Friday, November 17th 2017

ASUS Intros ROG Strix XG35VQ 21:9, UWQHD Monitor With 100 Hz FreeSync

ASUS has introduced a new ROG Strix monitor to its lineup, the XG35VQ, which brings with it UWQHD resolution (3440 x 1440) in a 21:9 aspect ratio and a 35" diagonal. It's a curved affair - 1800R at that - and ASUS says the VA panel offers 100% sRGB coverage, plus 2500:1 contrast and 300 cd/m2 brightness. Viewing angles stand at an almost perfect 178° - a standard spec in recent times.

The most interesting selling point for this monitor, however, is that it can deliver a 100 Hz refresh rate, with FreeSync support up to that frequency. A 4 ms response time means reduced ghosting, and the panel also applies ASUS' version of Extreme Low Motion Blur mode, which strobes the LED backlight to lower persistence, much like a VR display. This mode uses a fixed refresh rate, so ASUS recommends it for fast-paced games where users can comfortably maintain high frame rates.
There are RGB LEDs to illuminate a ring on the back of the monitor, which feature support for Aura Sync, so users can coordinate the colors and effects with other components, from external peripherals to internal parts. Additional LED lighting takes the form of a red ROG logo being projected onto the desk. It originates in the base of the stand, whose height, swivel, and tilt are all easily adjustable. Connectivity stands at 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x HDMI 1.4, 1x DisplayPort 1.2, and a headphone jack. A dual-port USB 3.0 hub completes the specs with a convenient place to connect users' keyboard and mouse.

The XG35VQ is expected to cost £799.99 (~$1,056, or ~€895).

Sources: ROG ASUS, via ETeknix
Add your own comment

19 Comments on ASUS Intros ROG Strix XG35VQ 21:9, UWQHD Monitor With 100 Hz FreeSync

#1
Hugh Mungus
Probably failed pg35vq panels stuffed into pg35vq chassis. Looks awesome thoigh,so who cares?!
Posted on Reply
#3
JackOne
This is a great monitor especially for FPS gamers.
and the panel also applies ASUS' version of Extreme Low Motion Blur mode, which strobes the LED backlight to lower persistence
EIZO, the last monitor tested here, also had one with a similar feature but it's over 1000 bucks and just 27" big, no 21:9 / curve either. I guess this one's better for gamers.
Posted on Reply
#4
Valantar
Damn, this is so close to what I want my next monitor to be - it even has a VESA mount! - but an external power brick? Why, Asus? Why? Are you really that cheap? A desktop PC already means enough cords cluttering the back of my desk, without one of them being weighted down by a giant, hot lump to boot. Oh, and having a thin, flimsy, twisted, low-quality DC cable running to the monitor? No thank you. Besides, usually external power bricks = cheap and prone to failure, while internal ones (due to not being replaceable) are made to tolerate higher temperatures and last longer. The internal supply of my Dell U2711 is going strong 6 years in - nothing exceptional about that, but I'd expect it to last 2-3 years more, at the very least. And this is not a cool-running monitor, to put it mildly.
Posted on Reply
#5
Readlight
I rather take monitor under 200 euro.
Posted on Reply
#6
Hugh Mungus
Readlight said:
I rather take monitor under 200 euro.
Really? Can't even get new 1440p for that little money.
Posted on Reply
#7
tnn500aff
LogitechFan said:
AU panels, stay away
Do you care to elaborate why?
Posted on Reply
#8
Th3pwn3r
Hugh Mungus said:
Probably failed pg35vq panels stuffed into pg35vq chassis. Looks awesome thoigh,so who cares?!
No G-sync so no care. Can anything from Vega do this monitor justice anyways? I'm kind of doubtful.
Posted on Reply
#9
medi01
With 4K 55" OLED TVs available for 1700$, exactly which piece in this VA monitor justifies its 1000$ price point?

Th3pwn3r said:
I'm kind of doubtful.
You kind of ignorant.

Posted on Reply
#10
Th3pwn3r
medi01 said:
With 4K 55" OLED TVs available for 1700$, exactly which piece in this VA monitor justifies its 1000$ price point?


You kind of ignorant.


You're trying to compare the PRICE/SIZE of a TV to a monitor and you say I'm the ignorant one? Also, your picture shows nothing specific to challenge what I said about a video card not even being strong enough to really use this monitor
Posted on Reply
#11
Totally
Th3pwn3r said:
You're trying to compare the PRICE/SIZE of a TV to a monitor and you say I'm the ignorant one? Also, your picture shows nothing specific to challenge what I said about a video card not even being strong enough to really use this monitor
Points out by the same arbitrary metric you are applying to AMDs cards Nvidia's cards with the exception of the 1080ti fail also, also highlights current performance in the segment makes freesync pointless, g-synce moreso since it adds cost to the monitor, as the cards are unlikely to be hitting triple digit frames where the feature is useful.
Posted on Reply
#12
Vayra86
LogitechFan said:
AU panels, stay away
What sort of baseless nonsense is this? Provide sources for this blanket statement, or just be quiet. This has no value whatsoever, all manufacturers have good and not so good panels.

AU Optronics and Samsung are actually pushing the PC monitor panel tech more than LG display, for example, and the amount of LG display panels that are subpar is FAR GREATER than what you find with AU Optronics.

That being said, a 2500:1 static contrast for a VA panel is VERY LOW. So definitely stay away from this specific one. If it had half its current price tag, it would be competitive, but right now, this is just Asus shoving a ROG branding up your ass with shit product.
Posted on Reply
#13
Th3pwn3r
Totally said:
Points out by the same arbitrary metric you are applying to AMDs cards Nvidia's cards with the exception of the 1080ti fail also, also highlights current performance in the segment makes freesync pointless, g-synce moreso since it adds cost to the monitor, as the cards are unlikely to be hitting triple digit frames where the feature is useful.
Mhmm, System Specs check out, AMD fanboy confirmed.
Posted on Reply
#14
Beastie
Totally said:
Points out by the same arbitrary metric you are applying to AMDs cards Nvidia's cards with the exception of the 1080ti fail also, also highlights current performance in the segment makes freesync pointless, g-synce moreso since it adds cost to the monitor, as the cards are unlikely to be hitting triple digit frames where the feature is useful.
Freesync and gsync are very useful at low framerates.
Posted on Reply
#15
TheGuruStud
Vayra86 said:
What sort of baseless nonsense is this? Provide sources for this blanket statement, or just be quiet. This has no value whatsoever, all manufacturers have good and not so good panels.

AU Optronics and Samsung are actually pushing the PC monitor panel tech more than LG display, for example, and the amount of LG display panels that are subpar is FAR GREATER than what you find with AU Optronics.

That being said, a 2500:1 static contrast for a VA panel is VERY LOW. So definitely stay away from this specific one. If it had half its current price tag, it would be competitive, but right now, this is just Asus shoving a ROG branding up your ass with shit product.
But we all know contrast ratios are purely for marketing as they're full of shit. It has to be measured, otherwise, it means jack. Perhaps it has a realistic value this time lol
Posted on Reply
#16
Vayra86
TheGuruStud said:
But we all know contrast ratios are purely for marketing as they're full of shit. It has to be measured, otherwise, it means jack. Perhaps it has a realistic value this time lol
*static* contrast is a hard value.

You are confused with dynamic contrast, which indeed falls prey to marketing.

Static contrast is very simply tied to panel tech

Most IPS are stuck with 1000:1
VA typically gives you 3000:1, good ones go up to 5000:1, achieved by means of a very low black point of below 0.1cd/m
A 2500:1 VA is a sign its not very good at blocking light, which will affect most images.
Posted on Reply
#17
Valantar
Vayra86 said:
*static* contrast is a hard value.

You are confused with dynamic contrast, which indeed falls prey to marketing.

Static contrast is very simply tied to panel tech

Most IPS are stuck with 1000:1
VA typically gives you 3000:1, good ones go up to 5000:1, achieved by means of a very low black point of below 0.1cd/m
A 2500:1 VA is a sign its not very good at blocking light, which will affect most images.
Define "affect", though. It's still 2.5x better than any IPS panel, after all (well, there are a handful of exceptions in the 1500 range). And IPS panels can look fantastic.
Posted on Reply
#18
Vayra86
Valantar said:
Define "affect", though. It's still 2.5x better than any IPS panel, after all (well, there are a handful of exceptions in the 1500 range). And IPS panels can look fantastic.
VA has some other traits that do pop up especially in cheaper panels, such as black crush and off-center contrast shifts which can even make them worse than TN in that respect. With IPS the image quality is more constant, its mostly the way the backlight is implemented that counts.
Posted on Reply
#19
medi01
Th3pwn3r said:
Also, your picture shows nothing specific to challenge what I said about a video card not even being strong enough to really use this monitor
These pictures show no AMD card could "use this monitor"?



What is wrong with you?
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment