ASUS Offers ROG Strix XG32VQ 32-Inch WQHD Curved Gaming Monitor

#5493950

Equinoxe

2017-11-20 09:22

Would be great if there will be G-sync variants.

#5493954

Prometheus336

2017-11-20 09:41

Equinoxe:

Would be great if there will be G-sync variants.

Completely agree, I would have bought it for Christmas XD

#5494098

Solfaur

2017-11-20 17:10

I'm not a fan at all of curved displays with 16:9 aspect ratio... also, the size is a bit too big too for that resolution. 1440p is best at 27", or maybe 30 (though I believe only 1600p displays came with this size).

#5494122

Abc666

2017-11-20 18:30

Equinoxe:

Would be great if there will be G-sync variants.

Na, Gsync isnt needed at 144hz or above. I've had gsync on my previous display, now i have 144hz freesync with a gtx1070, i see no difference in tearing at all, as in i dont see the tearing at 144hz. The bonus of not having Gsync, less cost, better image quality on desktop(no scanlines) and no weird blinking of buttons and stuff in games. If you ask me, gsync is obsolete, unless you use displays at 100hz or below i dont see the idea of sync tech like freesync or gsync. At 144 and above, no sync tech please.

#5494151

ChisChas

2017-11-20 20:15

Solfaur:

I'm not a fan at all of curved displays with 16:9 aspect ratio... also, the size is a bit too big too for that resolution. 1440p is best at 27", or maybe 30 (though I believe only 1600p displays came with this size).

My Dell U2711 is 2560 x 1440 60Hz and 7 years old. Dell also sold a U3011 which was the 30" version which was 2560 x 1600. I'm not seeing any exciting progress with the NVidia card & monitor scenario.

#5494166

Solfaur

2017-11-20 21:08

ChisChas:

My Dell U2711 is 2560 x 1440 60Hz and 7 years old. Dell also sold a U3011 which was the 30" version which was 2560 x 1600. I'm not seeing any exciting progress with the NVidia card & monitor scenario.

I too have a U2711 for the same time as you and was thinking precisely about the U3011 😀... fantastic IPS (not the backlight bleeding messes that are out nowadays), it just sucks that it doesn't have higher refresh, that is pretty much the only reason why I want to upgrade.

#5494175

xrodney

2017-11-20 21:39

ChisChas:

My Dell U2711 is 2560 x 1440 60Hz and 7 years old. Dell also sold a U3011 which was the 30" version which was 2560 x 1600. I'm not seeing any exciting progress with the NVidia card & monitor scenario.

I was using DELL UWP3008 10 years ago,so I fully agree with you that we are lacking progress in monitor development.

Abc666:

Na, Gsync isnt needed at 144hz or above. I've had gsync on my previous display, now i have 144hz freesync with a gtx1070, i see no difference in tearing at all, as in i dont see the tearing at 144hz. The bonus of not having Gsync, less cost, better image quality on desktop(no scanlines) and no weird blinking of buttons and stuff in games. If you ask me, gsync is obsolete, unless you use displays at 100hz or below i dont see the idea of sync tech like freesync or gsync. At 144 and above, no sync tech please.

You are forgeting one very important thing, and thats freesync/gsync main advantage is for FPS bellow set monitor refresh rates. Even 1080Ti is not able handle new games at WQHD and 144 Hz.

#5494205

Angushades

2017-11-20 23:34

Abc666:

Na, Gsync isnt needed at 144hz or above. I've had gsync on my previous display, now i have 144hz freesync with a gtx1070, i see no difference in tearing at all, as in i dont see the tearing at 144hz. The bonus of not having Gsync, less cost, better image quality on desktop(no scanlines) and no weird blinking of buttons and stuff in games. If you ask me, gsync is obsolete, unless you use displays at 100hz or below i dont see the idea of sync tech like freesync or gsync. At 144 and above, no sync tech please.

You mate are as dumb as they come. You either can't afford a g-sync lcd or need glasses.Once again you read about people that can't afford a good LCD and have no idea about what they are talking about.

#5494206

Angushades

2017-11-20 23:40

xrodney:

I was using DELL UWP3008 10 years ago,so I fully agree with you that we are lacking progress in monitor development. You are forgeting one very important thing, and thats freesync/gsync main advantage is for FPS bellow set monitor refresh rates. Even 1080Ti is not able handle new games at WQHD and 144 Hz.

Wrong wrong wrong . 100Hz is the minimum you should be playing at with adaptive sync , even at 144 no sync is noticeable and it shows stuttering,tearing and jitters. I'd wager that anyone who has seriously spent some time on an adaptive sync LCD will not talk so my BS as you guys have.

#5494208

Agonist

2017-11-20 23:57

Solfaur:

I'm not a fan at all of curved displays with 16:9 aspect ratio... also, the size is a bit too big too for that resolution. 1440p is best at 27", or maybe 30 (though I believe only 1600p displays came with this size).

Exactly. Any 16:9 monitor curved is just stupid personally.

#5494209

Agent-A01

2017-11-21 00:20

Abc666:

Na, Gsync isnt needed at 144hz or above. I've had gsync on my previous display, now i have 144hz freesync with a gtx1070, i see no difference in tearing at all, as in i dont see the tearing at 144hz. The bonus of not having Gsync, less cost, better image quality on desktop(no scanlines) and no weird blinking of buttons and stuff in games. If you ask me, gsync is obsolete, unless you use displays at 100hz or below i dont see the idea of sync tech like freesync or gsync. At 144 and above, no sync tech please.

Just because you can't see a difference doesn't mean I can't. You still get noticeable tearing even at 144hz. Just as you can see tearing, you'll also see 'microstuttering'. As for the rest of those issues you listed like better iq and weird blinking, that's a monitor specific issue with no relation to gsync