.

The major issues are 1) lack of warranty - I would expect at least 5 years for this but you get 1 year. 2) it's an ips display, you could buy a 65 oled and 55 oled and have change. Madness..
 
Associate
Joined
17 Jan 2007
Posts
146
I bought the Acer x27 for £1500 and regretted it quite quickly. This for double the price is insanity.

The major issues are 1) lack of warranty - I would expect at least 5 years for this but you get 1 year. 2) it's an ips display, you could buy a 65 oled and 55 oled and have change. Madness..

I have a 75" OLED, but it's a tiny bit tricky playing PC games on that...

Make no mistake, it's stupid expensive, no question. They can get away with charging that is there is literally no competition.
 
Back
Top Bottom