Looks like another overclocked sub-4K Toy (designed for specific types of use/games). With "medium" blacks and brightness level. They done thin bezzel - its okey.. But this looks even more fake, when u run monitor coz AH-IPS have "poor" contrast and black. And this is very wide screen where u must sit very close to the screen. So it will contrast with this black bar more than real frame (coz absorb more light). Im curious how they resolve backlight uniformity in this screen. Whole design look just middle for me. But mby i expecting too much for 1300$.. Crazy!!

Not sure where u get the "medium" blacks (most like the screen wasnt calibrated with sensor/software), but my 3y old AH-IPS based 27" asus has better blacks than the 2016 full dynamic range (0-255) VS i just bought. same for contrast and uniformity (not saying its perfect), so unless i've seen (that its bad) myself, i will stay with asus..

Not sure where u get the "medium" blacks (most like the screen wasnt calibrated with sensor/software), but my 3y old AH-IPS based 27" asus has better blacks than the 2016 full dynamic range (0-255) VS i just bought. same for contrast and uniformity (not saying its perfect), so unless i've seen (that its bad) myself, i will stay with asus..

Its the nature of AH-IPS/IPS technology in the current state. And I think there is LG panel used already in other 21:9 monitors aswell - where was some backlight uniformity problems. Also 21:9 aspect ratio is not same like 16:9. Its much wider, have high pixel density, so u need stay relativly close to the screen. There is effect called "silvering" on IPS/AH-IPS panells. Where wider angle give worse black and "silvering" effect. U can calibrate evry monitor ofcorse. But in LCD monitors.. there is no Local Dimming. It mean if U like get better "black" just by calibration, U will need decrease the generall brightness and contrast level, or lose gradient bits (deepend how u calibrate it). So then will lose in "white" and contrast level, but can get better black, and more naturall colors, with lose some colors from pallete ofcorse. But get deeper black this way is like bypass "tehnology issues" by that way. I not try to say that profesionall calibration is usless ofcorse. VA panels have better potential for calibration (from their nature) there is around (3000:1 - 5000:1) contrast ratio is higher enough to play with. But for calibration we need very qualified (expensive) hardweare, and some experience. Otherwise calibration isnt worth much. VA panels don't have contrast and "silvering" issues, but they have quite medium or some even poor angles. My personal fauvorite is VA panels. But before i think that IPS is the way to go. But question is what we like in LCD screen's and that our personall taste..

Newest IPS with very slim bezels and very thin shapes have lots of backlight bleeding further reducing the black levels. Only OLED is the savior. hahaha!

Looks like another overclocked sub-4K Toy (designed for specific types of use/games). With "medium" blacks and brightness level. They done thin bezzel - its okey.. But this looks even more fake, when u run monitor coz AH-IPS have "poor" contrast and black. And this is very wide screen where u must sit very close to the screen. So it will contrast with this black bar more than real frame (coz absorb more light). Im curious how they resolve backlight uniformity in this screen. Whole design look just middle for me. But mby i expecting too much for 1300$.. Crazy!!

Trolls will be trolls. You obviously have no personal desire for the extra rendered width in games therefore you seem to apply that individual need to make a broad generalization about 21:9 that is entirely subjective to your needs. Further your wording mean you are blatantly bias to 4K and define it as the end all (by saying anything under 4k is a toy). 4k is ok but certainly nothing special for gaming, it doesn't offer anything new to the experience however it does come with the huge drawback that even SLI Titan's can't maintain high framerate in AAA games.

I'd take the Acer variant over this any day. I REAAAALLY dislike the new ROG color scheme, and having an entire monitor with it just messes up my whole black/red build. Or better said I'd look for a better 2560x1440p IPS screen with gsync and 144+Hz, the ASUS one with 160Hz is apparently pretty horrible with the backlight bleed. I don't know really, but when I'm throwing out such huge amount of cash, I expect top quality. Sadly most of these monitors have some kind of drawback. And I really wish to upgrade from my Dell 2711 IPS 60Hz, mostly for higher refresh and g-sync features, but I can't seem to find something worth the price tag. :wanker:

Trolls will be trolls. You obviously have no personal desire for the extra rendered width in games therefore you seem to apply that individual need to make a broad generalization about 21:9 that is entirely subjective to your needs. Further your wording mean you are blatantly bias to 4K and define it as the end all (by saying anything under 4k is a toy). 4k is ok but certainly nothing special for gaming, it doesn't offer anything new to the experience however it does come with the huge drawback that even SLI Titan's can't maintain high framerate in AAA games.

1. Some criticall look on hardweare, not mean i troll - even if that sound like 😀 2. 4K screen..? You can easily make 3440x1440 or 3840x1620 which is just better and more flexible. 3. 2xGPU's.. Ye right now for 4K need atleast 2x980, but some players can be satisfied with lower cards, or with just one 980Ti - not all need play on maximum settings, like anti-alising or motion-blur right? If we like higher resolution, we need more power - what You expect magic..? But we buy monitors on years, so its important to perdict what we like use in near feature right? PS: I use both 16:9 and 21:9 resolutions now, and when I swap between them (16:9/21:9) I feel much more comfort with 4K on : desktop usage, gamming, movies and generally. I will not mention how games support 21:9 right now - had some problems in new titles (but nothing really big, coz I hope it will change soon). More pixels vertically make human eye see better distance and space in 3D. But from the other side 21:9 give nice FOV and games look cool also.

For that price, I would much rather get a VR headset and call it a day. Would have a much better FOV, which is way more worth it in my opinion. Now if Oculus would hurry up and officially release.

Newest IPS with very slim bezels and very thin shapes have lots of backlight bleeding further reducing the black levels. Only OLED is the savior. hahaha!

Maby in feature.. But right now OLED's are far too much expensive for home use, for almost all of us. As long as not need professionall works with colors, they not deal at all. And the newest/best one WRGB have durability limits 30.000 hours lose 30-50% of brightness (thats the officiall LG info atleast). But for "abusive" (desktop) use You may be sure color degradation will show fast - i read some issues about this. Some sellers in malls confirm this theory.

Asus PG348Q Asus PG348q No where to be found in North America {USA/Canada}

For that price, I would much rather get a VR headset and call it a day. Would have a much better FOV, which is way more worth it in my opinion. Now if Oculus would hurry up and officially release.

I see people mention this comment a lot and honestly it makes no sense at all. Would you get a VR headset to replace your TV? Likely not, so why is it any difference for a monitor? Would I wish to be spinning house music on a 21:9 ultrawide or wearing a headset AND headphones? Seriously. do people forget that monitors are used for more than just gaming? I dun even.

Asus PG348q No where to be found in North America {USA/Canada}

Amazon is taking orders. Ordered mine yesterday. Acer variant has it's share of issues so I hope ASUS learned something and corrected some of those issues on their product. fingers crossed!

I see people mention this comment a lot and honestly it makes no sense at all. Would you get a VR headset to replace your TV? Likely not, so why is it any difference for a monitor? Would I wish to be spinning house music on a 21:9 ultrawide or wearing a headset AND headphones? Seriously. do people forget that monitors are used for more than just gaming? I dun even.

Well I mean, technically, eventually, you probably would use a VR headset to replace the TV, as a VR headset with an extremely high resolution could essentially replicate a TV of any size, where as space is a concern for a physical TV. That being said, we don't have the resolution for that. So it's not a good point. Ultimately most games won't even have VR support, where as nearly every game has ultra widescreen support. And you can technically get more use out of the monitor for non-media consumption tasks, that isn't quite possible in the resolution limited VR. So yeah, I agree, it's not even really comparable. I would just sell my kidney and buy both.

Well I mean, technically, eventually, you probably would use a VR headset to replace the TV, as a VR headset with an extremely high resolution could essentially replicate a TV of any size, where as space is a concern for a physical TV. That being said, we don't have the resolution for that. So it's not a good point. Ultimately most games won't even have VR support, where as nearly every game has ultra widescreen support. And you can technically get more use out of the monitor for non-media consumption tasks, that isn't quite possible in the resolution limited VR. So yeah, I agree, it's not even really comparable. I would just sell my kidney and buy both.

Hey down the road for sure, who knows what will be possible or not.. but for right now people are acting as if VR = so long monitors and its just simply stupidity to suggest such a thing.. for gaming or otherwise

Also 21:9 aspect ratio is not same like 16:9. Its much wider, have high pixel density, so u need stay relativly close to the screen.

Why would you need to sit closer to the monitor because of the higher pixel density and 21:9 aspect ratio? Unless you have bad eyes or something.

@MBTP at least for tv's, i havent seen an oled that i would spend money on (and have half the brightness after just a few years). as long as you have local dimming, led driven ips looks pretty good to me, is cheaper and will last longer than the oleds that are out right now. im not working in retail anymore, so its a bit older pic, but one reason i dont see oled as a replacement for me (soon): http://www.bilder-hochladen.net/i/iyhi-f-ab6d.jpg

Seriously. do people forget that monitors are used for more than just gaming?

Ye that hit in the sensitive point 21:9 monitors. Same reason I call PG348Q a "Toy" - for now. If their size grow significantly, and resolution aswell, mby then it will be good solution for all type of use. But for now its far to early to be universal tool, not toy.

Why would you need to sit closer to the monitor because of the higher pixel density and 21:9 aspect ratio? Unless you have bad eyes or something.

Beacause I lose (high) and vertical resolution I feel like im in tank. Higher FOV (21:9) make higher (pixel density) in games, things look smaller and more far from cammera. That force me to sit closer. Clarity of textures on 21:9 is better, and performance (3440x1440) also go up. But after I play some hours 3440x1440 or 3480x1620 (21:9) I back UHD resolution, and then I see how much I lose. PS : thanks for sarcasm, but I see burned pixels from 5 meters :bugeye: fry178 - said that I see 4K as end off all.. I just think he like troll on me 😀 4K is good for now, and upcomming years. Overall its better than 3440x1440 and far better than 1080p. As long as You can afford enough GPU power in PC, but that will change (in this year). But what a bull$hit anyway. Other thing is Acer in their new Z35 (not X34) decide to put VA matrix from AU Optronics instead LG AH-IPS like Asus above. What is good step IMO (not all must agree). VA panel fit better in 21:9 aspect ratio, especially when screen is curved (black point, contrast, and less light lekage, and no silvering effect).

Release? Just curious when we might see a release on this monitor in NA.

Great looking monitor, but man the price. These monitors need to drop in price, not going to spend the same amount of money as for two high-end GPU's for one.

I wonder if this monitor will also have terrible recall rate just like PG279Q. 800 pages of people complaining. It makes me sad, because i realy wanted that monitor, thank god i waited with that order. http://www.overclock.net/t/1558309/various-asus-debuts-rog-swift-pg279q-144hz-ips-and-g-sync