Asus ROG Strix XG32VQ & XG35VQ
Does size matter or is it how you use it?
Having raved about the threeand-a-half-inch smaller XG32VQ monitor on this page, you’d be forgiven for thinking that it’s big brother must be better.
The XG35VQ isn’t just 35-inches wide, it has a higher, 3,440 x 1,440 resolution which gives it a 22:9 aspect ratio compared to the 2,560 x 1,440, 16:9 combination provided by the XG32VQ. Big deal you might say, but the core difference isn’t the $190 price increase, it’s the 100Hz refresh rate which is noticeably-slower than the smaller-sibling’s 144Hz.
We’ll start with connectivity in order to explain the issue. In place of a mini DisplayPort socket is a second HDMI port to complement the full-size DisplayPort (version 1.2). One HDMI port is version 1.4 while the other is version 2. When we attached the monitor to our GTX 1080-based rig using the lesser HDMI port, we couldn’t achieve a refresh rate greater than 60Hz. And simply plugging it into the proper HDMI port didn’t always fix things.
The trouble is that at 100Hz we still suffered from image tearing. One significant reason that these monitors are cheaper than competitors is that they don’t carry Nvidia’s certifications for G-Sync (which fixes tearing). They do support the (free) Freesync standard that AMD uses so this should be less of an issue if you’re using an AMD card.
It’s still a useable monitor but the VA panel is optimised for gaming and the curved screen isn’t as uniformly-lit as desktopapplication-optimised IPS panels. For the sake of 3.5in, the XG32VQ offers a saving of $190 and is much better all round. NICK ROSS