BenQ EX3210U

Interlace pattern artifacts

On some monitors, particularly but not exclusively those with high refresh rates, interlace patterns can be seen during certain transitions. We refer to these as ‘interlace pattern artifacts’ but some users refer to them as ‘inversion artifacts’ and others as ‘scan lines’. They may appear as an interference pattern, mesh or interlaced lines which break up a given shade into a darker and lighter version of what is intended. They often catch the eye due to their dynamic nature, on models where they manifest themselves in this way. Alternatively, static interlace patterns may be seen with some shades appearing as faint horizontal or vertical bands of a slightly lighter and slightly darker version of the intended shade. We did not observe either artifact type on this monitor.

Responsiveness

Input lag

A sensitive camera and a utility called SMTT 2.0 was used to analyse the latency of the EX3210U. Over 30 repeat readings were taken to help maximise accuracy. Using this method, we calculated 2.72ms (under ½ a frame at 144Hz) of input lag and recorded similar values at other refresh rates including 60Hz and 120Hz. This figure is influenced by both the element of input lag you ‘see’ (pixel responsiveness) and the main element you ‘feel’ (signal delay). It indicates a very low signal delay which shouldn’t be bothersome even for sensitive users. Note that we don’t have the means to accurately measure input lag with VRR technology active in a VRR environment or HDR active in an HDR environment.

Perceived blur (pursuit photography)

Our article on responsiveness explores various factors affecting monitor responsiveness. A key concept explored is ‘perceived blur’, contributed to by both the pixel responses of the monitor and movement of your eyes as you observe motion on the screen. This second factor dominates on modern monitors, but both factors play an important role. A photography technique called ‘pursuit photography’ is also described, using a moving rather than stationary camera to capture motion on the screen in a way that reflects both parts of perceived blur. Rather than only reflecting the pixel response element.

The images below are pursuit photographs taken using the UFO Motion Test for ghosting, with the test running at its default speed of 960 pixels per second. This is a good practical speed to take such photographs at and highlights both elements of perceived blur well. The UFOs move across the screen from left to right at a frame rate matching the refresh rate of the display. All three rows of the test are analysed to highlight a range of pixel transitions. The monitor was tested at 60Hz (directly below), 120Hz and 144Hz using all available ‘AMA’ (Advanced Motion Acceleration) pixel overdrive settings. The two final columns show reference screens, both with IPS-type panels, set to what we consider their optimal response time setting for a given refresh rate. The Gigabyte M32U which is quite fast and provides a well-rounded performance and the ASUS PG32UQX which is rather slow for a modern IPS model.

Note that wavy patterns surrounding some UFOs in the background are slight image retention. This was only observed during this test and is something we’ve seen on various monitors before. It soon disappeared when using monitor normally.

At 60Hz, above, the UFO appears soft and unfocused without clear internal detailing. This reflects a moderate amount of perceived blur due to eye movement. Trailing is observed in places behind the UFO, due to weaknesses in pixel response time or overshoot (inverse ghosting) from aggressive pixel overdrive. There’s a fair bit of ‘powdery’ trailing with a bold initial section near the UFO with ‘AMA = 0’. These weaknesses are less apparent using ‘AMA = 1’, though a bit of ‘powdery’ trailing remains for the dark background (top row) with a slightly bold initial section for the medium background (middle row). There’s just a touch of overshoot for the light background (bottom row) – ‘halo’ trailing that’s a touch lighter than the background shade. The reference screens show less ‘powdery’ trailing in comparison, without strong overshoot. Using ‘AMA = 2’ acceleration is ramped up a fair bit with all rows showing some ‘halo’ trailing. In practice we found it fairly eye-catching for the bottom row, standing out more due to its brightness than it does in the image. These overshoot levels are not extreme by any means and are lower than you might expect based on performance at higher refresh rate (explored shortly) – this is due to a degree of variable overdrive being used, explored in relation to FreeSync shortly. ‘AMA = 3’ ramps up the overdrive in a way that’s very distracting in practice. We consider ‘AMA = 1’ or ‘AMA = 2’ optimal here, depending on sensitivity to overshoot. Below you can see how things appear with refresh rate doubled to 120Hz.

At 120Hz, above, the UFO appears significantly narrower with clearer internal detail. This reflects a significant decrease in perceived blur due to eye movement. The pixel response requirements for a good performance here are significantly increased. ‘AMA = 0’ shows clearer weaknesses now, with some quite bold trailing behind the object – though nothing we’d describe as ‘smeary’ here. ‘AMA = 1’ reduces these weaknesses quite effectively. There’s still a bit of a bold ‘tail’ to the UFO for the medium background which is a bit more pronounced than with the M32U. And some ‘powdery’ trailing behind the cockpit for the dark background – but much less of that than with the PG32UQX. The trailing is reduced with ‘AMA = 2’, with some ‘halo’ trailing introduced. To the eye this was again a bit more eye-catching for the light background than it may appear from the photo. ‘AMA = 3’ ramped up overshoot, with an ‘inky’ look to it in places and extreme ‘halo’ trailing. We again consider ‘AMA = 1’ or ‘AMA = 2’ optimal depending on overshoot sensitivity. It’s worth bearing in mind that this test only shows a small subset of transitions. In practice there are some more pronounced weaknesses (more obvious ‘powdery’ trailing – still not ‘smeary’) where some very dark and very bright shades are involved. This is less apparent with ‘AMA = 2’ but some weaknesses do still persist, beyond what you’d see on the M32U but significantly less apparent than on the PG32UQX. This is explored subjectively shortly. Below you can see how things look with a slight bump in refresh rate to 144Hz.

At 144Hz, above, the UFO appears very slightly narrower with slightly better definition. This reflects a slight reduction in perceived blur to eye movement – not as significant as the initial boost from 60Hz to 120Hz as this is only an extra 24Hz. The pixel response behaviour is quite comparable to at 120Hz overall. There’s a bit of a step up in pixel response requirements due to the increase in refresh rate, so some of the weaknesses are a touch more pronounced – such as some of the bold trailing that sits close behind the UFO for the medium background. Using ‘AMA = 1’, there’s a bit more ‘powdery trailing’ behind the UFO cockpit and body for the dark background and UFO body for the medium background compared to the M32U. But far fewer weaknesses apparent than on the PG32UQX. ‘AMA = 2’ cuts down on this ‘powdery trailing’ to a fair degree – some overshoot is introduced for the medium and light backgrounds. This ‘halo’ trailing is again more noticeable by eye than it appears in the photo, but it isn’t extreme for these transitions. We again consider ‘AMA = 1’ or ‘AMA = 2’ optimal depending on overshoot sensitivity. We slightly preferred ‘AMA = 2’ in practice and used that for our subjective testing. As mentioned at 120Hz, there are some weaknesses not highlighted with these particular transitions and those are explored subjectively very shortly.

The monitor also includes a setting called ‘Blur Reduction’, which can be used at the same time as VRR technology. This is a strobe backlight setting which forces the backlight to flicker in sync with the refresh rate of the monitor. 100Hz, 120Hz and 144Hz (DP only) can be selected as a static refresh rate, or as the ceiling of operation if using VRR at the same time. The lowest refresh rate the monitor will strobe at is ~77Hz – 93Hz, with the floor of operation varying within that range depending on content. Below that point the monitor resumes its regular VRR operation without ‘Blur Reduction’. Sensitivity to the flickering of the backlight varies and some will find it bothersome whilst others may notice accelerated eye fatigue, even if the flickering isn’t actively bothersome to them. The pursuit photographs below were taken with the monitor set to 100Hz using ‘Blur Reduction’. AMA can be adjusted just as it can without the setting active and our recommendations there would be the same. We’ll just be testing ‘AMA = 1’ and ‘AMA = 2’ here as these are the two optimal settings you will choose from. The reference screens used for comparison are the AOC C24G1 using its ‘MBR’ setting and the Dell S2417DG using its ‘ULMB’ setting. These are both quite useable strobe backlight settings and make appropriate references.

Strobe behaviour was similar regardless of whether VRR was active in the OSD. Subjective analysis over a range of refresh rates is included deeper into the review. Brightness can be adjusted according to taste, as explored earlier. A lower brightness can potentially improve motion clarity, but we didn’t find it had a significant effect in this case – for reference, these photos were taken at minimum brightness.

With ‘Blur Reduction’ active at 100Hz, above, the main object is significantly narrower with clearer internal detailing compared to with the setting deactivated. This is true even if you’re using a higher refresh rate with the setting disabled. The segments of the UFO are distinct, with well-defined black lines separating them – these black lines appear somewhat clearer by eye than in the images. Separate white notches can also be seen on each segment, though these are not as crisp and countable as on the S2417DG reference, with the photo fairly representing how they appear by eye. This could be due to some pixel response time weaknesses. There are some repetitions of the object which can broadly be termed ‘strobe crosstalk’ – not extreme in these examples by any means. You can see this both in front and behind for the dark background and only behind for the medium and light backgrounds, but it’s not extreme strobe crosstalk shown here by any means. This is less bold than the strobe crosstalk for the C24G1. There is also some overshoot visible, with this largely replacing the strobe crosstalk when using ‘AMA = 2’. Both the strobe crosstalk and overshoot appears fragmented due to the strobe nature of the backlight. The preferred setting really comes down to preferences here, just like with ‘Blur Reduction’ disabled. The images below show the monitor running at 120Hz, with ‘Blur Reduction’ enabled.

With ‘Blur Reduction’ active at 120Hz, above, the UFO is slightly narrower with segmentation somewhat better defined. The black lines are again sharper than in the image – the notches are again more distinct than with the setting deactivated, though not as distinct as on the S2417DG. The strobe crosstalk and overshoot is broadly similar to at 100Hz, though the fragments are narrower and sit closer to the object due to the increased refresh rate. The preferred AMA setting again comes down to personal preference. The images below show the monitor running with ‘Blur Reduction’ at 144Hz. The AOC AG251FG is used as the ULMB reference here as the S2417DG can’t strobe at 144Hz.

With ‘Blur Reduction’ active at 144Hz, above, things don’t look dramatically different to at 120Hz. The UFO segmentation is very slightly more distinct by eye than at 120Hz – and in both cases somewhat more distinct than it appears in the images. The white notches are again not as distinct as they are for the ULMB reference, but don’t just blur together completely like they do with ‘Blur Reduction’ disabled. The strobe crosstalk is a touch stronger for the dark background due to the increased pixel response requirements here. Overshoot is reduced slightly and again the choice between ‘AMA = 1’ and ‘AMA = 2’ comes down to overshoot tolerance – we preferred ‘AMA = 2’ in practice and used that for our subjective testing.

It’s important to note that strobe crosstalk varies at different areas of the screen. Not all areas refresh simultaneously, so its appearance can differ depending on how high up or low down on the screen movement is being observed. The image below is a pursuit photo with the UFO shown at various positions of the screen, from top to bottom, at a refresh rate of 144Hz with ‘AMA = 2’. Strobe crosstalk positioning was similar at decreased refresh rates. Overshoot was just slightly stronger as refresh rate was reduced, but the differences in that and strobe crosstalk were not dramatic. The ‘- Middle -‘ marker denotes the central region of the screen. Note that this image does not accurately show the clarity of the object itself, but allows analysis of strobe crosstalk and other imperfections such as overshoot.

You can see varying levels of strobe crosstalk depending on how far up or down the screen you’re observing. Higher up the screen there is quite strong strobe crosstalk in front of the object and lower down behind the object. But it’s the central bands of the screen where your eyes will spend most of their time focusing on competitive titles – those which see most benefit from the setting. And here, the strobe crosstalk levels were low, whilst there wasn’t strong overshoot either. Strobe crosstalk and overshoot levels can vary depending on the transitions performed, so we also provide broader subjective analysis a little later on.

Responsiveness in games and movies

On various Battlefield titles, with the frame rate keeping up with the 144Hz refresh rate, the monitor provided a fluid experience. The monitor outputs up to 2.4 times as much visual information per second as a 60Hz monitor, or this monitor running at 60Hz (or 60fps). This significantly enhances the ‘connected feel’, which describes the precision and fluidity felt when interacting with the game. This was also aided by the low input lag of the monitor – and more specifically the very low signal delay. The high frame and high refresh rate combination also reduces perceived blur due to eye movement, something demonstrated using Test UFO earlier on. This provides a competitive edge by making it easier to track and engage enemies, whilst some will find the gaming experience or simply general usage of the monitor more comfortable. It complements the high pixel density well, too, with details better preserved during motion than at 60Hz.

The other important part of the perceived blur equation is pixel responsiveness. As highlighted earlier with the pursuit photographs, the monitor did have some weaknesses in that respect. Using our preferred ‘AMA = 2’ setting, there was a fair bit of overshoot. This was particularly visible as ‘halo’ trailing that’s quite a bit brighter than the background shade. Mainly, but not exclusively, where medium to light backgrounds (e.g. daylight sky, smoke etc.) are present. Sometimes ‘dirty trailing’ was visible, which is darker than the background or object shade – but this was relatively faint and not deep and inky by any means. The overshoot is toned down using ‘AMA =1’, but it’s replaced by ‘powdery trailing’ – which is more widespread and extensive than that observed using ‘AMA = 2’. It adds an additional mask of perceived blur which is more significant than that experienced using ‘AMA = 2’. There are still some transitions using ‘AMA = 2’ that provide more extended or bolder ‘powdery’ trailing, more significant than what was shown by the pursuit photos. Mainly where very bright or very dark shades are involved. It isn’t ‘smeary’ in appearance and is very different to what your typical VA model would show, but these pixel responses are certainly slower than on faster IPS models like the Gigabyte M32U.

Similar observations were made on Shadow of the Tomb Raider. There are plenty of very dark and very bright shades combining on this title, presenting those ‘high contrast’ transitions this model struggles a bit with. And there’s again widespread and in places potentially eye-catching overshoot – sensitivity to this varies and again turning down the ‘AMA’ setting is an option. The lack of the sort of ‘smeary’ trailing you’d see on most VA models and a lack of extreme overshoot was certainly good to see, even if a natively faster panel which requires less aggressive pixel overdrive would naturally perform better. We also observed video content at a range of refresh rates, including ~24 – 30fps content on platforms such as Netflix, Disney Plus and Amazon Prime Video as well as 60fps content on YouTube. Aside from a touch of overshoot in places (faint and short-lived – less noticeable than for higher frame rate gaming content) there were no real weaknesses from the pixel responses of the monitor. Some may prefer ‘AMA = 1’ to cut down on the overshoot, with performance still good for these sorts of frame rates using that setting. The main barrier to fluidity was the frame rate of the content itself rather than weaknesses related to the pixel responses of the monitor.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases made using the below link. Where possible, you’ll be redirected to your nearest store. Further information on supporting our work.

Blur Reduction

Earlier in the review we covered ‘Blur Reduction’, including its principles of operation and how it performs using specific tests. When using a strobe backlight feature it’s very important that your frame rate matches the refresh rate precisely, otherwise you’re left with particularly obvious stuttering or juddering. It stands out so clearly as there’s very little perceived blur due to eye movement to mask it. Blur Reduction on this monitor can be used alongside VRR technology (Adaptive-Sync or HDMI 2.1 VRR), which avoids such issues within its range of operation. Below ~77 – 93Hz Blur Reduction deactivated and the monitor returned to its normal operation. The point of deactivation seemed to vary in different scenarios and wasn’t a well-defined and precise point. You can’t activate HDR with ‘Blur Reduction’ active, but most other features in the OSD remain accessible including ‘AMA’, colour channel controls, brightness and even ‘B.I.+’. We tested this feature using various Battlefield titles which we’ll use as reference for this section.

Overall, the technology worked well, achieving its stated goal of blur reduction. Or more specifically, reducing perceived blur due to eye movement. It also worked well with VRR active at the same time, without unexpected behaviour. The greatest benefits in terms of ‘connected feel’ and minimal perceived blur still come at higher refresh rates, but it certainly makes dips in frame rate more palatable when they aren’t accompanied by extremely obvious stuttering or tearing and juddering. As covered earlier there was some strobe crosstalk in places, though this was generally at reasonable levels centrally which is the main area your eyes focus during competitive play. And that’s really what this mode is designed for. It was higher for some transitions, particularly involving very dark shades or very bright shades against contrasting backgrounds. These are the same transitions the monitor struggles a bit with when the technology is not used. The overshoot demonstrated with pursuit photographs earlier was also a feature – not extreme overshoot by any means, particularly at triple digit refresh rates. Some may prefer the balance of ‘AMA = 1’, as noted earlier, though this increases strobe crosstalk somewhat as well.

Overall, we didn’t generally find the strobe crosstalk or overshoot strong enough to detract from the obvious perceived blur reduction offered by this mode. Because the monitor uses a QD LED backlight rather than relying on KSF phosphors to achieve its wide native gamut, you don’t have issues with red or magenta fringing or related colourful flashes. We find such issues rather distracting and some others would as well, so it’s nice not having to worry about that here. There is still flickering due to the nature of how the strobe backlight mode works and this does become more noticeable at decreased refresh rates. Sensitivity to this varies and it simply comes with the territory with such modes. Overall, considering the performance provided here, VRR support on top and the flexibility you maintain in the OSD with the setting active we found this to be one of the better strobe backlight implementations we’ve come across. And easily the best we’ve experienced or are aware of on a ‘4K’ UHD model.

VRR (Variable Refresh Rate) technology

FreeSync – the technology and activating it

AMD FreeSync is a variable refresh rate technology, an AMD-specific alternative to Nvidia G-SYNC. Where possible, the monitor dynamically adjusts its refresh rate so that it matches the frame rate being outputted by the GPU. Both our responsiveness article and the G-SYNC article linked to explore the importance of these two elements being synchronised. At a basic level, a mismatch between the frame rate and refresh rate can cause stuttering (VSync on) or tearing and juddering (VSync off). FreeSync also boasts reduced latency compared to running with VSync enabled, in the variable frame rate environment in which it operates.

FreeSync requires a compatible AMD GPU such as the Radeon RX 580 used in our test system. The monitor itself must support ‘VESA Adaptive-Sync’ for at least one of its display connectors, as this is the protocol that FreeSync uses. The EX3210U supports FreeSync Premium Pro via DP and HDMI on compatible GPUs and systems. Note that HDR can be activated at the same time as FreeSync. There isn’t a setting to activate or deactivate the technology in the OSD, that’s handled automatically. On the GPU driver side recent AMD drivers make activation of the technology very simple. You should ensure the GPU driver is setup correctly to use FreeSync, so open ‘AMD Software’, click ‘Settings’ (cog icon towards top right) and click on ‘Display’. You should then ensure that the first slider is set to ‘Enabled’ as shown below. The top image shows the monitor connected by DP and the bottom image by HDMI. The setting is referred to as ‘AMD FreeSync Premium Pro’ in both cases, although the exact wording may depend on the driver version you’re using.

The BenQ supports a variable refresh rate range of 48 – 144Hz (48 – 120Hz via HDMI prior to firmware V004). That means that if the game is running between 48fps and 144fps, the monitor will adjust its refresh rate to match. When the frame rate rises above 144fps, the monitor will stay at 144Hz and the GPU will respect your selection of ‘VSync on’ or ‘VSync off’ in the graphics driver. With ‘VSync on’ the frame rate will not be allowed to rise above 144fps, at which point VSync activates and imposes the usual associated latency penalty. With ‘VSync off’ the frame rate is free to climb as high as the GPU will output (potentially >144fps). AMD LFC (Low Framerate Compensation) is also supported by this model, which means that the refresh rate will stick to multiples of the frame rate where it falls below the 48Hz (48fps) floor of operation for FreeSync. If a game ran at 38fps, for example, the refresh rate would be 76Hz to help keep tearing and stuttering at bay. This feature is used regardless of VSync setting, so it’s only above the ceiling of operation where the VSync setting makes a difference.

To configure VSync, open ‘AMD Software’. Click ‘Settings’ (cog icon towards top right) and click ‘Graphics’. The setting is listed as ‘Wait for Vertical Refresh’. This configures it globally, but if you wish to configure it for individual games click ‘Game Graphics’ towards the top right. The default is ‘Off, unless application specifies’ which means that VSync will only be active if you enable it within the game itself, if there is such an option. Such an option does usually exist – it may be called ‘sync every frame’ or something along those lines rather than simply ‘VSync’. Most users will probably wish to enable VSync when using FreeSync to ensure that they don’t get any tearing. You’d therefore select either the third or fourth option in the list, shown in the image below. Above this dropdown list there’s a toggle for ‘Radeon Enhanced Sync’. This is an alternative to VSync which allows the frame rate to rise above the refresh rate (no VSync latency penalty) whilst potentially keeping the experience free from tearing or juddering. This requires that the frame rate comfortably exceeds the refresh rate, not just peaks slightly above it. We won’t be going into this in detail as it’s a GPU feature rather than a monitor feature.



Some users prefer to leave VSync enabled but use a frame rate limiter set a few frames below the maximum supported (e.g. 141fps) instead, avoiding any VSync latency penalty at frame rates near the ceiling of operation or tearing from frame rates rising above the refresh rate. The monitor does not include a ‘frame counter’ (refresh rate display) feature and the refresh rate shown in the OSD only reflects the refresh rate you’ve selected for the monitor. So there is no clear indication that VRR is doing its thing – aside from the lack of tearing and stuttering due to mismatches. If the setting is configured correctly in the graphics driver, as described earlier, the monitor should display ‘FreeSync Premium’ (SDR) or ‘FreeSync Premium Pro’ (HDR) in the OSD rather than ‘FreeSync OFF’.

Finally, it’s worth noting that FreeSync only removes stuttering or juddering related to mismatches between frame rate and refresh rate. It can’t compensate for other interruptions to smooth game play, for example network latency or insufficient system memory. Some game engines will also show stuttering (or ‘hitching’) for various other reasons which won’t be eliminated by the technology.

FreeSync – the experience

As usual, we tested various game titles using AMD FreeSync, with the experience very similar in all cases. Issues affecting one title but not others would suggest a problem with the game or GPU driver rather than the monitor. For the sake of simplicity we’ll just focus on Battlefield titles here. They offer a good range of graphics settings, allowing the full VRR range to be analysed on our Radeon RX 580. This isn’t the most powerful GPU on the market by a long way, so it was common to see dips below 144fps even with greatly reduced graphics settings. Without the technology active tearing (VSync off) or stuttering (VSync on) can be observed due to the frame and refresh rate being out of sync. FreeSync ensured synchronisation between the two, getting rid of such issues – very welcome if you’re sensitive to tearing or stuttering. Drops in frame rate still reduce the ‘connected feel’ and increase perceived blur due to eye movement, however.

The monitor doesn’t use tightly tuned variable overdrive which would carefully re-tune the pixel overdrive and significantly slacken off acceleration levels as refresh rate drops. Using our preferred setting of ‘AMA = 2’, there was moderate overshoot at high refresh rates. This increased slightly as refresh rate dipped, although didn’t become as extreme as you might expect. So at least some degree of variable overdrive did appear to be in use even if it wasn’t tightly tuned or highly effective variable overdrive. Sensitivity to overshoot varies, but we found it became rather strong for some transitions by low triple digit and certainly into double digit refresh rates. To give a broad recommendation, you may wish to switch over to ‘AMA = 1’ if you’re frequently dipping into double-digit refresh rates. But different settings will work for different people. The technology worked down to the floor of operation of 48Hz (48fps), below which LFC (Low Framerate Compensation) kicked in. LFC keeps the refresh rate at a multiple of the frame rate to keep tearing and stuttering at bay. There was a subtle momentary stuttering when LFC activated or deactivated, something we always observe and not specific to this model. It was much less noticeable than traditional stuttering from frame and refresh rate mismatches, but if you’re sensitive to it and frequently passing the boundary it could be annoying.

Nvidia Adaptive-Sync (‘G-SYNC Compatible’)

As noted earlier, AMD FreeSync makes use of Adaptive-Sync technology on a compatible monitor. As of driver version 417.71, users with Nvidia GPUs (GTX 10 series and newer) and Windows 10 or later can also make use of this Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) technology. When a monitor is used in this way, it is something which Nvidia refers to as ‘G-SYNC Compatible’. Some models are validated as G-SYNC compatible, which means they have been specifically tested by Nvidia and pass certain quality checks. With the EX3210U you can connect the monitor up via either DisplayPort 1.4 or HDMI 2.1 to use ‘G-SYNC Compatible Mode’, with the latter technically making use of HDMI 2.1’s integrated VRR functionality rather than Adaptive-Sync. There’s no OSD setting for Adaptive-Sync on the monitor, that’s handled automatically. When you open up Nvidia Control Panel, you should then see ‘Set up G-SYNC’ listed in the ‘Display’ section. Ensure the ‘Enable G-SYNC, G-SYNC Compatible’ checkbox and ‘Enable settings for the selected display model’ is checked as shown below and press ‘OK’. If you’ve enabled ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ and it was previously disabled, the monitor should re-establish its connection with the system and the technology should now be active.



You will also see in the image above that it states: “Selected Display is not validated as G-SYNC Compatible.” This means Nvidia hasn’t specifically tested and validated the display, not that it won’t work. On our RTX 3090 the experience was very similar to what we described with FreeSync. With the technology getting rid of tearing and stuttering from what would otherwise be frame and refresh rate mismatches, within the VRR range. An LFC-like frame to refresh multiplication technology was employed below that to keep tearing and stuttering from frame and refresh rate mismatches at bay. There was again a subtle momentary stuttering as the boundary was crossed, as we observed with our AMD GPU as well. Our suggestions regarding use of VSync also apply, but you’re using Nvidia Control Panel rather than AMD Software to control this. The setting is found in ‘Manage 3D settings’ under ‘Vertical sync’, where the final option (‘Fast’) is equivalent to AMD’s ‘Enhanced Sync’ setting. You’ll also notice ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ listed under ‘Monitor Technology’ in this section, as shown below. Make sure this is selected (it should be if you’ve set everything up correctly in ‘Set up G-SYNC’).



Note again that the monitor does not include a ‘frame counter’ (refresh rate display) feature and the refresh rate shown in the OSD only reflects the refresh rate you’ve selected for the monitor. So there is no clear indication that VRR is doing its thing – aside from the lack of tearing and stuttering due to mismatches. If the setting is configured correctly in the graphics driver, as described earlier, the monitor should display ‘FreeSync Premium’ in the OSD rather than ‘FreeSync OFF’. This should also be displayed in the if using ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ via HDMI 2.1 VRR. And as with the AMD FreeSync Premium Pro, HDR can be used at the same time as ‘G-SYNC Compatible’.

HDMI 2.1 VRR

HDMI 2.1 includes Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) support as part of the specification. This is an integrated technology, which unlike FreeSync does not rely on VESA Adaptive-Sync to function. As such it be used by devices such as the PS5 that don’t support Adaptive-Sync. It can also be leveraged via ‘G-SYNC Compatible Mode’ on compatible Nvidia GPUs. Based on our testing of ‘G-SYNC Compatible Mode’ using HDMI 2.1 VRR, the experience was very similar to the Adaptive-Sync experience under SDR and HDR. ‘Blur Reduction’ is also available to use with HDMI 2.1 VRR, if you wish.

HDR (High Dynamic Range)

HDR (High Dynamic Range) on an ideal monitor involves very deep dark shades and brilliantly bright light shades being simultaneously displayed. In addition to a broad range of shades between these extremes, including muted pastel shades alongside very vibrant saturated shades. Ideally, per-pixel illumination would be provided (e.g. self-emissive displays such as OLED), or for LCDs a very large number of precisely controlled dimming zones used. A solution such as FALD (Full Array Local Dimming) with a generous number of dimming zones, for example. Such a solution would allow some areas of the screen to remain very dim whilst others show brilliantly high brightness. Colour reproduction is also an important part of HDR, with the ultimate goal being support for a huge colour gamut, Rec. 2020. A more achievable near-term goal is support for at least 90% DCI-P3 (Digital Cinema Initiatives standard colour space) coverage. Finally, HDR makes use of at least 10-bit precision per colour channel, so its desirable that the monitor supports at least 10-bits per subpixel. HDR10 is the most widely supported standard used in HDR games and movies and what is supported here.

For games and other full screen applications that support HDR, the BenQ EX3210U automatically switches to its HDR operating mode if an HDR signal is provided. Some game titles will activate HDR correctly when the appropriate in-game setting is selected. Others that support HDR will only run in HDR if ‘Use HDR’ is turned on in Windows, too. Related Windows HDR settings are found in the ‘Windows HD Color settings’ (Windows 10) or ‘HDR’ (Windows 11) section of ‘Display settings’ (right click the desktop). If you want to view HDR movie content, ensure ‘Stream HDR Video’ (Windows 10) or ‘Play streaming HDR video’ (Windows 11) is active. Also note that there’s an ‘HDR/SDR brightness balance’ (Windows 10) or ‘SDR content brightness’ (Windows 11) slider that allows you to adjust the overall balance of SDR content if HDR is active in Windows. This is really just a digital brightness slider that only makes changes for SDR content, and you lose contrast by adjusting it. The settings in the OSD are greatly restricted under HDR and the gamma and general balance to the image is off when viewing SDR content, so we’d only recommend activating HDR in Windows if you’re about to use an HDR application that specifically requires it.

For simplicity we’ll just focus on Shadow of the Tomb Raider here. This is a title we’ve tested on a broad variety of monitors under HDR and we know it has a good HDR implementation which highlights the strengths and weaknesses of a screen’s HDR capability well. Although our testing focuses on HDR PC gaming with an RTX 3090 hooked up via DP, similar observations were made when viewing HDR video content on the Netflix app. There are some additional points to bear in mind if you wish to view such content. We also made similar observations using HDMI, which would be used when viewing HDR content on an HDR compatible games console for example. Testing on both our Nvidia and AMD GPUs provided a similar experience in both cases via DP, but via HDMI our AMD GPU gave an unusually dull and muted representation under HDR. We’re not sure if this is related to the older HDMI hardware used on this GPU – it doesn’t support HDMI 2.1 so perhaps that was causing some issues here.

The monitor includes three ‘HDR Mode’ settings; ‘Game HDRi’, ‘Cinema HDRi’ and ‘Display HDR’. As noted earlier, these settings act as so-called ‘emulation modes’ under SDR but act as distinct HDR settings when an HDR signal is detected. ‘Game HDRi’ and ‘Cinema HDRi’ incorporate the light sensor, as used for ‘Brightness Intelligence +’ (B.I. +) under SDR. This adjusts the image based on the content being displayed as well as ambient lighting. As we covered earlier, it was very gentle with its brightness adjustments and tended to just stay moderately bright in any lighting conditions. Further adjustments are made to colour temperature, gamma and other elements as well. The HDR10 pipeline has a rather specific set of parameters which a monitor would ideally follow closely. The HDRi modes make various changes to the image (with the ‘Cinema HDR’ mode giving an overly deep look as if gamma is generally too high) and limit the brightness levels, going against the intended look. There is a ‘Backlight Control’ option available with the ‘DisplayHDR’ setting that will enable local dimming – if this is disabled, the backlight will simply stay at it a moderately bright level regardless of content. For these reasons we strongly preferred the ‘Display HDR’ setting with ‘Backlight Control’ enabled and will focus on that for the rest of this section. Subjectively, some may like the look the ‘HDRi’ modes give to the image so should feel free to use them if so. Many settings are locked off under HDR, as usual – including brightness, gamma, ‘Blur Reduction’ and colour channels. You can adjust settings such as ‘Sharpness’ and ‘AMA’ according to taste.

The BenQ EX3210U is VESA DisplayHDR 600 certified, which means it gives a slightly enhanced HDR experience compared to many models – that isn’t really saying much. In terms of colour gamut, 90% DCI-P3 coverage is the minimum required for this HDR certification level. The monitor comfortably exceeded this, with a measured 96% DCI-P3. This is shown in the representation below, where the red triangle shows the monitor’s colour gamut, the blue triangle DCI-P3 and green triangle sRGB. This strong DCI-P3 coverage plus some extension beyond for the green to blue edge of the gamut provides a good level of vibrancy under HDR. Elements that the developers intend to be vibrant are, such as roaring orange flames, deep orange and red lava, lush forest vegetation and brightly painted artifacts. Even more generous Rec. 2020 coverage (more extension beyond DCI-P3) could invite even more vibrancy in places and extra dimming precision could help improve the depth of some medium and darker shades, but vibrancy was still at a good level nonetheless. Because developers target wider colour spaces than sRGB under HDR, the oversaturation observed under SDR wasn’t present. Lara Croft’s skin tone and that of various other characters on the game was appropriately rich without looking too sun-kissed or overdone, earthy browns showed good neutrality rather than having a red push and vegetation appeared appropriate without overdone yellowish greens or an inappropriate slightly neon look.

Colour gamut 'Test Settings'

The HDR10 pipeline uses 10-bits per colour channel, which this monitor also supports via 8-bit + FRC. This enhanced precision aids the nuanced shade variety for darker and brighter shades, whilst allowing the monitor to use its generous colour gamut with appropriate precision. This provides a natural-looking uplift of detail in darker regions, due to the variety of subtly different dark shades provided. This is different to a gamma enhancement that could be applied under SDR, which would artificially raise detail by lightening shades rather than increasing the variety of shades. At the high end the enhanced nuanced variety of bright shades help smooth out gradients and provide more natural shade progressions for various particle effects, weather effects, smoke and suchlike. To really help accentuate this, you’d need a much higher luminance precision than is provided by the backlight here. Under HDR there should be a tight link between the shades outputted and luminance output of the monitor and that’s not possible in this case. The image below shows one of our favourite scenes from Shadow of the Tomb Raider for HDR. Remember that the photo is purely for illustrative purposes and in no way represents how the monitor appeared running HDR in person.

This scene highlighted the aforementioned advantages of the 10-bit precision nicely, with a good mixture of shade depths and plenty of subtle variations. The VESA DisplayHDR 600 level requires local dimming and as covered earlier in the contrast and brightness section, that’s provided here with 16 dimming zones running as vertical bands from the left to right side of the screen. Compared to the ~8.3 million pixels of the screen, this is a small number of dimming zones and therefore precision is very limited. It still provides a situational boost to contrast in some scenes and the zones were certainly reactive rather than ‘laggy’ in their response to changes in the scene. Using the scene above as an example, the brighter shades near the waterfall can be boosted whilst the darker to medium shades for the shaded areas to the left can remain relatively dim. There is of course an intricate mixture of shade depths which isn’t accounted for here and depth is nowhere near as good as it could be for darker and even some medium shades. But there’s still an improvement compared to universal backlight control for scenes like this. For some scenes where there are more intricate mixtures of light and dark the monitor can only do so much with its 16 dimming zones. The dimming algorithm proved quite reactive, but as explored earlier tended to bias towards darker shades where mixtures of bright and dark covered a dimming zone. And didn’t dim to extremely low levels even for very dark content. Overall, we felt it struck a reasonable balance between a situational contrast enhancement and ensuring the zones weren’t abruptly dimming and brightening all the time in a very obvious fashion, particularly where dark shades dominated.

The peak luminance we recorded (506 cd/m²) was decent but not exceptional by HDR standards – it also fell some way short of the specified 600 cd/m² which is the minimum requirement for the VESA DisplayHDR 600 level. We tested various white patch sizes as documented earlier and also took some in-game measurements but couldn’t ever attain a higher brightness than ~506 cd/m². And often it was a fair bit lower, as explained earlier with the limited number of dimming zones and the tendency of the screen to dark-bias for mixed content. This was repeated with our AMD GPU and results were similar. Still, this helped bright elements such as the glint of light on the water stand out with reasonable but not truly brilliant ‘pop’. And with the monitor able to sustain decent brightness levels where bright shades dominated it gave a somewhat more natural look to large areas of daylight. This was certainly not apparent to the extent we’ve seen on some models of the same DisplayHDR tier (such as the Acer XB323U GP) or higher, however. The section of video review below runs through the HDR experience using various scenes from Battlefield V, for a bit of variety. Another game we’ve used extensively on monitors under HDR and know has a good HDR implementation.

The ‘4K’ UHD experience

Our 3840 x 2160 ‘4K’ UHD experience article takes a look at what the resolution brings to the table on a 28” screen, with pixel density of 157.35 PPI (Pixels Per Inch). The 32” screen of the BenQ provides a slightly lower pixel density of 137.68 PPI – so still high for a monitor. This provides a certain ‘UHD’ crispness to text and suitably high resolution content, similar to what’s described in the article. The larger screen size is also more accommodating with this resolution, when it comes to viewing without as much scaling or application-specific zoom. We were happy to use the monitor without any scaling, which offered an excellent level of ‘desktop real-estate’ and multi-tasking potential with strong text clarity. Scaling levels come down to personal preference, however. And as pointed out in the ‘4K UHD Experience’ article, the high pixel density remains regardless of this and provided the text scales ‘cleanly’ (which it does in most cases, on modern versions of Windows) you benefit from the full clarity and crispness of this. The images below show the screen in action on the desktop and doing some multi-tasking natively (100% scaling – no scaling) and with a small amount of scaling applied (125%).

Note that these images are just for illustrative purposes and don’t accurately reflect how the monitor appears in person. Any banding and patchiness on solid backgrounds are artifacts in the image, not observed in person.

The 32” screen also provided an enjoyable ‘4K’ UHD gaming experience, with the large size inviting a good level of immersion – but not feeling overbearing from our preferred viewing distance. A screen of this size would also be more practical if you wish to move it back a bit further, too. The strong pixel density provided strong definition and clarity that’s similar to what is described in the article – something which screens of a significantly lower pixel density (e.g. 27” WQHD screens) simply don’t offer. The high refresh rate of the screen, with accompanying high frame rates, also helped preserve this to a greater extent during movement than with significantly lower refresh rates. And it was nice having this spread out across quite a large screen, in our view. The visuals were most impressive for games with high resolution textures, detailed particle effects and suchlike. But even for graphically much simpler titles there’s a defined look to objects and their edges even as you look into the distance on the game, which isn’t seen on models with significantly lower pixel density. The images below show the monitor running various game titles at the native resolution. These are purely for illustrative purposes and in no way indicate how the monitor appears in person.

Interpolation and upscaling

The 3840 x 2160 (‘4K’ UHD) resolution is graphically demanding and not all systems can run it, so it may be desirable or necessary to run at a lower resolution. The monitor is able to use interpolation (scaling) to display lower resolutions such as 1920 x 1080 (‘1080p’ or Full HD) using all 3840 x 2160 pixels of the display. To ensure the monitor rather than GPU is handling the scaling process, as a PC user, you need to ensure the GPU driver is correctly configured so that the GPU doesn’t take over the scaling process. For AMD GPU users the monitor will handle the scaling by default, when gaming at non-native resolutions. Nvidia users should open the Nvidia Control Panel and navigate to ‘Display – Adjust desktop size and position’. They should ensure that ‘No Scaling’ is selected and ‘Perform scaling on:’ is set to ‘Display’ as shown below.

The monitor supports interpolation at various refresh rates including 60Hz, 120Hz and 144Hz. When running 1920 x 1080 @144Hz the monitor reports 2560 x 1440 @144Hz in the OSD. This didn’t appear significantly different in terms of the interpolated image compared to running 1920 x 1080 @120Hz etc. where 1920 x 1080 is reported in the OSD.



The monitor includes various ‘Display Mode’ settings in the ‘System’ – ‘Display’ section of the OSD when the monitor is running at a non-native resolution. The setting is shown briefly in this section of the OSD video. The default ‘Full’ setting uses interpolation to map the source resolution onto all 3840 x 2160 pixels of the display. There’s also ‘Aspect’, which will use as much screen space as possible without changing the aspect ratio, avoiding any stretching or distortion for non-16:9 resolutions. And finally, ‘1:1’ which is a pixel mapping feature that will only use the pixels called for in the source resolution and fill out the remaining pixels as black space around the image.

When running the monitor at the either 1920 x 1080 (Full HD or 1080p) or 2560 x 1440 (WQHD or 1440p), there was moderate softening. This wasn’t as extreme as on some models and you can access the ‘Sharpness’ control if you prefer to offset some of the softening. Our preference was to set this to ‘7’, but everyone will have their own preferences. The interpolation process worked quite well overall – the WQHD resolution was presented particularly well and didn’t appear dramatically softer than viewing that resolution natively on a screen of this size. Nor did it appear excessively over-sharpened, with the sharpness control again something you can adjust according to preferences. The Full HD resolution appeared a touch soft in a way that can’t be counteracted with the sharpness control (and excessive sharpness can be introduced if that is raised too high). Though even natively, clarity is not really a strong point of any ~32” screen with Full HD resolution. So overall the interpolation process used by the monitor was well-balanced and flexible.

As usual, if you’re running the monitor at 3840 x 2160 and viewing 1920 x 1080 content (for example a video over the internet or a Blu-ray, using movie software) then it is the GPU and software that handles the upscaling. That’s got nothing to do with the monitor itself – there is a very small amount of softening to the image compared to viewing such content on a native Full HD monitor, but it’s slight and shouldn’t bother most users.

Video review

The video below shows the monitor in action. The camera, processing done and your own screen all affect the output – so it doesn’t accurately represent what you’d see when viewing the monitor in person. It still provides useful visual demonstrations and explanations which help reinforce some of the key points raised in the written piece.

Timestamps:
Features & Aesthetics
Contrast
Colour reproduction
HDR (High Dynamic Range)
Responsiveness (General)
Responsiveness (VRR)

Conclusion

The combination of 32” screen size and ‘4K’ UHD resolution is one we often praise, providing a strong pixel density which gives text and suitably high resolution image content a well-defined look. And which facilitates viewing without scaling or with lower levels than for smaller screens with the resolution. The relatively large screen provides ‘desktop real estate’ advantages, whilst also providing an immersive experience for entertainment usage. The monitor makes some fairly bold aesthetic choices, with an orange or coral red coloured striping visible for the long legs of the stand base. The silver plastic which tops this base doesn’t really emit ‘premium’ vibes either, but it does the job. The monitor is otherwise decently solid in its build, with good weight and good ergonomics to go with it – though height adjustment is more limited than some options and there’s no pivot into portrait. We found the integrated speakers and subwoofer performed well – certainly above average for a monitor – and the OSD remote was a useful addition. HDMI 2.1 is also present and correct at full bandwidth, providing a 120Hz ‘4K’ UHD signal for the PS5 and Xbox Series X, alongside integrated VRR support.

The IPS-type panel offered the usual strengths in colour consistency, which was combined with a generous colour gamut covering most of DCI-P3 and all of Adobe RGB. This offers good flexibility for content creators, whilst for content consumption it provides a strong level of vibrancy. The gamma tracking was a bit wonky, though could be improved to a degree with appropriate OSD tweaking – full calibration (including profile) would improve that further. Contrast was in-line with expectations, a touch below the specified 1000:1 for static contrast and a moderate but expected level of ‘IPS glow’. Brightness was somewhat limited under SDR, given the panel capabilities, though provided suitable brightness for most users. Under HDR brightness was improved and 16-zone local dimming was facilitated. However; even under a range of test conditions, we were unable to record much above 500 cd/m² which is unexpectedly low for a VESA DisplayHDR 600 certified display. The local dimming provided a situational edge in contrast, but was still very limited compared to solutions with a larger number of zones (Mini LED and OLED etc.). The colour gamut was put to good use under HDR, though, delivering a good but appropriate level of saturation and vibrancy. As long as the gimmicky ‘HDRi’ settings were avoided, that is.

In terms of responsiveness the monitor doesn’t use the fastest panel of its type, but it put it to relatively good use. There were some weaknesses in terms of ‘powdery trailing’ and overshoot, with the user able to find a balance between the two with the flexible and relatively well-tuned ‘AMA’ settings. Input lag was nice and low and VRR worked as expected via both DP and HDMI, with both AMD FreeSync and Nvidia’s ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ offering a similar experience. It could also be used with ‘Blur Reduction’, which was a pretty decent strobe backlight implementation and probably the best we’ve come across on a ’4K’ model. On our forum in posts such as this one and in this thread we draw various comparisons, including to the Gigabyte M32U which is a cheaper option (~$700 vs. ~$1000 USD) with better pixel responsiveness, USB-C support and a narrower colour gamut. And the MSI MPG321UR-QD based on the same panel as the BenQ. This has an arguably less ‘fussy’ design, offers higher SDR and HDR brightness, includes USB-C and has emulation modes for not just sRGB but also DCI-P3 and Adobe RGB. On the other hand the pixel response tuning isn’t quite as good as on the BenQ, the strobe backlight implementation is inferior and it lacks the same capable sound system or OSD remote. Overall, we feel the EX3210U could appeal to some who find the feature set attractive and want a vibrant experience with decent responsiveness on top. Even more so if the ‘BenQ specific’ additions are appreciated.

Positives	Negatives
Strong vibrancy and colour consistency from the IPS-type panel with generous gamut. sRGB emulation mode with adjustable brightness, good sRGB coverage and ‘2.2’ gamma tracking	Gamma tracking wonky ‘out the box’, improved to an extent with OSD tweaking. sRGB emulation setting lacks colour adjustment and was too cool and slightly green tinted on our unit
Reasonable static contrast (middling for panel type) and a light to very light matte screen surface which minimises layering in front of image	Moderate ‘IPS glow’, brightness somewhat limited under SDR and below specifications for HDR – 16-zone local dimming offers limited HDR contrast enhancement
Panel tuned well in terms of pixel responsiveness, putting 144Hz refresh rate to pretty good use. Very low input lag, VRR working as expected and good ‘Blur Reduction’ implementation	Some weaknesses in terms of ‘powdery trailing’ and overshoot, with the chosen ‘AMA’ setting shifting things more towards one or the other
Good screen size and resolution combination delivers strong detail, clarity and ‘desktop real estate’. Decent ergonomic flexibility, good sound system for a monitor and useful OSD remote plus full bandwidth HDMI 2.1	Stand base feels rather plasticky with quite ‘bold’ styling, stand lacks pivot and height adjustment somewhat limited, a bit more expensive than some competing models

The bottom line; a feature-rich and vibrant ‘4K’ UHD monitor with decent responsiveness and moderately high price tag, which falls short of HDR brightness claims.<span class="su-quote-cite">PC Monitors</span>

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases made using the below link. Where possible, you’ll be redirected to your nearest store. Further information on supporting our work.

Buy from Amazon

 

Donations are also greatly appreciated.