ROG Swift Asus Dual REZ OLED PG32ucdp Monitor 4K and 1080p CES

Cool that this is going to happen If your game is at 4k which is too squinty.
 
Last edited:
Too squinty? Not sure how that works, 4K just makes everything more crisp and clear, not squinty. And the fix for squinty is to make everything a pixelated mess instead?
 
MistaSparkul said:
Too squinty? Not sure how that works, 4K just makes everything more crisp and clear, not squinty. And the fix for squinty is to make everything a pixelated mess instead?
Click to expand...
You have stuff in videogames like the user interface being too small at 4K and Text being too small at Native 4K so this monitor fixes that problem.
 
Comixbooks said:
You have stuff in videogames like the user interface being too small at 4K and Text being too small at Native 4K so this monitor fixes that problem.
Click to expand...
This is only a problem for people who think 27" 4k is better than 32".
 
Comixbooks said:
You have stuff in videogames like the user interface being too small at 4K and Text being too small at Native 4K so this monitor fixes that problem.
Click to expand...

Any modern game will have proper scaling of the UI by now. The last time UI scaling at 4K was an issue for me was with Bioshock Infinite, a game from 2013...and again I'm not sure setting your entire display to 1080p is the best fix for that.
 
You could play classic games on the monitor like Tyranny or Ultima Online.
 
On a side note, I wonder if Asus will once again aim for higher brightness over the LG counterpart. The LG is only rated for HDR400 which is pretty lame.
 
HDR400 and TRUE BLACK HDR400 are not the same thing, the latter is comparable to HDR1000.

Incredibly accurate shadow detail for a remarkable visual experience.

Deeper black levels and dramatic increases in dynamic range create a remarkable visual experience:
  • Peak luminance of 400 cd/m2
  • Brings permissible black level down to 0.0005 cd/m2 – the lowest level that can be effectively measured with industry-standard colorimeters
  • Provides up to 50X greater dynamic range and 4X improvement in rise time compared to DisplayHDR 1000
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xar
like this
tongshadow said:
HDR400 and TRUE BLACK HDR400 are not the same thing, the latter is comparable to HDR1000.
Click to expand...

You really just gonna believe the marketing BS? Lol of course that's what the display makers want you to believe, that 400 nits can somehow be on the same level as 1000 nits just because "muh true blacks". Well you know what's better than true blacks with 400 nits? How about true blacks with 1000 nits? That's all I'm asking for here, I don't need 2000 or 3000 nits or whatever, just give me a 4K OLED monitor that can do around 1000 nits like the KTC/Asus 1440p OLED and I'll be happy enough.
 
MistaSparkul said:
You really just gonna believe the marketing BS? Lol of course that's what the display makers want you to believe, that 400 nits can somehow be on the same level as 1000 nits just because "muh true blacks". Well you know what's better than true blacks with 400 nits? How about true blacks with 1000 nits? That's all I'm asking for here, I don't need 2000 or 3000 nits or whatever, just give me a 4K OLED monitor that can do around 1000 nits like the KTC/Asus 1440p OLED and I'll be happy enough.
Click to expand...
DisplayHDR TrueBlack 400 doesn't necessarily mean the display peaks at 400 nits, it's just that the monitor didn't meet the criteria for a higher certification. The Alienware AW3423DW for example, "only" has TrueBlack 400 certification, but can peak at 1,000 nits on small highlights (2% window). Sustained "real scene" brightness according to Rtings is about 500 nits.
 
Armenius said:
DisplayHDR TrueBlack 400 doesn't necessarily mean the display peaks at 400 nits, it's just that the monitor didn't meet the criteria for a higher certification. The Alienware AW3423DW for example, "only" has TrueBlack 400 certification, but can peak at 1,000 nits on small highlights (2% window). Sustained "real scene" brightness according to Rtings is about 500 nits.
Click to expand...

Right. It's just that typically a brighter 10% window will often translate into an overall higher real scene brightness. My CX is only around 570nits real scene based on RTings, the Asus 1440p OLED is 740. I don't believe the upcoming LG 32" which is rated for TrueBlack400 will be any brighter than my soon to be 4 year old CX which is disappointing so I'm just hoping someone else will deliver on that front.
 
TFTC says this panel is capable of 1300 nits. That's probably on a 1-2% window but let's see how hard Asus pushes this panel overall, maybe we can get close to 1000 nits real scene HDR? It's also going to have a new subpixel layout that's better optimized for text so it might end up looking better than QD OLED in that regard too.

1703701332834.png
 
MistaSparkul said:
TFTC says this panel is capable of 1300 nits. That's probably on a 1-2% window but let's see how hard Asus pushes this panel overall, maybe we can get close to 1000 nits real scene HDR? It's also going to have a new subpixel layout that's better optimized for text so it might end up looking better than QD OLED in that regard too.

View attachment 622955
Click to expand...
I have high hopes for this. I'd honestly rather buy something other than Samsung because Samsung's firmware tends to be a buggy pile of crap on many of their displays.
 
kasakka said:
I have high hopes for this. I'd honestly rather buy something other than Samsung because Samsung's firmware tends to be a buggy pile of crap on many of their displays.
Click to expand...

Well for the QD OLED options there are plenty to choose from besides Samsung themselves. Asus, Alienware, MSI, and OMEN will all have QD OLED offerings.
 
I find this an interesting and probably better implemented solution than their previous "eSport Gaming Monitor" that had the 25" mode. At least this way you are gaining something giving up the resolution for titles that you may want the increased refresh rate support. That said being an OLED I'm more hesitant on wanting to purchase one for the long term. I think I did see LG marketing the same feature as well on their model so we shall see. Might not end up being an exclusive feature that comes with a hefty Asus Tax. And perhaps even better might be seeing something similar with Mini LED backlighting soon.
 
Any idea on price?

This might be the upgrade I've been waiting a decade on if it can be calibrated well enough.
 
Comixbooks said:
You have stuff in videogames like the user interface being too small at 4K and Text being too small at Native 4K so this monitor fixes that problem.
Click to expand...
That's a software problem. Poor game design doesn't have scalable interfaces. It's generally not an issue on modern games.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Shame the BFI is only going to work at 120Hz. I would love to see what a 480Hz BFI capable OLED would look like.
Click to expand...
Sounded to me like actual spec was still TBD? And maybe there's also hope for the smaller 1440P 480Hz one having BFI? (Smaller one also appears to have that greyed out "ELMB" toggle.)

In any case, so glad they're talking about OLED and BFI together again...
 
Last edited:
SH1 said:
Sounded to me like actual spec was still TBD? And maybe there's also hope for the smaller 1440P 480Hz one having BFI? In any case, so glad they're talking about OLED and BFI again...
Click to expand...

He mentions in the video that 120Hz BFI seems the most likely, and TFTCentral already has the 240Hz ultrawide WOLED for review and also says BFI is only available at 120Hz, not 240Hz or even 60Hz.
 
Yeah too bad if that's it. Makes the smaller one almost more interesting if there's something behind its "ELMB" toggle there.

Smaller one also matte Vincent says. Darn...thought I had heard the smaller one would be glossy. (Though I don't think I have an interest to go to smaller panels again...)
 
MistaSparkul said:
He mentions in the video that 120Hz BFI seems the most likely, and TFTCentral already has the 240Hz ultrawide WOLED for review and also says BFI is only available at 120Hz, not 240Hz or even 60Hz.
Click to expand...
Maybe the brightness loss at 240 Hz is just too much? On my LG CX 48" at 120 Hz, the "medium" BFI setting is the most usable and "high" is already too dim. 60 Hz would be a good addition though.
 
My LG CX 48" is on 120 Hz BFI High permanently. And it's fantastic. No interest in anything less than that. It is still my first year with it though. Do they lose brightness over time to that extent? Or maybe it's just that I prefer lower ambient light around it anyway...
 
MistaSparkul said:
He mentions in the video that 120Hz BFI seems the most likely, and TFTCentral already has the 240Hz ultrawide WOLED for review and also says BFI is only available at 120Hz, not 240Hz or even 60Hz.
Click to expand...
240 Hz is the max of that panel? If so, 240 Hz BFI would not be available as they are not offering sub refresh hardware like the CX and C1 have. Not that I've heard anyway.
 
SH1 said:
My LG CX 48" is on 120 Hz BFI High permanently. And it's fantastic. No interest in anything less than that. It is still my first year with it though. Do they lose brightness over time to that extent? Or maybe it's just that I prefer lower ambient light around it anyway...
Click to expand...
TFTCentral measured the CX 48" BFI brightess as low setting 216 cd/m2, medium 148 cd/m2 and high 119 cd/m2. I don't think they lose much brightness over time because to me it was dark even when brand new, and I normally use about 120 cd/m2 in desktop use. Just that bit of extra brightness made it more ok at medium setting.

I haven't tested the setting in ages though because the extra input lag was noticeable to me and since I mostly play HDR capable titles, BFI is not a good option for me.
 
kasakka said:
TFTCentral measured the CX 48" BFI brightess as low setting 216 cd/m2, medium 148 cd/m2 and high 119 cd/m2. I don't think they lose much brightness over time because to me it was dark even when brand new, and I normally use about 120 cd/m2 in desktop use. Just that bit of extra brightness made it more ok at medium setting.

I haven't tested the setting in ages though because the extra input lag was noticeable to me and since I mostly play HDR capable titles, BFI is not a good option for me.
Click to expand...

119 nits is perfectly suitable for SDR content since that's supposed to be 120 nits anyway. You probably thought it was too dim since turning on BFI also screws with the gamma as well.
 
I was very late to the CX party, but I think I read that firmware updates after release helped with the input lag. Catching it up with the C1 or something like that.

And/or maybe I'm just not so sensitive to input lag. I try to elicit the feel of that, but I don't sense it. Not so far anyway.

Blur though...I was running the Cyberpunk benchmark the other day and I noticed parts of it were blurring. Couldn't figure out what had happened until I realized I had somehow put the set in a picture mode where BFI wasn't enabled. Coming directly from a CRT probably skews my perspective. Unless it was something else going on...
 
SH1 said:
I was very late to the CX party, but I think I read that firmware updates after release helped with the input lag. Catching it up with the C1 or something like that.

And/or maybe I'm just not so sensitive to input lag. I try to elicit the feel of that, but I don't sense it. Not so far anyway.

Blur though...I was running the Cyberpunk benchmark the other day and I noticed parts of it were blurring. Couldn't figure out what had happened until I realized I had somehow put the set in a picture mode where BFI wasn't enabled. Coming directly from a CRT probably skews my perspective. Unless it was something else going on...
Click to expand...

BFI adds about 7ms of input lag.

1705343360724.png


So turning on BFI would make the CX go from a Class 2 lag category to a Class 3, it's definitely noticeable but I don't think anyone buys an LG CX to play sweaty competitive games anyway.

1705343385041.png
 
Armenius said:
You can't pick a class like that because the way TFT Central measures input lag is different from Rtings.
Click to expand...

TFTC doesn't measure input lag with BFI on so they don't tell us how much latency it adds but RTings does. Anyways here's TFTC's normal input lag figures for the CX.

1705344571337.png
 
Looks like CX still managed to squeeze into RTings "Good" category for input lag. I'll take what I can get, because I love that 120 Hz BFI High. :)
 
SH1 said:
Looks like CX still managed to squeeze into RTings "Good" category for input lag. I'll take what I can get, because I love that 120 Hz BFI High. :)
Click to expand...

It is still very much useable, especially if you just want to enjoy some single player games with excellent motion clarity and are able to get a locked 100/120fps. Like I said I really don't think anyone is using a CX to play super competitively or anything, there are other displays that are better suited for that.
 
Yeah agree it's not a race car. So far been a good all rounder for me. (With admittedly a heavy work focus so far...)

Guess sub refresh BFI on OLED is a thing of the past. Such a shame. Guess it was too niche. But say, 120 Hz or 240 Hz BFI on that 480 Hz screen? 2.08 Hz persistence. (Though not 4k so less great for work...)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top