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

Status
Not open for further replies.
TsbitPrik said:
The PA32UCG and PG32UQX are literally the same panel. The off axis contrast enhancement is simply a layer of material inserted between the panel and backlight. It literally probably costs ASUS $20 to add this layer. This was basically an intentional gimping of the PG32UQX.

While the PA32UCG lacks gsync, it does support the absolute latest version of Freesync, which is actually quite good. It also supports HDMI 2.1 VRR which the PG32UQX lacks.

The PA32UCG also has a setting to enable 144hz, although ASUS does not advertise this.
Click to expand...
144Hz can be enabled but I have not been able to get it working with HDR so far. Going to 144Hz forces the panel back to SDR.
 
Hypez said:
Are these similar fald settings? I think the PA32UCG comes with some fancy off axis viewing tech that they advertise for better contrast and color accuracy in the professional scene. It is also supposed to reduce blooming and what not I think. I thought it was a bunch of marketing BS but maybe it's legit.

You would think for 3k they could have included that on the X if the results are that good....then again why would anyone buy the UCG for 4k then.🤦‍♂️
Click to expand...
Yes, the settings are as similar as can be. FALD Mode set to Medium, using HDR_DCI - PQ Clip on PA32UCG and FALD Mode set to 2, using Racing Mode profile on PG32UQX.

I haven't had much time to play around, just some initial testing yesterday. But aside from the off-axis contrast enhancement, the PA32UCG seems to get even brighter and unlike the PG32UQX, can hold that peak brightness fullscreen for longer than two seconds. Also, I don't think the reduction in blooming is purely because of this contract enhancement layer, it seems Asus tuned the FALD algorithm to be a little different. I noticed that in motion, blooming was more visible but when pausing the screen, the brightness (and blooming) seemed to decrease until the blooming was greatly reduced or gone. Not sure if my eyes were deceiving me since it was late but gonna do some more comparisons this weekend. I will say that when using the monitor in a normal environment e.g. with lights on, the blooming in these starfield-esque scenarios wasn't really visible at all on the PA. I'm curious how it is in games. I only tried a little Doom Eternal yesterday and it looked great on the PA32UCG. But then again, it looked great on the PG as well.
 
badmojomk said:
Hmm, some food for thought. Take a look at the following images. The monitor on the left is the PG32UQX. The monitor on the right is the PA32UCG. Asus is clearly tuning these monitors differently even though they are supposed to be based on the same panel. View attachment 395873
Click to expand...


have you tried this with 2 different pc? or you have done mirror? because windows don't support mirror hdr...atleast i can't do it.

anyway i link here my bad phone shot of my PA32UCX...you see a bit bloom and not good contrast on this shot...but in real is really perfect, no bloom at all from frontal view on this scene and superb contrast with deep black.
 

Attachments

  • 20210917_230134.jpg
    20210917_230134.jpg
    278.1 KB · Views: 0
amonakira said:
have you tried this with 2 different pc? or you have done mirror? because windows don't support mirror hdr...atleast i can't do it.

anyway i link here my bad phone shot of my PA32UCX...you see a bit bloom and not good contrast on this shot...but in real is really perfect, no bloom at all from frontal view on this scene and superb contrast with deep black.
Click to expand...
Same PC, I just had two browser windows opened and paused the videos around the same spot. And yes, in real-world use, I was struck by how there was no bloom on the PA compared to the PG. I assumed there'd be some, maybe a little less than the PG, but not this dramatically different as to be functionally no bloom in most scenes. I think there are some downsides to this approach though - will try to find the video and post later.
 
The PA is using a more sophisticated FALD algorithm at the expense of input lag (probably). That's really all there is to this.

Is there a noticeable difference in mouse feel between the two?
 
badmojomk said:
Same PC, I just had two browser windows opened and paused the videos around the same spot. And yes, in real-world use, I was struck by how there was no bloom on the PA compared to the PG. I assumed there'd be some, maybe a little less than the PG, but not this dramatically different as to be functionally no bloom in most scenes. I think there are some downsides to this approach though - will try to find the video and post later.
Click to expand...
ok but you have done extended desktop so? i remember i have done this in past without success...only 1display with hdr active at time worked. well to know this, i ll try this when i ll get the successor of my pa32ucx but for now don't exist yet ^^'

ah, response time of course limited to 60hz is good for my screen, no ghosting/overshoot
 
TsbitPrik said:
Gsync module is helping with fast FALD response time. Basically, the FALD has to adjust to the content on the screen. It can’t do this in real time because you can’t know in real time where the content on screen is going.

This is just my understanding as a software developer.

For example, if I send you a video of me throwing a basketball and tell you to shine a flashlight on the ball as it moves without you seeing the video first, you will have a very hard time completing this task. You won’t know the ball is going to be thrown ahead of me, up in the air, on the ground. Nor will you know where the ball will go once it hits a surface.

Now, once you see the video, you will have a drastically easier time tracking the ball with the flashlight on the second attempt, yes? You will have some idea where the ball is going, how it will behave, etc.

But you still have another problem. What if I really throw that ball hard? What if it is moving really fast? Chances are the LCD will display the ball faster than you can respond and track it with the flashlight.

So, what if I slow the video down by a factor of 10? You’ll have a much better success shining the light on it, yes?

This is the engineering problem with the FALD. It must shine a light on content as it moves. Not just that, however. It also must adjust intensity and do it across way more on screen content than just a ball. Just like you, the FALD can’t move as fast as the LCD pixels nor can it know how they will change in real time.

How can we solve this problem from a software engineering perspective? Basically, the same way we would as a human tasked with the same challenge.

So, a lag is introduced . Basically, the monitor “holds” each frame for a small interval of time. (A few milliseconds). This gives the FALD algorithm a chance to look at the frame and say “ok, I see this area needs to be super bright, this area dark, etc”. Basically, it gives it advanced notice so that it can shine light as needed, and then the image is displayed on top.

This is why, if you used an older FALD like the PG27UQ, you will notice for about a second or two win you first turn it on, the FALD will come on first and will already be mapped to the image you are about to see.

So, this isn’t really a gsync “thing”. All FALD algorithms work this way and have some lag introduced. It simply has to because the laws of physics don’t permit a real time function here, nor will they ever.

Now, the gsync module IS performing these calculations. AMD has their own implementation of an FALD algorithm and it’s own ASIC compute unit for this task.

In my opinion, the AMD implementation is on par with the Nvidia implementation. Therefore, the lag introduced should be about the same. As far as the results of the two algorithms on image quality, I actually believe the AMD freesync algorithm yields better results.
Click to expand...

I was actually talking about the pixel response time (GtG) and not the FALD response time, hence the mentioning of variable overdrive. I imagine the UCG will perform worst than the UQX in GtG measurements due to the omission of the Gsync module but I could be wrong on that. If it performs identically in that area while having better blooming handling, can't wait to see all the UQX owners dumping their monitors for the UCG lol.
 
TsbitPrik said:
Pixel response should be nearly identical on both of these. This is the easy part of the equation. What really introduces lag on these is the FALD algorithm. It’s a massively computationally heavy task, and by its nature requires the addition of latency.

Remember these both use the same panel. The only heavy difference is the firmware, freesync vs gsync, and additional layer on the UCG to mitigate halo/bloom.

Another thing people should remember is the older PA32UCX series had two variants - one with the layer to mitigate halo/bloom and one without. The halo/bloom on the variant without was trash. This layer actually makes a huge difference.
Click to expand...

Same panel does not always mean same response time performance. LG 32GK850G vs GK650F. Same panel, one has better response time.

1631923101378.png


https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tool...-32gk650f-b/682/893?usage=3623&threshold=0.10
 
Same scene on 32EP950 for comparison. In real life, the lights "pop" WAY more than the photo captured.
 

Attachments

  • tempImagesbQ9BT.gif
    tempImagesbQ9BT.gif
    611.9 KB · Views: 0
TsbitPrik said:
Another thing people should remember is the older PA32UCX series had two variants - one with the layer to mitigate halo/bloom and one without. The halo/bloom on the variant without was trash. This layer actually makes a huge difference.
Click to expand...

i have the pa32ucx and my friend have the p version with offaxis, are almost identical from front view, off-axis is for angle viewing...you see the same halos if you see them from front.
 
amonakira said:
i have the pa32ucx and my friend have the p version with offaxis, are almost identical from front view, off-axis is for angle viewing...you see the same halos if you see them from front.
Click to expand...

Something weird is going on with that situation. I was one of the early adopters of the UCX without the off axis and halo/bloom was awful. I replaced it when the variant with the off axis layer and halo/bloom was improved to PG27UQ level. Remember there is also a third variant that was out as well at one point. Your friend could also have that one.
 
TsbitPrik said:
Something weird is going on with that situation. I was one of the early adopters of the UCX without the off axis and halo/bloom was awful. I replaced it when the variant with the off axis layer and halo/bloom was improved to PG27UQ level. Remember there is also a third variant that was out as well at one point. Your friend could also have that one.
Click to expand...

but my halos/bloom happen only in true critic situation...for example on image above hdr night video in reallife there isn't no halo at all and super contrast with deepest black. in extreme condition is normal otherwise we dont need more zone or dualcell or per pixel tech. :)

ps. asus too advertises the off-axis layer for angle boost contrast and halo reduction, of course from angle...because when you do a design work and customer sit right to side you, him can see like you see from front.

maybe you got the ucx when was early firmware with old menu voices

and there are only 2variant pa32ucx (k=calibration hw) and (p=offaxis)
pa32ucx first version
pa32ucx-k (my version with calibration tool)
pa32ucx-p (offaxis layer)
pa32ucx-pk (offaxis+calibration)

but panel is always the same auo 2.5
 
Last edited:
badmojomk said:
Hmm, some food for thought. Take a look at the following images. The monitor on the left is the PG32UQX. The monitor on the right is the PA32UCG. Asus is clearly tuning these monitors differently even though they are supposed to be based on the same panel. View attachment 395873
Click to expand...
Wow. I'm thinking about getting Acer X27. How is it compared to these? You have any experience ?
 
The mythical miniLED versions of the 27's finally surface after 2 years.

You can find X27's for $700 used so it's not exactly a bad buy.
 
SoCali said:
The mythical miniLED versions of the 27's finally surface after 2 years.

You can find X27's for $700 used so it's not exactly a bad buy.
Click to expand...

They've been available for a while, but only with the Asus PG27UQX. Of course being Asus I'm not sure if anyone was actually able to buy one, but it was announced May 2019. Acer is just really late to the game with their announcement of an updated 512 zone FALD X27.

https://rog.asus.com/articles/gamin...mini-led-monitor-delivers-4k-gaming-at-144hz/
 
MistaSparkul said:
Don't buy an X27, there is a new version coming out called the X27 S with 512 zone FALD, 160Hz, and 2x HDMI 2.1. Seems like a cheaper price too.

https://pcmonitors.info/acer/acer-x27-s-160hz-4k-ips-with-512-zone-mini-led-backlight/
Click to expand...
I can't afford that and also i wouldn't pay that much. I found really good discounted price $625 + tax in my country so that's why i started to consider buying it. 27gn950 is $710 + tax for comparison.
X27 is pretty old monitor now. Does it have any quirks with the HDR ? I've used newer monitors that look quite good in windows hdr. Older ones generally look bad in windows when hdr enabled.
 
Furikosx said:
I can't afford that and also i wouldn't pay that much. I found really good discounted price $625 + tax in my country so that's why i started to consider buying it. 27gn950 is $710 + tax for comparison.
X27 is pretty old monitor now. Does it have any quirks with the HDR ? I've used newer monitors that look quite good in windows hdr. Older ones generally look bad in windows when hdr enabled.
Click to expand...

Oh that's quite a big savings and well worth it then. I personally have not had any major issues with windows HDR.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Oh that's quite a big savings and well worth it then. I personally have not had any major issues with windows HDR.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply. My current monitor is high contrast VA. Is this FALD work good in SDR content as well ? Is image comparable to VA in SDR ? How about the fan ?
 
Furikosx said:
Thanks for the reply. My current monitor is high contrast VA. Is this FALD work good in SDR content as well ? Is image comparable to VA in SDR ? How about the fan ?
Click to expand...

Yes FALD works in SDR and it can beat the best VA monitors in all but challenging checkerboard test patterns. The fan isn't much of an issue unless you have a high ambient room temperature and do long HDR gaming sessions then it might get noisy.
 
badmojomk said:
Hmm, some food for thought. Take a look at the following images. The monitor on the left is the PG32UQX. The monitor on the right is the PA32UCG. Asus is clearly tuning these monitors differently even though they are supposed to be based on the same panel. View attachment 395873
Click to expand...

Just wanted to add that taking pictures of a monitor make the bloom look a lot worse than it really is. My PG32UQX does not look like the picture of the left but instead more like the picture on the right. It's something that's hard to prove unless you are here seeing it from my desk. Still, the PA must have some really good bloom/halo management if it looks like that on the camera. Do you notice any input delay difference between the two?
 
Last edited:
MistaSparkul said:
Yes FALD works in SDR and it can beat the best VA monitors in all but challenging checkerboard test patterns. The fan isn't much of an issue unless you have a high ambient room temperature and do long HDR gaming sessions then it might get noisy.
Click to expand...
Sorry i have another question :) So i have used CHG70 and 27GL850 monitors. CHG70 is hdr600, LG HDR350-400 or something idk. CHG70 had an issue in some games. It didn't properly work. Colors and gamma look off while LG's ''hdr'' worked great in every game except that it's contrast/brightness capabilities horrible. Is X27 have quirks like the CHG70 ? CHG70 just doesn't properly work in some games and in windows. 27GL850 works in every game and in windows.
For example:
 
Furikosx said:
Sorry i have another question :) So i have used CHG70 and 27GL850 monitors. CHG70 is hdr600, LG HDR350-400 or something idk. CHG70 had an issue in some games. It didn't properly work. Colors and gamma look off while LG's ''hdr'' worked great in every game except that it's contrast/brightness capabilities horrible. Is X27 have quirks like the CHG70 ? CHG70 just doesn't properly work in some games and in windows. 27GL850 works in every game and in windows.
For example:
Click to expand...


AC:V has some issues with HDR so maybe it's just game related. If it happens in other games as well then the CHG70 probably does have some issues with HDR but it's also an older monitor than the GL850 so more problems is to be expected. I haven't had anything look off on my X27 that was caused by the monitor itself and not the game.
 
MistaSparkul said:
AC:V has some issues with HDR so maybe it's just game related. If it happens in other games as well then the CHG70 probably does have some issues with HDR but it's also an older monitor than the GL850 so more problems is to be expected. I haven't had anything look off on my X27 that was caused by the monitor itself and not the game.
Click to expand...
Samsung is so incompetent. Look at Neo G9 lol. Newest shit in the market yet have similar problems to CHG70. 27GL850 worked as it should so i hope X27 will work too. CHG70 hit or miss. Some games looks great and normal, some looks just irrelevant which i don't think it's a game issue. I think there are problems how game/windows communicate with the monitor. CHG70 probably have some outdated stuff to make some games look wrong. Samsung not good at software/firmware. Also this monitor came out as ''freesync 2'' back in the day claiming ''lagless hdr'' so i believe there are some differences how this monitor handles it all.
 
RogerL7 said:
Just wanted to add that taking pictures of a monitor make the bloom look a lot worse than it really is. My PG32UQX does not look like the picture of the left but instead more like the picture on the right. It's something that's hard to prove unless you are here seeing it from my desk. Still, the PA must have some really good bloom/halo management if it looks like that on the camera. Do you notice any input delay difference between the two?
Click to expand...
Second that. These is a fair amount but definitely looks 3x worse in the picture. Still impressed with the PA though if both monitors are running HDR.
 
Hubba Bubba said:
Second that. These is a fair amount but definitely looks 3x worse in the picture. Still impressed with the PA though if both monitors are running HDR.
Click to expand...
i remember when i have tried comparison with 2display hdr both 4k with w10 was impossible do hdr on both. then i remember i have tried to google it too confirm this. so i don't think was both hdr with 1pc
 
amonakira said:
i remember when i have tried comparison with 2display hdr both 4k with w10 was impossible do hdr on both. then i remember i have tried to google it too confirm this. so i don't think was both hdr with 1pc
Click to expand...
Agreed, HDR on two monitors is not supported on Windows 10 at least.
 
badmojomk said:
Hmm, some food for thought. Take a look at the following images. The monitor on the left is the PG32UQX. The monitor on the right is the PA32UCG. Asus is clearly tuning these monitors differently even though they are supposed to be based on the same panel. View attachment 395873
Click to expand...
This is what my PG32UQX looks like and actually quite a bit better in person (I would say about 20% better)
 

Attachments

  • IMG20210925230931.jpg
    IMG20210925230931.jpg
    265.6 KB · Views: 1
Hubba Bubba said:
This is what my PG32UQX looks like and actually quite a bit better in person (I would say about 20% better)
Click to expand...
again i can confirm on this scene 0:04sec on my pa32ucx in hdr i see 0 halos and nice contrast in real and in frontview...always in this video if i go ahead there are scenes with halos of course.
 
Hubba Bubba said:
This is what my PG32UQX looks like and actually quite a bit better in person (I would say about 20% better)
Click to expand...

This scene looks drastically better on the older PG27UQ with far less zones and being the first real FALD gaming monitor. How have they regressed this severely while at the same time adding substantially more zones?

Obviously, this scene is pixel perfect on my 32EP950. (OLED gaming monitors can't get here soon enough)

Again, I think the only explanation is that ASUS intentionally is gimping their FALD gaming monitors now so as to be able to continue to charge insane price premiums for their FALD ProArt series.

This isn't really a crazy thing to say. Creative Labs used to be notorious for intentionally gimping their sound cards and got caught red handed when simple driver tweaks enabled the same features on their budget cards that their premium cards costing 10X more had. Same for Nvidia, Intel, and AMD who also have historical gimping history.
 
Are they really worse than older ones ? 3x more zones but only 40% more area. Acer X27 really superb. Fald is impressive and far better than expected. How they can mess this. Someone should compare side by side
 
Furikosx said:
Are they really worse than older ones ? 3x more zones but only 40% more area. Acer X27 really superb. Fald is impressive and far better than expected. How they can mess this. Someone should compare side by side
Click to expand...

There are a couple problems here, which is why I think ASUS is getting away with this.

The PG27UQ and X27 were pretty niche when they came out. They were $2000 (which was basically unheard of for a consumer monitor to be priced at at the time), most gamers had NOTHING that came close to being able to push 4K 144hz at the time, and HDR gaming for PC was still basically unheard of. Because of this, these two monitors didn't have anything close to widespread uptake.

Secondly, they were both discontinued pretty quickly after release. On top of that, only a handful of retailers carried them.

Third, while they were AMAZING monitors (I still consider them to be the among the best ever produced), they were not built to last. A huge number of them were defective to some degree new out the box. (Technically, the PG27UQ basically had a mini-recall after the first batch shipped because of firmware that wasn't ready at the time it shipped.). Mine had a weird power issue (sometimes would not power on) and the buttons basically didn't work on top of a few stuck pixels. They got HOT and the cooling solution was half assed. The fans were cheap and loud and didn't get the job done. The monitors were basically doomed to fail within 1-3 years time. Mine literally died 100% a few days ago, and it was on its last legs for months prior to that.

So, for these reasons, I think doing side by side comparisons is going to be pretty hard. There just aren't that many PG27UQ and X27 monitors left in the wild, and the ones that remain probably aren't in good shape at this point.
 
TsbitPrik said:
There are a couple problems here, which is why I think ASUS is getting away with this.

The PG27UQ and X27 were pretty niche when they came out. They were $2000 (which was basically unheard of for a consumer monitor to be priced at at the time), most gamers had NOTHING that came close to being able to push 4K 144hz at the time, and HDR gaming for PC was still basically unheard of. Because of this, these two monitors didn't have anything close to widespread uptake.

Secondly, they were both discontinued pretty quickly after release. On top of that, only a handful of retailers carried them.

Third, while they were AMAZING monitors (I still consider them to be the among the best ever produced), they were not built to last. A huge number of them were defective to some degree new out the box. (Technically, the PG27UQ basically had a mini-recall after the first batch shipped because of firmware that wasn't ready at the time it shipped.). Mine had a weird power issue (sometimes would not power on) and the buttons basically didn't work on top of a few stuck pixels. They got HOT and the cooling solution was half assed. The fans were cheap and loud and didn't get the job done. The monitors were basically doomed to fail within 1-3 years time. Mine literally died 100% a few days ago, and it was on its last legs for months prior to that.

So, for these reasons, I think doing side by side comparisons is going to be pretty hard. There just aren't that many PG27UQ and X27 monitors left in the wild, and the ones that remain probably aren't in good shape at this point.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'll have no clue what to replace my PG27UQ with if/when it dies... :( The picture quality and HDR is amazing.
 
TsbitPrik said:
There are a couple problems here, which is why I think ASUS is getting away with this.

The PG27UQ and X27 were pretty niche when they came out. They were $2000 (which was basically unheard of for a consumer monitor to be priced at at the time), most gamers had NOTHING that came close to being able to push 4K 144hz at the time, and HDR gaming for PC was still basically unheard of. Because of this, these two monitors didn't have anything close to widespread uptake.

Secondly, they were both discontinued pretty quickly after release. On top of that, only a handful of retailers carried them.

Third, while they were AMAZING monitors (I still consider them to be the among the best ever produced), they were not built to last. A huge number of them were defective to some degree new out the box. (Technically, the PG27UQ basically had a mini-recall after the first batch shipped because of firmware that wasn't ready at the time it shipped.). Mine had a weird power issue (sometimes would not power on) and the buttons basically didn't work on top of a few stuck pixels. They got HOT and the cooling solution was half assed. The fans were cheap and loud and didn't get the job done. The monitors were basically doomed to fail within 1-3 years time. Mine literally died 100% a few days ago, and it was on its last legs for months prior to that.

So, for these reasons, I think doing side by side comparisons is going to be pretty hard. There just aren't that many PG27UQ and X27 monitors left in the wild, and the ones that remain probably aren't in good shape at this point.
Click to expand...
Honestly, this is kinda of a weird thing to say without any evidence. I had a PG27 before my 32UQX and it was in perfect condition. I had a later revision, but it was only 1 year after launch. Never ran into any weird issues with powering it on or off, sleep mode, or weird fan noise. I sold it and the person who bought it was surprised at the image quality and how quiet it was after hearing all the complaints online. Obviously it is a very niche monitor so the overall sales will be lower, but considering how few are actually listed for sale, I would imagine that many people are just holding on to them because there is nothing else that comes close to the specs at 27inch.
 
TsbitPrik said:
There are a couple problems here, which is why I think ASUS is getting away with this.

The PG27UQ and X27 were pretty niche when they came out. They were $2000 (which was basically unheard of for a consumer monitor to be priced at at the time), most gamers had NOTHING that came close to being able to push 4K 144hz at the time, and HDR gaming for PC was still basically unheard of. Because of this, these two monitors didn't have anything close to widespread uptake.

Secondly, they were both discontinued pretty quickly after release. On top of that, only a handful of retailers carried them.

Third, while they were AMAZING monitors (I still consider them to be the among the best ever produced), they were not built to last. A huge number of them were defective to some degree new out the box. (Technically, the PG27UQ basically had a mini-recall after the first batch shipped because of firmware that wasn't ready at the time it shipped.). Mine had a weird power issue (sometimes would not power on) and the buttons basically didn't work on top of a few stuck pixels. They got HOT and the cooling solution was half assed. The fans were cheap and loud and didn't get the job done. The monitors were basically doomed to fail within 1-3 years time. Mine literally died 100% a few days ago, and it was on its last legs for months prior to that.

So, for these reasons, I think doing side by side comparisons is going to be pretty hard. There just aren't that many PG27UQ and X27 monitors left in the wild, and the ones that remain probably aren't in good shape at this point.
Click to expand...
I have one without a problem. Gsync module temp is around 63C and fan speed is around 1500rpm. It's quiet. It peaks 1300 nits. Backlight works great. Only problem i have is the ridiculous joystick. It's really bad, worst i've seen. I also would like to have better srgb mode. Mine clamps the gamut a lot. Reds look like orange. I use native gamut and calibration profile for chrome. I hope windows 11 will have better color management so i can use icc for more apps.
It's really good product. I think qc and reliability issues ruined it at it's price point. Though mine is Acer X27 which i heard better than Asus PG27UQ especially when it comes to fan.


Can someone share how service menu looks on PG32UQX please ? Also what are you guys using for HDR ? Nvidia api (kicking HDR in windows SDR mode) or Windows OS api (windows hdr enabled) ? These two are different.
 
TsbitPrik said:
This scene looks drastically better on the older PG27UQ with far less zones and being the first real FALD gaming monitor. How have they regressed this severely while at the same time adding substantially more zones?

Obviously, this scene is pixel perfect on my 32EP950. (OLED gaming monitors can't get here soon enough)

Again, I think the only explanation is that ASUS intentionally is gimping their FALD gaming monitors now so as to be able to continue to charge insane price premiums for their FALD ProArt series.

This isn't really a crazy thing to say. Creative Labs used to be notorious for intentionally gimping their sound cards and got caught red handed when simple driver tweaks enabled the same features on their budget cards that their premium cards costing 10X more had. Same for Nvidia, Intel, and AMD who also have historical gimping history.
Click to expand...

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 big in person.
 

Attachments

  • PG27UQ.JPG
    PG27UQ.JPG
    469.4 KB · Views: 0
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 big in person.
Click to expand...

Ok, and here is the same scene on the 32EP950. Where are the halos on the photo?
 

Attachments

  • 503622_tempImagesbQ9BT.gif
    503622_tempImagesbQ9BT.gif
    611.9 KB · Views: 0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top