Images: ASUS

ASUS recently announced a 32-inch HDMI 2.1 gaming monitor, but if that’s too small for you, the company has another display up its sleeve called the ROG Strix XG43UQ, which features a much larger 43-inch screen. The company’s Edge Up article fails to note whether this is a 4K IPS or VA panel (the latter is likely based on previous products), but it does confirm refresh rates of up to 144 Hz, as well as DisplayHDR 1000 certification and multiple HDMI 2.1 ports. Pricing and availability are unknown.

“It wraps refresh rates up to 144Hz and VESA DisplayHDR 1000 compliance into a sleek white chassis that attractively coordinates with the PS5 or Xbox Series S, or contrasts with the Xbox Series X,” ASUS wrote. “Connect your PS5 or Xbox to one of this monitor’s HDMI 2.1 ports, and the XG43UQ will seamlessly enable automatic low latency mode, variable refresh rate support, and a 120Hz refresh rate at 4K to unlock the best gaming experience from those consoles.”

ASUS has also announced the TUF Gaming VG28UQL1A 4K monitor for those of you who want a higher DPI and don’t mind having to scale the Windows desktop. This is a 28-inch IPS panel with a 120 Hz refresh rate, DisplayHDR 400 compliance, and 90 percent DCI-P3 coverage. Again, pricing and availability weren’t listed.

“The high-bandwidth DisplayPort 1.4 inputs also support VESA Display Stream Compression (DSC), allowing the monitor to function at 144Hz while displaying full per-pixel color data,” ASUS noted. “If you connect an Xbox Series X or PlayStation 5 using the HDMI 2.1 ports, you’ll enjoy an automatic low latency mode, variable refresh rates, and refresh rates ranging up to 120Hz, plus HDR visuals in supported titles.”

Join the Conversation

14 Comments

  1. Seems good on paper, but so did my XG438Q, and while it is excellent in games, it has utterly atrocious text quality rendering it an annoyance to use for anything else.

    I hate how everything is "either or" these days. Either it is a "gaming" product, or it is a "professional" product. I want a no compromises monitor that excels at all things. Good for office work, good for content creation, good for media viewing, and good for the occasional game.

    My PC is not a game console, nor should anyones be. The PC is a general purpose computing platform that can do everything, and the accessories need to reflect this.

  2. Seems good on paper, but so did my XG438Q, and while it is excellent in games, it has utterly atrocious text quality rendering it an annoyance to use for anything else.

    I hate how everything is "either or" these days. Either it is a "gaming" product, or it is a "professional" product. I want a no compromises monitor that excels at all things. Good for office work, good for content creation, good for media viewing, and good for the occasional game.

    My PC is not a game console, nor should anyones be. The PC is a general purpose computing platform that can do everything, and the accessories need to reflect this.

    Are you using text scaling? I have an Acer CG437K which uses the same panel I believe. With text scaling (Windows turns this on by default with 4K displays), it was awful. When text scaling was disabled, it looked fine. As for the rest, it’s unfortunate but some of the needs of professionals and gamers are counter to each other. Technologically, at this point you simply can’t have it all. Even if you could, its clear the costs would be excessive.

  3. Seems good on paper, but so did my XG438Q, and while it is excellent in games, it has utterly atrocious text quality rendering it an annoyance to use for anything else.

    This is my fear #1. I have a 32" VA, branded by LG who didn’t make the panel, that also has atrocious text rendering. 10 / 10 would not repeat.

    That VA also has atrocious dark tone smearing, so the extended contrast over an IPS panel is essentially useless for gaming, and it seems near impossible to calibrate.

    I will also say that having a 32" 4k panel next to it, the difference in text rendering is stark. The 4k panel isn’t sharp at 100% either, but gets razor sharp at 150% scaling, which consequently results in a scaled pixel-pitch almost identical to 1440p.

    I hate how everything is "either or" these days. Either it is a "gaming" product, or it is a "professional" product. I want a no compromises monitor that excels at all things. Good for office work, good for content creation, good for media viewing, and good for the occasional game.

    What we seem to be finding is that LCD panels that have a real pixel response of <=8.3ms also max out at about 1000:1 native contrast, be it IPS or VA.

    At that point I’d prefer IPS, but honestly it’ll come down more to stuff like the above-mentioned text rendering, as well as available screen size and resolution. Dell’s latest Alienware 38" is probably as good as it gets to an actual ‘all-around’ display, with Samsung’s G9 Odyssey coming a close second; and probably the reverse depending on priorities.

  4. I’m at least curious. More so about price though. ASUS 4K displays have a way of making a RTX 3090 look cheap by comparison. That’s saying something.
  5. Are you using text scaling? I have an Acer CG437K which uses the same panel I believe. With text scaling (Windows turns this on by default with 4K displays), it was awful. When text scaling was disabled, it looked fine. As for the rest, it’s unfortunate but some of the needs of professionals and gamers are counter to each other. Technologically, at this point you simply can’t have it all. Even if you could, its clear the costs would be excessive.

    When you say "text scaling" is this the same as the display scaling in the display settings or something different? I usually use the display at 100%.

    I think it might be a BGR issue. Not sure.

    Text looks better in Linux Mint than it does in Windows, but Mint’s Cinnamon desktop has official BGR support.

  6. They all do. A 38" IPS? Samsung’s 49" 32:9?

    Makes you reconsider the CX48 every time.

    Yeah, when I got my CRG49 this summer it felt like a steal at around $1400 for what it gives versus if I’d gone with one of the ASUS offerings. I admit the HDR on it isn’t that great but otherwise it checks a lot of boxes.

  7. When you say "text scaling" is this the same as the display scaling in the display settings or something different? I usually use the display at 100%.

    I think it might be a BGR issue. Not sure.

    Text looks better in Linux Mint than it does in Windows, but Mint’s Cinnamon desktop has official BGR support.

    Yes, that’s what I meant. Text looks fine for me with the scaling set at 100%. At 125% or 150% it looks like ***. I only use Windows.

  8. You mean the LG OLED?

    I am very tempted, but since most of my work is on the desktop, i am very concerned I’ll j have menu bar burn in :(

    Burn-in is concern #1. It’s the only concern that has me cross-shopping LCDs.

    Size is concern #2; if #1 were taken care of, I wouldn’t blink, but it ain’t. As it stands, for 48" I’d be moving my desk back say a foot, and putting the TV on a stand, probably with casters. Biggest issue really is that I prefer using multiple monitors, and even a single 4k monitor run at 100% scaling would feel pretty restrictive, even if it’s about the same number of pixels I’m used to.

    Being a TV is loosely concern #3. Tuning an LG OLED for desktop use is unnecessarily complicated. I don’t really fault LG specifically for this, unless of course they do make a monitor version that comes with the same issues. A mode tuned for desktop use, to include gaming optimizations and burn-in mitigations for typical desktop use would be welcome.

    Yes, that’s what I meant. Text looks fine for me with the scaling set at 100%. At 125% or 150% it looks like ***. I only use Windows.

    I’ll say that this used to be the case; I still don’t really like scaling in general, but when the DPI and software both line up, it works to exceed expectations.

    Yeah, when I got my CRG49 this summer it felt like a steal at around $1400 for what it gives versus if I’d gone with one of the ASUS offerings. I admit the HDR on it isn’t that great but otherwise it checks a lot of boxes.

    HDR on the desktop ain’t that great either so far as I’ve seen. Along with scaling it’s one of those issues that touches such a diverse range of interests that getting people to just solve the problem is going to be an ongoing challenge, unless perhaps if you’re Apple, where solutions may be dictated to users.

  9. I don’t really see how scaling or HDR are that diverse…

    I mean – yeah, there are a lot of various competing HDR formats, but that is mostly just in the storing and formatting media, not in the display of the picture.

    Both of them seem pretty cut and dry to me, and it still shocks me that Windows does both so poorly. The Mac solution being dictated to users seems to work, I vastly prefer it to the CF that is the Microsoft solution – but maybe I’m outside of all the niche cases where it isn’t suitable?

  10. I mean – yeah, there are a lot of various competing HDR formats, but that is mostly just in the storing and formatting media, not in the display of the picture.

    It gets diverse I think when the halfarsery that attempts to make LCDs comparable to OLEDs even from a marketing standpoint has resulted in some pretty poor releases.

    Both of them seem pretty cut and dry to me, and it still shocks me that Windows does both so poorly. The Mac solution being dictated to users seems to work, I vastly prefer it to the CF that is the Microsoft solution – but maybe I’m outside of all the niche cases where it isn’t suitable?

    So, Apple took the short route: their displays were pretty low resolution relative to what was available on PCs, to the point where they could straight up just double it in both dimensions, and market the solution as ‘Retina’. Thus, for apps that were not scaling-aware, OS X just forced a 200% scale and that was that.

    Same trick works quite well in Windows, whether you use Windows’ scaling or your GPUs scaling. What challenges everyone is ‘fractional scaling’, i.e. stuff like 125% and 150%. It’s coming along, even in Linux, but it’s not ‘there’ yet unfortunately!

  11. So, Apple took the short route: their displays were pretty low resolution relative to what was available on PCs, to the point where they could straight up just double it in both dimensions,

    No I don’t think it’s quite as simple as that. I’m on a Mac right now – I can tell it larger or smaller (which is suspect is some scale from 50-150% in increments of 25% or so). Everything just scales smaller or larger. Nothing gets fuzzy, UI elements don’t get left out in limbo, there isn’t a bevy of applications that ignore my setting…. stuff just gets bigger (and sharper), or smaller.

    On the original Retina Phone – yeah, it was pretty basic. But on the Desktop, it’s much more nuanced, and works very well.

    Kinda like World of Warcraft scaling, if you’ve played that (and if I’m recalling it correctly). No matter what resolution you play it in, the UI and game is roughly all presented in the same relative size – it just gets clearer and sharper as you increase the resolution.

  12. No I don’t think it’s quite as simple as that.

    It isn’t now, but that is how Apple made the transition. They also have the benefit of controlling their product stack so you’re less likely to find an app that doesn’t scale well today.

Leave a comment