PG32UQX vs Top 2023 Displays (Subjective Review)

[CHCsky]

Hello everyone, I wanted to provide some feedback about a recent display test that myself and a few others took part in. I have been a PG32UQX owner since launch, it has added an incredible amount of immersion to the gaming expierence for me and without a doubt has been the single biggest upgrade I have ever made since I started PC gaming in the early 2000s. With that said, I decided to try out some of the newer display hardware that has come out over the last year or so in hopes to compare it to my PG32UQX.

I have tested side by side with the PG42UQ, AW3423DWF, and the PG27AQDM and I have come to the conclusion, as well as a few friends and the wifey, that the PG32UQX is still the KING of gaming monitors currently. The HDR contrast and pop, the color accuracy, and the immersion that 32in at 4k offers is unmatched IMO. It really is not even close.

I will say, that the AW3423DWF is an incredible display, and does offer incredible immersion. The brightness and HDR pop still is far below the PG32UQX, but it did look incredible. One area where all of the OLED panels did shine was in dark scenes of course. Zero blooming is a huge plus, especially in space games, i.e. Starfield. Still, when compared to the PG32UQX with its incredible level of brightness, the dark scene contrast advantange really faded away as blasters from a laser cannon, or the bright highlights from a torch in a cave really added an incredible amount of immersion, the HOLY **** factor as I like to call it.

The PG42UQ like the AW3423DWF was also a great display. Having a 42" monitor with incredible motion clartiy on a desk is STUNNING, and really adds a new level of immersion. With that said, the higher brightness and glossy coating really made the AW3423DWF standout to me as my prefered choice between the two.

Out of all of the displays, the PG27AQDM looked the worst. The display shipped with the latest firmware, but the color accuracy was horrific. Oversaturated skin tones, tons of crushing in shadows, really really unusable compared to the other displays, not to mention the HEAVY anti-glare coating used was distracting. One area that was pristine though was the response times. 240hz on an OLED was a game changer, especially when compared to a "slower" monitor like the PG32UQX.

Of course, one of the main criticisms that always pop up about the PG32UQX is GTG transitions and respone times. After thorough testing side by side with each display, and feedback from multiple users, we all came to the conclusion. "The difference is small but noticable if you look hard enough." I will add that on paper, the OLED displays seem MUCH faster based on the respsone time testing from many Tech Media Outlets. In reality, the real world difference is just negligible. Without having the display side by side for like for like testing, we honestly would have never noticed any difference between them when gaming.

One area that was very noticble however was the blooming casued by the FALD tech. Of course with an FALD backlight, blooming is unavoidable but in some scenes it was distracting. Fyling around in a space game like Starfield or No Mans Sky, it was very easy to spot the haloing around stars and in motion looked quite bad compared to the OLED displays. In dark scenes, crosshairs will create a blooming effect, just like a mouse cursor on a dark background. To our surprise though, there were many dark scenes that we tested that looked "better" on the PG32UQX. All of these dark scenes had bright highlights that encompassed a wide area of the display, say 40-60% of the display window. A good example of this would be exiting a cave or a building where the outside area in daylight is taking up most of the display window. This scene really allows the FALD backlight to work its magic, and in combination with the incredible brightness in a 50-100 percent window, the PG32UQX made all of our jaws drop consistently.

Damn, this was a long post. Hopefully it proivded some insightful feedback and can create some discussion around the latest and greatest display tech. I am looking forward to the true successor to the PG32UQX at some point!

 

[Hypez]

So did they fix the weird fald anomalies with a firmware update or does it still inverse halo on some tones, yellow glow, and fireworks pop when small highlights transition scenes?

I owned 2 of these and while there was no question it's "the king" of bright colorful static images it left a lot to be desired in fast paced motion and dark scenes. The uqx is the only monitor I have used that give me headaches and borderline motion sickness with the blur of bright beautiful colors in some games. If you are lucky enough to not be bothered by it I envy you.

 

[MistaSparkul]

The fact that the PG32UQX is still "the king" years later shows just how sad the monitor market is. No way a TV from 2020 would still be the king today. In just a few short years FALD TV's have improved leaps and bounds while FALD monitors...not so much.

 

[Sycraft]

I love mine. I bought it as a compromise display. I have an S95B TV that I game(d) on primarily but I don't want to hog the TV all the time, my GF likes to use it too. Given my HDR obsession I wanted an HDR monitor to game on at my desktop. I thought about the AW3423DWF, there's a post of mine on the forums asking people for opinions, but in the end I was too worried about burn in, and there were a few other things that made me want to try this. What I figured is that hopefully it would work well enough that I'd be happy gaming on it when I needed to, but I'd still primarily game on my TV.

...ya well that has not been the case. I now prefer it to my OLED. Never would have expected that. No it doesn't have the motion clarity and I badly wish it had less blur, but it still is a better experience. For me it seems to come down to three big issues:

1) The brightness. I didn't think I'd appreciate that as much as I do. It's not like the S95B can't do well in that area, but it just can't compete. Probably depends on the game, I've been playing Jedi Survivor mostly, and that game has some very bright, beautiful, open areas and they just look better. Also things like when you get on your ship and bright light is streaming through the cockpit, it really looks bright and powerful on the PG32UQX, it is more sedate on the S95B.

2) Correct color/EOTF tracking. Reviews/measurements show that this thing is bang on the PQ EOTF curve, and the S95B is not. That is probably part of why things seem to look the "right" brightness to me on it more than the TV. I feel like games are often overly dark on my TV, I never feel that way on this monitor. It reminds me of the experience I had with my NEC PA301W back in the day, which was a pro monitor with hardware calibration. Games always looked "right" on it, never too dark or blown out. This one is the same to me. I can't say for sure that's why, but I suspect it is.

3) No black crush/better dark image quality. Surprisingly, I find it does better than the OLED in dark scenes. Might be related to the PQ EOTF tracking, might just be inherent black crush. Whatever the case I find really dark scenes can be too dark and lose detail on the S95B, but I can still see it on the PG32UQX. Like in a dark cave in Survivor Cal's face will be totally black on the TV, but I can still see faint details on the monitor.


Blooming is actually much less of a problem than I thought it would be. Granted, I've not played a title with "small sports of bright on dark" on it like RE: Village or Starfield, I suspect it'll be more visible there, but I expected it to be more of an issue than it is. It seems like usually the bright things in a game cast enough light on the surroundings such that the transition is gradual enough that the backlight can keep up with it. There were a few instances of what I saw that I was like "yep, that's FALD bloom," that when I looked at it later on the TV, no it was just bloom implemented in the game. It isn't completely unnoticeable to be sure, but I was amazed at how little I see in game.

It's not a perfect display, but man is it good. I was a complete OLED fanboy prior to this, but now I think there's some serious merit in MiniLED LCDs. I still think OLED is going to be the long-run winner, but if I were re-buying a TV today I might consider a high-end MiniLED TV.

The fact that the PG32UQX is still "the king" years later shows just how sad the monitor market is. No way a TV from 2020 would still be the king today. In just a few short years FALD TV's have improved leaps and bounds while FALD monitors...not so much.

Well one thing to note is that in many ways, this beat out FALD TVs from then and even today. Dimming zones is one example. You see TVs today with over 1000 zones but only when you go to 75" or above to you get more than this monitor has. The TCL QM850 has 1080 for its 65", 1920 for its 75". The Samsung QN95B has 720. The Sony X95L has 864. These are all current TVs. There's also brightness. The PG32UQX peaks out at about 1700 nits and can sustain 1200 nits full screen. TVs these days do peak out slightly higher, the QM850 hitting 2000, but can't sustain that or do it full screen, it drops to 860 nits. Go back to 2020 and the Vizio P Quantum series, which was one of the brighter TVs out there, capped out at about 1060 nits.

Not saying I wouldn't like to see a better one. I badly would like less blur, and it would be awesome to get something with over 2000 zones for even less blooming. But when you compare it to TVs in many ways it compares favorably to TVs of today, despite being from 2021.

 

[MistaSparkul]

Well one thing to note is that in many ways, this beat out FALD TVs from then and even today. Dimming zones is one example. You see TVs today with over 1000 zones but only when you go to 75" or above to you get more than this monitor has. The TCL QM850 has 1080 for its 65", 1920 for its 75". The Samsung QN95B has 720. The Sony X95L has 864. These are all current TVs. There's also brightness. The PG32UQX peaks out at about 1700 nits and can sustain 1200 nits full screen. TVs these days do peak out slightly higher, the QM850 hitting 2000, but can't sustain that or do it full screen, it drops to 860 nits. Go back to 2020 and the Vizio P Quantum series, which was one of the brighter TVs out there, capped out at about 1060 nits.

Not saying I wouldn't like to see a better one. I badly would like less blur, and it would be awesome to get something with over 2000 zones for even less blooming. But when you compare it to TVs in many ways it compares favorably to TVs of today, despite being from 2021.

You're comparing it to mid range TV's though. Something like a Hisense UXN or the new TCL X955 have over 5000 dimming zones and 4000 nits of brightness which the PG32UQX does not compare favorably against. The PG32UQX is a flagship halo product so I say it makes more sense to compare it to the flagship halo TVs.

 

[Sycraft]

You're comparing it to mid range TV's though. Something like a Hisense UXN or the new TCL X955 have over 5000 dimming zones and 4000 nits of brightness which the PG32UQX does not compare favorably against. The PG32UQX is a flagship halo product so I say it makes more sense to compare it to the flagship halo TVs.

I was comparing it against products that are out and have been reviewed. Near as I can tell the X955 doesn't exist on the retail market yet. It's been shown at trade shows but I can't go buy one, unless you know somewhere special that I don't. I'm sure TVs will continue to get better, I'm not trying to argue they won't or haven't, but when you look at what is on the market right now, it is surprising how well the PG32UQX does.

I mean if I go to Best Buy and look at TVs by price, find a halo product, there's the Bravia XR Z9K. $6k for the 75" version (it's 8k so many monies). Finding any professional reviews on it is hard, but it seems like it is super bright, getting above 2000 nits. Only 800 dimming zones though.

 

[MistaSparkul]

I was comparing it against products that are out and have been reviewed. Near as I can tell the X955 doesn't exist on the retail market yet. It's been shown at trade shows but I can't go buy one, unless you know somewhere special that I don't. I'm sure TVs will continue to get better, I'm not trying to argue they won't or haven't, but when you look at what is on the market right now, it is surprising how well the PG32UQX does.

I mean if I go to Best Buy and look at TVs by price, find a halo product, there's the Bravia XR Z9K. $6k for the 75" version (it's 8k so many monies). Finding any professional reviews on it is hard, but it seems like it is super bright, getting above 2000 nits. Only 800 dimming zones though.

I never said the PG32UQX wasn't a good product. It is, and it's clearly still the best option and that is the whole point I'm trying to make. The fact that it is STILL the best option today and looks it will continue to be the best option for many years to come is pretty depressing. Imagine if the RTX 4090 was the best GPU you could buy for the next 5 years with nothing better coming out until then.

 

[kasakka]

To me the problem with the PG32UQX has always been its cost. Here in Finland it started from nearly 4000 euros, and the lowest price it has been for sale has been 3300 euros, with average still at 3500. That's just way too much money for something that is not "top tier everything." I understand the pricing is more favorable in the US though, but I'm not ordering displays abroad, I need local returns and repairs as an option.

 

[Armenius]

To me the problem with the PG32UQX has always been its cost. Here in Finland it started from nearly 4000 euros, and the lowest price it has been for sale has been 3300 euros, with average still at 3500. That's just way too much money for something that is not "top tier everything." I understand the pricing is more favorable in the US though, but I'm not ordering displays abroad, I need local returns and repairs as an option.

Yeah, it's still USD $2,300 in the US. After the PG27UQ I promised myself that I'd never spend more than $2k on a monitor.

 

[CHCsky]

So did they fix the weird fald anomalies with a firmware update or does it still inverse halo on some tones, yellow glow, and fireworks pop when small highlights transition scenes?

I owned 2 of these and while there was no question it's "the king" of bright colorful static images it left a lot to be desired in fast paced motion and dark scenes. The uqx is the only monitor I have used that give me headaches and borderline motion sickness with the blur of bright beautiful colors in some games. If you are lucky enough to not be bothered by it I envy you.

Not sure what you mean about yellow glow or fireworks pop? Blooming is going to happen on any FALD display, it is unavoidable.

 

[CHCsky]

I love mine. I bought it as a compromise display. I have an S95B TV that I game(d) on primarily but I don't want to hog the TV all the time, my GF likes to use it too. Given my HDR obsession I wanted an HDR monitor to game on at my desktop. I thought about the AW3423DWF, there's a post of mine on the forums asking people for opinions, but in the end I was too worried about burn in, and there were a few other things that made me want to try this. What I figured is that hopefully it would work well enough that I'd be happy gaming on it when I needed to, but I'd still primarily game on my TV.

...ya well that has not been the case. I now prefer it to my OLED. Never would have expected that. No it doesn't have the motion clarity and I badly wish it had less blur, but it still is a better experience. For me it seems to come down to three big issues:

1) The brightness. I didn't think I'd appreciate that as much as I do. It's not like the S95B can't do well in that area, but it just can't compete. Probably depends on the game, I've been playing Jedi Survivor mostly, and that game has some very bright, beautiful, open areas and they just look better. Also things like when you get on your ship and bright light is streaming through the cockpit, it really looks bright and powerful on the PG32UQX, it is more sedate on the S95B.

2) Correct color/EOTF tracking. Reviews/measurements show that this thing is bang on the PQ EOTF curve, and the S95B is not. That is probably part of why things seem to look the "right" brightness to me on it more than the TV. I feel like games are often overly dark on my TV, I never feel that way on this monitor. It reminds me of the experience I had with my NEC PA301W back in the day, which was a pro monitor with hardware calibration. Games always looked "right" on it, never too dark or blown out. This one is the same to me. I can't say for sure that's why, but I suspect it is.

3) No black crush/better dark image quality. Surprisingly, I find it does better than the OLED in dark scenes. Might be related to the PQ EOTF tracking, might just be inherent black crush. Whatever the case I find really dark scenes can be too dark and lose detail on the S95B, but I can still see it on the PG32UQX. Like in a dark cave in Survivor Cal's face will be totally black on the TV, but I can still see faint details on the monitor.


Blooming is actually much less of a problem than I thought it would be. Granted, I've not played a title with "small sports of bright on dark" on it like RE: Village or Starfield, I suspect it'll be more visible there, but I expected it to be more of an issue than it is. It seems like usually the bright things in a game cast enough light on the surroundings such that the transition is gradual enough that the backlight can keep up with it. There were a few instances of what I saw that I was like "yep, that's FALD bloom," that when I looked at it later on the TV, no it was just bloom implemented in the game. It isn't completely unnoticeable to be sure, but I was amazed at how little I see in game.

It's not a perfect display, but man is it good. I was a complete OLED fanboy prior to this, but now I think there's some serious merit in MiniLED LCDs. I still think OLED is going to be the long-run winner, but if I were re-buying a TV today I might consider a high-end MiniLED TV.



Well one thing to note is that in many ways, this beat out FALD TVs from then and even today. Dimming zones is one example. You see TVs today with over 1000 zones but only when you go to 75" or above to you get more than this monitor has. The TCL QM850 has 1080 for its 65", 1920 for its 75". The Samsung QN95B has 720. The Sony X95L has 864. These are all current TVs. There's also brightness. The PG32UQX peaks out at about 1700 nits and can sustain 1200 nits full screen. TVs these days do peak out slightly higher, the QM850 hitting 2000, but can't sustain that or do it full screen, it drops to 860 nits. Go back to 2020 and the Vizio P Quantum series, which was one of the brighter TVs out there, capped out at about 1060 nits.

Not saying I wouldn't like to see a better one. I badly would like less blur, and it would be awesome to get something with over 2000 zones for even less blooming. But when you compare it to TVs in many ways it compares favorably to TVs of today, despite being from 2021.

Good Points about Black Crush. I also agree that in many areas dark level detail does look better on the PG32UQX as most of the OLEDS I tested, ESPECIALLY the PG27aQDM crushed black level detail hard.

 

[CHCsky]

I never said the PG32UQX wasn't a good product. It is, and it's clearly still the best option and that is the whole point I'm trying to make. The fact that it is STILL the best option today and looks it will continue to be the best option for many years to come is pretty depressing. Imagine if the RTX 4090 was the best GPU you could buy for the next 5 years with nothing better coming out until then.

You make a fair point, but to that I wil say that Monitor tech always takes much longer to develop when compared to TVs and computer hardware.

 

[CHCsky]

To me the problem with the PG32UQX has always been its cost. Here in Finland it started from nearly 4000 euros, and the lowest price it has been for sale has been 3300 euros, with average still at 3500. That's just way too much money for something that is not "top tier everything." I understand the pricing is more favorable in the US though, but I'm not ordering displays abroad, I need local returns and repairs as an option.

Yea, that is very expensive. We are pretty luckly to find this display at its current price, and open box / used units can be had around 1800 usd.

 

[MistaSparkul]

You make a fair point, but to that I wil say that Monitor tech always takes much longer to develop when compared to TVs and computer hardware.

That's true. It's just that the PG27UQ came out in 2018 and then just 2 years later the PG32UQX was announced so that's a relatively short time to go from 384 zones to 1152 zones and from 1000 nits to 1400 nits . I was just hoping that within another 3 years or so we would now have another successor that increases the zone count and brightness figures some more by now, along with perhaps much improved response times and maybe even 240Hz. But well here we are with no sign of such monitor coming out any time soon. I would've honestly bought the PG32UQX for $2300 myself but then the InnoCN 32M2V came out for $850 and for that price it's "good enough" to hold me over for now.

 

[Sycraft]

You make a fair point, but to that I wil say that Monitor tech always takes much longer to develop when compared to TVs and computer hardware.

I mean, it depends. I think there is a different focus for some of it. One area that develops much faster is refresh rate. While TVs love to lie about their "motion rate" most cap out at 120Hz actual panels, 144Hz being the most I've ever seen and only recently. Computers monitors have been doing 240Hz or more for some time now. The different markets have different development focuses.

However, part of the issue might just be what people are willing to spend. The amount people will spend on a TV without complaint is vastly more than on a computer monitor. You see people bitch and complain that a $500 computer monitor is "too expensive" all the time, but $500 65" TVs are cheap and fly off the shelves. The PG32UQX is considered a "halo product", which it is to a degree, and is expected to do everything perfect. Yet at $2300 it is cheaper than MANY TVs. The LG G3, Samsung S95C, Sony Bravia XR A75, all more than it and that's just in the 65" category, there are a whole lot more expensive in the 75" and 85" categories.

Well if you are a manufacturer, that matters for making high end products. Pack a lot of new high-end tech in a product, it is going to cost a lot. If TV buyers will happily break out the wallets, but computer users say "nope, too expensive" then the choice of which market to target is easy.

 

[CHCsky]

That's true. It's just that the PG27UQ came out in 2018 and then just 2 years later the PG32UQX was announced so that's a relatively short time to go from 384 zones to 1152 zones and from 1000 nits to 1400 nits . I was just hoping that within another 3 years or so we would now have another successor that increases the zone count and brightness figures some more by now, along with perhaps much improved response times and maybe even 240Hz. But well here we are with no sign of such monitor coming out any time soon. I would've honestly bought the PG32UQX for $2300 myself but then the InnoCN 32M2V came out for $850 and for that price it's "good enough" to hold me over for now.

2 years later it was announced, but it took 3 years in total for release. I would be totally fine with brightness staying where it is at. I couldn't really imagine any more to be honest, haha. Although it would be great to see a large increase in zone count as you mention.

 

[MistaSparkul]

2 years later it was announced, but it took 3 years in total for release. I would be totally fine with brightness staying where it is at. I couldn't really imagine any more to be honest, haha. Although it would be great to see a large increase in zone count as you mention.

What? People have been using the PG32UQX since 2021 if you check the thread. It's now locked though.

 

[Armenius]

What? People have been using the PG32UQX since 2021 if you check the thread. It's now locked though.

It was revealed at CES in 2020 and availability was in the latter half of 2021. 2 years from the release of the PG27UQ to reveal + 1 year to commercial availability = 3 years total.

 

[MistaSparkul]

It was revealed at CES in 2020 and availability was in the latter half of 2021. 2 years from the release of the PG27UQ to reveal + 1 year to commercial availability = 3 years total.

"2 years later it was announced, but it took 3 years in total for release."

It was revealed at CES in 2020 and availability was in the latter half of 2021.

Did not take 3 years to get released lol. Sure it came 3 years after the PG27QU but not 3 years after it's announcement.

 

[CHCsky]

"2 years later it was announced, but it took 3 years in total for release."



Did not take 3 years to get released lol. Sure it came 3 years after the PG27QU but not 3 years after it's announcement.

If you check what I wrote, I said 3 years total. The PG32UQX was avaiable to buyers 3 years after the release of the PG27UQ. Trust me, I followed this release very close as I did buy it on launch day.

 

[MistaSparkul]

If you check what I wrote, I said 3 years total. The PG32UQX was avaiable to buyers 3 years after the release of the PG27UQ. Trust me, I followed this release very close as I did buy it on launch day.

I did check what you wrote and that's actually not what you said originally. Where in your post did you say it was available to buyers 3 years after the release of the PG27UQ? Here's your own quote:

2 years later it was announced, but it took 3 years in total for release. I would be totally fine with brightness staying where it is at. I couldn't really imagine any more to be honest, haha. Although it would be great to see a large increase in zone count as you mention.

The way you word it makes it seem like the PG32UQX came out 3 years after it was announced. Anyway if you want to go by the timeline that PG27UQ owners can upgrade to something better after 3 years (2018-2021) then we should have have something to upgrade to by next year (2021-2024) but will we? Don't think so. Hopefully in yet another 3 years from now we will get something that is a PG32UQX successor but I don't really see that happening. Would love to be wrong of course. In the end your original post stands true regardless, that anyone looking for the best HDR monitor experience just has to plop the cash for a PG32UQX.

 

[SoCali]

If I didn't have the 57" Neo G9 on order the PG32UQX/XG321UG is what I would be using. Still think its the best all arounder for work/gaming/HDR and will probably remain so until the end of 2025. I dunno if I'd want to own one out of warranty though since it has so many points of failure (FALD zones, Gsync module, fan, etc).

I sold mine ahead of the Neo G9 preorder but if the Samsung ends up being horrible I will buy a XG321UG or wait until the 32" OLED's come to market because there really is no decent alternative.

 

[MistaSparkul]

If I didn't have the 57" Neo G9 on order the PG32UQX/XG321UG is what I would be using. Still think its the best all arounder for work/gaming/HDR and will probably remain so until the end of 2025. I dunno if I'd want to own one out of warranty though since it has so many points of failure (FALD zones, Gsync module, fan, etc).

I sold mine ahead of the Neo G9 preorder but if the Samsung ends up being horrible I will buy a XG321UG or wait until the 32" OLED's come to market because there really is no decent alternative.

Who knows maybe CES 2024 will end up surprising us all with some new banger Mini LED options. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Sycraft]

Who knows maybe CES 2024 will end up surprising us all with some new banger Mini LED options. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Maybe, but I'm doubtful just looking at the panel announcements. A new panel has to precede a new display by some time for all the development and testing. AUO has a 2k and 4k zone MiniLED panel on their roadmap, but they are 60Hz only. All their faster ones are 576 zone. Likewise LG has a 2k+ zone panel announced, but only 60Hz. That just leaves BOE. They DO have panels that are both high zone count and high refresh rate listed but it isn't clear if these are real products or pie in the sky stuff (they aren't very good about listing models and such) and thus far their panel quality seems to be not so great on the current products that use their stuff.

I don't know if it is something that panel makers don't think there's a market for, or if it is just really hard to do high zone and fast frame rates.

 

[MistaSparkul]

Maybe, but I'm doubtful just looking at the panel announcements. A new panel has to precede a new display by some time for all the development and testing. AUO has a 2k and 4k zone MiniLED panel on their roadmap, but they are 60Hz only. All their faster ones are 576 zone. Likewise LG has a 2k+ zone panel announced, but only 60Hz. That just leaves BOE. They DO have panels that are both high zone count and high refresh rate listed but it isn't clear if these are real products or pie in the sky stuff (they aren't very good about listing models and such) and thus far their panel quality seems to be not so great on the current products that use their stuff.

I don't know if it is something that panel makers don't think there's a market for, or if it is just really hard to do high zone and fast frame rates.

Yeah the panel roadmap isn't looking all that great in terms of something promising coming out next year. I'm just on copium that's all lol.

 

[CHCsky]

Who knows maybe CES 2024 will end up surprising us all with some new banger Mini LED options. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Def possible, at least an announcement of the products in development. I have a feeling just like the PG32UQX, it would be at least another full year after announcment for a product to be released. We know in 2024 the OLED Flagship is launching by Asus ROG. It would make sense in 2025 for the next HALO flagship to launch after that.

 

[MistaSparkul]

Def possible, at least an announcement of the products in development. I have a feeling just like the PG32UQX, it would be at least another full year after announcment for a product to be released. We know in 2024 the OLED Flagship is launching by Asus ROG. It would make sense in 2025 for the next HALO flagship to launch after that.

I think it's ok to have two flagship models at the same time as long as they aren't really directly competing with each other. One would be QD OLED while the other is FALD so it gives people the option to choose which technology they prefer. But who knows maybe I'm wrong and having two flagships just cannibalizes their sales too.

 

[Sycraft]

I think it's ok to have two flagship models at the same time as long as they aren't really directly competing with each other. One would be QD OLED while the other is FALD so it gives people the option to choose which technology they prefer. But who knows maybe I'm wrong and having two flagships just cannibalizes their sales too.

I think that might be the issue. Only so much money to go around, particularly at the high end. If you are going to sell half as many then the price has to go up, and then you are going to sell even less, etc.

Another issue may just be perception: People seem to think OLED = best and thus highest end. Heck I had that same general perception before getting this thing. I believed that OLED got you the best image and that FALD wasn't as good a tech, you'd only use it as a compromise. I was wrong, but I don't think my perception is unique.

 

[kasakka]

I think that might be the issue. Only so much money to go around, particularly at the high end. If you are going to sell half as many then the price has to go up, and then you are going to sell even less, etc.

Another issue may just be perception: People seem to think OLED = best and thus highest end. Heck I had that same general perception before getting this thing. I believed that OLED got you the best image and that FALD wasn't as good a tech, you'd only use it as a compromise. I was wrong, but I don't think my perception is unique.

OLED has so much going for it:

• Nearly perfect pixel response times
• Excellent viewing angles
• Glossy options (sometimes)
• Per pixel local dimming

But it certainly can't compare to the best mini-LEDs on the market when it comes to HDR, even if the per pixel local dimming allows for some parts of it to do better. FALD's benefits basically end at "no burn in and very high HDR brightness" so it's understandable that it does not get viewed as favorably.

I think if we had more mini-LED displays that perform really well without costing 3000+ euros, it would be more popular. Many of the options available now are oddball Chinese brands or buggy ones from e.g Acer and ASUS. Or just poorly tuned like the Samsung Neo G8 with its grainy AG coating, poor EOTF tracking, unnecessary curve etc.

 

[Sycraft]

OLED has so much going for it:

• Nearly perfect pixel response times
• Excellent viewing angles
• Glossy options (sometimes)
• Per pixel local dimming

That is why, in the long run, I think everything will go that way and it will be the only display tech. It has a lot of inherent advantages. If they can mitigate the burn in, and increase the brightness, which I imagine they'll continue to figure out ways to do, it'll just be the beast way to go in the long run.

But it certainly can't compare to the best mini-LEDs on the market when it comes to HDR, even if the per pixel local dimming allows for some parts of it to do better. FALD's benefits basically end at "no burn in and very high HDR brightness" so it's understandable that it does not get viewed as favorably.

Also for a long time it was the "cheap HDR" technology in TVs. Like you could get an OLED and it was fantastic, but super expensive, or you could get an FALD TV and it didn't have all that many zones, really didn't have any more peak brightness, didn't look nearly as good, but cost less. I think many people still mentally put it in that segment.

I think if we had more mini-LED displays that perform really well without costing 3000+ euros, it would be more popular. Many of the options available now are oddball Chinese brands or buggy ones from e.g Acer and ASUS. Or just poorly tuned like the Samsung Neo G8 with its grainy AG coating, poor EOTF tracking, unnecessary curve etc.

I wonder if part of the problem is that they do have to cost a lot to do well. Like the PG32UQX, part of it is the nicer panel to be sure, but also that thing has some bang-on calibration. I wonder if that is not inherent but requires per-unit tuning and that pushes the price up. If the unit has to spend time having the response of each and every zone measured and tuned to produce a good image that could push the cost up and necessitate them being expensive to be good.

 

[Armenius]

I think that might be the issue. Only so much money to go around, particularly at the high end. If you are going to sell half as many then the price has to go up, and then you are going to sell even less, etc.

Another issue may just be perception: People seem to think OLED = best and thus highest end. Heck I had that same general perception before getting this thing. I believed that OLED got you the best image and that FALD wasn't as good a tech, you'd only use it as a compromise. I was wrong, but I don't think my perception is unique.

Even a good quality IPS panel with a quantum dot filter can't compare to the color quality of an OLED. The only thing IPS FALD has over an OLED is peak brightness with HDR. I think the primary issue with color quality may stem from the fact that all IPS panels I've seen use FRC to achieve 10-bit color, while OLED are true 10-bit.

 

[CHCsky]

Even a good quality IPS panel with a quantum dot filter can't compare to the color quality of an OLED. The only thing IPS FALD has over an OLED is peak brightness with HDR. I think the primary issue with color quality may stem from the fact that all IPS panels I've seen use FRC to achieve 10-bit color, while OLED are true 10-bit.

Man, that is so far from the truth. The PG32UQX has the best colors I have ever seen on a display, period.

 

[MistaSparkul]

I feel like color performance is almost a moot point when it comes to gaming simply because most games do not seem to actually use super wide color gamuts. Even Cyberpunk 2077 is mostly Rec.709 in HDR with just a tiny bit of DCI-P3. This would explain why CP2077 on my CX OLED looks basically identical to my 32M2V with the Mini LED monitor just being brighter overall. Colors on it don't "pop" any harder vs the OLED.

BTW, does anyone know where you can get such a program that shows you the color space being outputted by the source material? I'm really curious to see what color space other games use.

 

[improwise]

Man, that is so far from the truth. The PG32UQX has the best colors I have ever seen on a display, period.

Welcome back

 

[CHCsky]

Welcome back

??

 

[Sycraft]

Even a good quality IPS panel with a quantum dot filter can't compare to the color quality of an OLED. The only thing IPS FALD has over an OLED is peak brightness with HDR. I think the primary issue with color quality may stem from the fact that all IPS panels I've seen use FRC to achieve 10-bit color, while OLED are true 10-bit.

I dunno, have a look at the measurements on the reviews. The PG32UQX isn't quite as wide as the Samsung QD-OLEDs... but it is real close. TFTCentral shows it as being 82% of Rec. 2020, they should a G95SC QD-OLED as being 85% of Rec. 2020. So not quite as wide, but right up there. Also the AW3423DW they show as being 80%. Point isn't if it is bang on the same, just that it looks very similar in terms of the level of saturation you get. If you look at the spectral graph it is three strong peaks.

Also it is a real 10-bit panel (might be part of its slowness issues) in there, which can do 10-bit + 2-bit FRC if you want actual 12-bit color to completely eliminate banding, supposing that your program supports that output.

 

[ssj3rd]

The fact that the PG32UQX is still "the king" years later shows just how sad the monitor market is.

So true!

But there is hope, next year might be a very magical year for monitors.
OLED/QD-OLED 32“/4k/240hz is coming to save us all, all hail to the Omnissiah!

 

[MistaSparkul]

So true!

But there is hope, next year might be a very magical year for monitors.
OLED/QD-OLED 32“/4k/240hz is coming to save us all, all hail to the Omnissiah!

Ya I'll definitely be getting one of the 32" QD OLEDs next year, but I would also like to see Mini LED tech improve as well.

 

[Sycraft]

Ya I'll definitely be getting one of the 32" QD OLEDs next year, but I would also like to see Mini LED tech improve as well.

I'm going to give one a look for sure. The potential issues are burn-in, of course, though maybe I need to stop worrying about that so much as I'm willing to buy new toys all the time and brightness. It looks like it still has the issue that the Alienware does of high peak brightness that drops off really fast with size. If they can get the dropoff up more in line with TVs then I'll be much more interested, but so far it seems like there's hard limits to how much current they can get in a panel that small.

 

[MistaSparkul]

I'm going to give one a look for sure. The potential issues are burn-in, of course, though maybe I need to stop worrying about that so much as I'm willing to buy new toys all the time and brightness. It looks like it still has the issue that the Alienware does of high peak brightness that drops off really fast with size. If they can get the dropoff up more in line with TVs then I'll be much more interested, but so far it seems like there's hard limits to how much current they can get in a panel that small.

Burn in and ABL is something that will never ever be "fixed" IMO. It's just inherent to the technology and there's no getting around it, they can only improve it up to a certain point. I'll still be keeping my 32M2V for desktop use and for certain HDR games that have a ton of high APL scenes where an OLED would struggle in.