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

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,802
Sadly no FALD on that. And remember, there's a reason why 32" VAs are curved. Prepare to be disappointed by the viewing angles.
The 28" model is IPS so I expect the 32" flat version would use some IPS panel as well. But it's not very interesting if it doesn't have any sort of FALD. At best it would be another alternative to the M32U etc.
 

kramnelis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2022
Messages
224
Damn it Jim, I'm a programmer, not a graphics artist! When most content I work with is made for the sRGB color space, wide gamut etc will just result in oversaturated colors. I have always calibrated my displays for sRGB at around 120 nits. That is a comfortable brightness level for me to use day and night for desktop use.

I have to accept that I need to start looking at a more work-oriented manner at my displays since it's 80% that use and 20% personal use considering I work mostly from home. So HDR content and "vividly popping colors" are very low on my list of things, but I do like having high refresh rates even in desktop use as it's more pleasant.

The PG32UQX doesn't make sense to me because it is so expensive with high brightness HDR being its main claim to fame, with mediocre response times falling short from handling 144 Hz properly and only single DP and 3x HDMI 2.0. It also seems to get replaced by the PG32UQXE but if that is as expensive, I'd probably rather buy the regular PG32UQ. The UQX had such high promise but at that pricing, it needs to be absolute top tier everything to me.

The Neo G7 is a more wallet-friendly option that performs well enough for HDR content but with the caveats of VA viewing angles, excessive curve and also no USB-C option for easily connecting to the Macbook Pro that I use most of the time. It does have full bandwith HDMI 2.1 though so its full capabilities can be used with all ports as long as you have a HDMI 2.1 GPU.

Which brings us to the "IPS panel, 4K, high refresh rate, garbage tier HDR" options like the M32U. The lack of proper HDMI 2.1 bandwidth sucks but it does provide both Displayport and USB-C so I could have it pull dual duties with my personal PC and Macbook Pro. Not being able to charge the MBP via USB-C is another drawback. The big reason to buy this is that it's starting to get low enough in price that it might be worth picking up and just wait a few years for better options, whether they are OLED or mini-LEDs with less issues.

It's hard to pick the right display at the right time. I bought the Samsung CRG9 like a year before it got replaced by the G9 that has more curve (which I feel helps at that size), higher refresh rate and better response times. If the G9 wasn't such a shitshow with quality problems I would be a bit more upset about it, but the CRG9 has been a very solid display for me, even if it has a lot of its own quirks and drawbacks.

I feel we are in that limbo period where all the 32" 4K high refresh rate options have their own drawbacks and you gamble on buying something more expensive that could get just superceded by something more refined coming out next year. The panel roadmaps for 32" 4K high refresh rate panels seems pretty barren though so we will see.
It doesn't matter what you do. When you already prefer an IPS, you choose it for the image quality, which needs overall color gamut, brightness, contrast, other than something like response time. Technology has the limits. The perfect monitor doesn't exist.

The color of a good IPS monitor, especially the top-tier, won't be superseded anytime soon. I haven't seen it in 4 years other 27'' monitors can outperform the vibrant color of PG27UQ. The same will apply to PG32UQX because no other manufactures except AUO can make the panel at the same level. And you have to deal with the backlight that needs good LEDs and faster FPGA from Nvidia or Samsung or other chipmakers. These things are the limits of the top-tier.

When you choose the mid-tier such as X32FP. It has lower zones, less brightness, less contrast but also less blooming, less color gamut overall. But because of these, the limited FPGA is able to change the backlight at faster speed. So the monitor can be equipped with the FastIPS. It also doesn't have G-sync FPGA, so HDMI 2.1 is available.

When you choose the low-tier IPS monitor. The backlight solution is cheap. The image quality won't be good. At this point, you might just buy other types of monitor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zahua
like this

Zahua

n00b
Joined
Jun 6, 2022
Messages
57
It doesn't matter what you do. When you already prefer an IPS, you choose it for the image quality, which needs overall color gamut, brightness, contrast, other than something like response time. Technology has the limits. The perfect monitor doesn't exist.

The color of a good IPS monitor, especially the top-tier, won't be superseded anytime soon. I haven't seen it in 4 years other 27'' monitors can outperform the vibrant color of PG27UQ. The same will apply to PG32UQX because no other manufactures except AUO can make the panel at the same level. And you have to deal with the backlight that needs good LEDs and faster FPGA from Nvidia or Samsung or other chipmakers. These things are the limits of the top-tier.

When you choose the mid-tier such as X32FP. It has lower zones, less brightness, less contrast but also less blooming, less color gamut overall. But because of these, the limited FPGA is able to change the backlight at faster speed. So the monitor can be equipped with the FastIPS. It also doesn't have G-sync FPGA, so HDMI 2.1 is available.

When you choose the low-tier IPS monitor. The backlight solution is cheap. The image quality won't be good. At this point, you might just buy other types of monitor.

X32FP is really something I want to try. The HDR doesn't seem that great, but it still has to be better than the current backlit IPS I'm using. I hope the US/NA price is somewhat reasonable.
 

JohnnyFlash

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 23, 2022
Messages
77
X32FP is really something I want to try. The HDR doesn't seem that great, but it still has to be better than the current backlit IPS I'm using. I hope the US/NA price is somewhat reasonable.
It looks to have horrible motion clarity though. People are putting way too much weight on HDR.

I currently have a PB328Q that does 3400:1 and runs at 75Hz. With tweaks at 2800:1, I can get a better UFO test result than what the X32FP tests show.

If it's blurry or has heavy ghosting, how bright the sun looks is irrelevent in my opinion.
 

Astral Abyss

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
2,985
It looks to have horrible motion clarity though. People are putting way too much weight on HDR.

I currently have a PB328Q that does 3400:1 and runs at 75Hz. With tweaks at 2800:1, I can get a better UFO test result than what the X32FP tests show.

If it's blurry or has heavy ghosting, how bright the sun looks is irrelevent in my opinion.
Exactly my opinion also.
 

kramnelis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2022
Messages
224
It looks to have horrible motion clarity though. People are putting way too much weight on HDR.

I currently have a PB328Q that does 3400:1 and runs at 75Hz. With tweaks at 2800:1, I can get a better UFO test result than what the X32FP tests show.

If it's blurry or has heavy ghosting, how bright the sun looks is irrelevent in my opinion.
The performance of X32FP is just Acer being the worst to dial the firmware.

People talk like they've been playing/ranking competitively on a 4K IPS all the time. There is TN for competitive games. The motion blur of a 144Hz 5ms IPS is acceptable.

HDR weighs that much, maybe even more. Without a good-looking IPS, I won't even play Doom Eternal more than once. After only 4 tries I completed Doom Eternal Ancient God Part One with the Ultra Nightmare setting in a single run on PG32UQX with the best HDR image I've seen so far. It's a much better visual experience. It doesn't mean you can use PG32UQX to rank on Rainbow Six but a lot better on a single-player game even with the highest difficulty or on a casual shooter game.
 

JohnnyFlash

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 23, 2022
Messages
77
The performance of X32FP is just Acer being the worst to dial the firmware.

People talk like they've been playing/ranking competitively on a 4K IPS all the time. There is TN for competitive games. The motion blur of a 144Hz 5ms IPS is acceptable.

HDR weighs that much, maybe even more. Without a good-looking IPS, I won't even play Doom Eternal more than once. After only 4 tries I completed Doom Eternal Ancient God Part One with the Ultra Nightmare setting in a single run on PG32UQX with the best HDR image I've seen so far. It's a much better visual experience. It doesn't mean you can use PG32UQX to rank on Rainbow Six but a lot better on a single-player game even with the highest difficulty or on a casual shooter game.
I was going to buy a PG32UQX on release until I saw the reviews. Everyone can have a personal performance, but the motion is not good and the bloom is very noticeable.

It's not about competitive gaming only, it's about immersion. Objects holding their color and shape when you move the camera quickly has a huge impact on that.

For $3000 this is not an acceptable result in my opinion:

PG32UQX pursuit_comparison.jpg
 

kramnelis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2022
Messages
224
I was going to buy a PG32UQX on release until I saw the reviews. Everyone can have a personal performance, but the motion is not good and the bloom is very noticeable.

It's not about competitive gaming only, it's about immersion. Objects holding their color and shape when you move the camera quickly has a huge impact on that.

For $3000 this is not an acceptable result in my opinion:

View attachment 501845
For $5000, PA32UCG is slower. It has larger bloom than PG32UQX.
I use both of them compared to fast monitors like PG279QM fast IPS, Zowie TN, AW OLED, etc.
It's not a subjective matter on image quality. And most people don't even see the monitors in person.
I won't choose a TN or PG279QM unless the monitor is doing panning shot 24/7.
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,802
For $5000, PA32UCG is slower. It has larger bloom than PG32UQX.
I use both of them compared to fast monitors like PG279QM fast IPS, Zowie TN, AW OLED, etc.
It's not a subjective matter on image quality. And most people don't even see the monitors in person.
I won't choose a TN or PG279QM unless the monitor is doing panning shot 24/7.
We are talking about purely response times here, obviously there's a number of factors to consider.

Like for example the Apple Studio Display looks fantastic when the image is static but the response time on it is slow enough that it has extra ghosting at 60 Hz. Macbook Pro displays are a whole magnitude worse, but in return do have also very good image in static image situations. In fact a lot of "professional" monitors have pretty terrible response times but at least generally fall below requirements for 60 Hz. Apple seems to put all their effort into color accuracy and HDR performance at the expense of motion because they expect their userbase won't notice.

We are only now starting to see more "pro" displays also measured for response times and input lag and it doesn't look very good. I was interested in picking up the LG DualUp as a side monitor but according to Toms Hardware review it has 28ms pixel response times and high input lag on top of that which is not great for a 900 euro monitor.

There's sweet spots for a lot of these specs where maybe I don't need world class color accuracy out of the box or could accept only decent pixel response times if it is reflected in price or performance benefits in other areas. Maybe you buy an Apple Display for its design and 5K/6K resolution and so on.
 

kramnelis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2022
Messages
224
We are talking about purely response times here, obviously there's a number of factors to consider.

Like for example the Apple Studio Display looks fantastic when the image is static but the response time on it is slow enough that it has extra ghosting at 60 Hz. Macbook Pro displays are a whole magnitude worse, but in return do have also very good image in static image situations. In fact a lot of "professional" monitors have pretty terrible response times but at least generally fall below requirements for 60 Hz. Apple seems to put all their effort into color accuracy and HDR performance at the expense of motion because they expect their userbase won't notice.

We are only now starting to see more "pro" displays also measured for response times and input lag and it doesn't look very good. I was interested in picking up the LG DualUp as a side monitor but according to Toms Hardware review it has 28ms pixel response times and high input lag on top of that which is not great for a 900 euro monitor.

There's sweet spots for a lot of these specs where maybe I don't need world class color accuracy out of the box or could accept only decent pixel response times if it is reflected in price or performance benefits in other areas. Maybe you buy an Apple Display for its design and 5K/6K resolution and so on.
Monitors already moves on from CRT in terms of the fastest response time.
Except PA32UCG, people don't even game well on a monitor that was made for graphic design. And 90% of the time the pro monitors are used to display static images.
PA32UCG was made to sustain the brightness. Without brightness, the color won't be even accurate. It was supposed to be a professional HDR reference monitor in the gaming industry.

The sweet spot is the personal preference under limited technology. There aren't a lot monitors to choose.
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,802
Ended up putting myself in waiting pattern by picking up a Samsung G7 S28, a 28" 4K 144 Hz IPS panel. HDR400 crap but it's pretty good looking for SDR and will tide me over until better options come to market. At 449 euros it was a bargain.

Unfortunately it seems my 2019 Macbook Pro is too crap to run it at above 60 Hz whereas newer M1 Macs should be able to handle it.
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,802
Nope even the newest macs don’t have HDMI 2.1 on board, it’s a real hassle with macs and all above 60hz…
We are talking about DP here. DP and 4K high refresh rate works on newer Macs but it also tends to be hit and miss based on display model.
 

JohnnyFlash

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 23, 2022
Messages
77
Well, I ordered a 32GQ950, should be here tomorrow. We'll see what's what.
I'm going to give this thing a rigorous testing over the weekend, but a few things that have stood out initially:

1. You cannot hardware calibrate below 140nits. This is shocking as sRGB work is done at 100nits in most industries. Trying to find a way around it.
2. Reflections are not great. To the people that are constantly arguing for glossy screens: I blame you. :p I can see my silhouette typing this.
3. Motion quality is unreal. On fast it's pretty much perfect at 144hz, best I have every seen. Not screwing around with 160Hz until I'm sure everything working.
4. Contrast is meh. Calibrated, the best I can get is 1025:1. That said, coming from a 3200:1 screen, once I've been playing for 10-15 min I don't really notice it anymore.
 

JohnnyFlash

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 23, 2022
Messages
77
Well, the 32GQ950 is going back.

The reason it can't hardware calibration below 140nit is because it uses PWM below that number and the brightness moves in bigger steps. Even manual calibration close to 100nit is hard on the eyes after a couple hours. To compound the problem, the light matte coating makes reflections a problem at lower brightness.

I have now gone through 9 monitors trying to replace this PB328Q. :cry:

I will say that the motion is the best I have ever seen though and there truly is no IPS glow at all. Contrast is still very meh.
 

recusant

n00b
Joined
Oct 19, 2021
Messages
51
Well, the 32GQ950 is going back.

The reason it can't hardware calibration below 140nit is because it uses PWM below that number and the brightness moves in bigger steps. Even manual calibration close to 100nit is hard on the eyes after a couple hours. To compound the problem, the light matte coating makes reflections a problem at lower brightness.

I have now gone through 9 monitors trying to replace this PB328Q. :cry:

I will say that the motion is the best I have ever seen though and there truly is no IPS glow at all. Contrast is still very meh.
At what brightness setting on the monitor will it start to use PWM?
 

JohnnyFlash

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 23, 2022
Messages
77
Apparently the RTINGs review mentioned this as well, though theirs was at 29.
I guess it makes sense when you consider it's edge lit and still gets pretty bright. At a certain point leds that strong will just go off from the minor different between off and low brightness, so they need to use PWM in that lower range.
 

kramnelis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2022
Messages
224
It's more like the LG panel of 32GQ950 uses PWM all along. There is a difference between Ennostar 250K Hz and LG 1K Hz backlight. At 250K Hz, it is equivalent to DC dimming.

The backlight is probably a lot cheaper to make if the PWM frequency is lower.

Anyway, it is made as a vivid gaming monitor. LG doesn't expect people still use sRGB with low brightness.
 
Last edited:

Zahua

n00b
Joined
Jun 6, 2022
Messages
57
Setting of 27 on mine, which is about 134nits.

I have the same monitor (32GQ950) at the moment, and use it at 45-50% Brightness. Not sure if that's too bright or bad for the eyes lol, but I like that amount of brightness for now.

Contrast sucks, but I'll probably keep it for now since I need something to work + game on and I got it for pretty cheap. I also actually like how very light the coating is, but that is probably because I use it at a higher brightness and my room never gets that bright.
 
Last edited:

recusant

n00b
Joined
Oct 19, 2021
Messages
51
That's extremely bright. Are you using Black Boost as well? (there's two settings that control it).
 

JohnnyFlash

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 23, 2022
Messages
77
I have the same monitor (32GQ950) at the moment, and use it at 45-50% Brightness. Not sure if that's too bright or bad for the eyes lol, but I like that amount of brightness for now.

Contrast sucks, but I'll probably keep it for now since I need something to work + game on and I got it for pretty cheap. I also actually like how very light the coating is, but that is probably because I use it at a higher brightness and my room never gets that bright.
Set the brightness to the point you can barely make out the top row of squares in this test. I haven't actually given up on this yet; I have gamer 1 set for dark and gamer 2 set for lights on.

I found that the green channel clips way before the blue or red, so if you set your grey scale to clip green at 252-253 it can get to 1100:1. You don't want to do that for desktop, but in games I can't see it.

Also, vertical viewing angle seems to be better from slightly below center.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Zahua
like this

Zahua

n00b
Joined
Jun 6, 2022
Messages
57
That's extremely bright. Are you using Black Boost as well? (there's two settings that control it).

Nope. I guess I'm just very used to high ass nits lol, I ran my 34gn850 around 50% too. I might lower it a bit, maybe down to 40%.
 

JohnnyFlash

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 23, 2022
Messages
77
Nope. I guess I'm just very used to high ass nits lol, I ran my 34gn850 around 50% too. I might lower it a bit, maybe down to 40%.
Could be completely different brightness at the same setting on two different displays.
 

Zahua

n00b
Joined
Jun 6, 2022
Messages
57
Could be completely different brightness at the same setting on two different displays.

Yeah I tried matching it to my last one ended up around 40%. Overall I like the display a lot for work/desktop and some games, but it obviously lacks amazing image quality for other media.

To make up for that I'll probably get a 42" C2 again on Black Friday, and place that somewhere in my vicinity (maybe next to the 32GQ950).

Wish there was a display that was both amazing for work AND media, rather than buying 1 of each. 😂
 

JohnnyFlash

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 23, 2022
Messages
77
Yeah I tried matching it to my last one ended up around 40%. Overall I like the display a lot for work/desktop and some games, but it obviously lacks amazing image quality for other media.

To make up for that I'll probably get a 42" C2 again on Black Friday, and place that somewhere in my vicinity (maybe next to the 32GQ950).

Wish there was a display that was both amazing for work AND media, rather than buying 1 of each. 😂
I hear ya. Pretty sure I'm keeping the GQ950 now for that very reason. I have solved a couple of the problems.

If you don't have one already, invest in a i1Display Pro. Being able to properly read and adjust color is so useful and it works on TVs as well.

I fixed the PWM issue by setting the brightness to the lowest mark before it kicks in, then adjusting the contrast down a little. I have 100nits now with no flicker at 860:1, which is acceptable for rRGB desktop work.
 

kramnelis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2022
Messages
224
3. Motion quality is unreal. On fast it's pretty much perfect at 144hz, best I have every seen. Not screwing around with 160Hz until I'm sure everything working.
On fast mode, it's still 4.61ms. It's funny that suddenly the motion quality is unreal. I remember it was not fast by your standard. This is contrary to what you've said before.
 

ssj3rd

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 30, 2021
Messages
169
All around the reviews for the GQ950 are meh, so let’s wait for the next one.

Even in 2022 there isn’t one good HDR monitor out there still, it’s a damn shame…
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,802
All around the reviews for the GQ950 are meh, so let’s wait for the next one.

Even in 2022 there isn’t one good HDR monitor out there still, it’s a damn shame…
Yeah it just feels weird. You can buy a 32" 4K high refresh rate display that doesn't have any huge dealbreaker issues like say a Gigabyte M32U, but want one with good HDR? Just doesn't exist.
 

kramnelis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2022
Messages
224
All around the reviews for the GQ950 are meh, so let’s wait for the next one.

Even in 2022 there isn’t one good HDR monitor out there still, it’s a damn shame…
There is very good HDR monitor. They are all IPS.

But people don't buy it. They don't see it. It's funny they still prefer sRGB 80 nits on OLED.
 

Decko87

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 23, 2007
Messages
2,067
There is very good HDR monitor. They are all IPS.

But people don't buy it. They don't see it. It's funny they still prefer sRGB 80 nits on OLED.
They're too expensive, they're also slow (particularly the ASUS monitor which costs like 3 grand still), also their FALD is a blooming mess in a lot of scenarios. People will take the deep blacks over a giant white blotch in star field situations.
 
Top