ASUS PG27UQ

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 or 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 bands of a slightly lighter and slightly darker version of the intended shade. We did not observe any such patterns, either dynamic or static, on this model.

Responsiveness

Input lag

A small utility called SMTT 2.0 was used alongside a sensitive camera to analyse the latency of the PG27UQ, with over 30 repeat readings taken to maximise accuracy. Using this method, we calculated 7.87ms (a little over 1 frame at 144Hz) of input lag. This was reduced slightly to 6.95ms at 120Hz, according to our measurements. The use of chroma subsampling at 144Hz seems to impart a slight latency penalty, but nothing major. We did not find a measurable difference in latency with the ‘Variable Backlight’ feature enabled (‘Fast’ setting) vs. disabled. Note that we do not have the means to accurately measure input lag in an HDR environment or with G-SYNC active in a variable refresh rate and frame rate environment. Note that the input lag measured here is influenced by the element you ‘see’ (pixel responsiveness) and the element you ‘feel’ (signal delay). It indicates a fairly low signal delay, which most users should find fine. Some sensitive users may consider this a bit too high, but given the overall capabilities and market positioning of this screen (immersive gaming vs. competitive gaming) we feel it does pretty well in this regard anyway.

Perceived blur (pursuit photography)

In our responsiveness article, we explore the key concepts related to monitor responsiveness. One of the most important concepts explored here is ‘perceived blur’, contributed to in part by the pixel responsiveness of the monitor but generally in larger part by eye movement as you track motion on the screen. We discuss a photography method called ‘pursuit photography’, which uses a moving rather than static camera to capture snapshots of motion on a monitor in a way that reflects both elements of perceived blur. This compares with static photography or video methods which only reflect pixel responsiveness.

The images below are pursuit photographs taken using the UFO Motion Test for ghosting, with the test running at 960 pixels per second. This is a good practical speed for capturing such photographs and highlights both elements of perceived blur nicely. The UFOs move across the screen from left to right at a frame rate matching the refresh rate of the display. All background shade levels (dark, medium and light) were used with the monitor set to all its ‘OD’ (Overdrive) settings; ‘OFF’, ‘Normal’ and ‘Extreme’. The monitor was tested at various refresh rates; 60Hz (directly below), 98Hz, 120Hz and 144Hz. Where possible, a reference image is included for comparison. This is a Dell S2417DG, a fast high refresh rate TN model which gives you an idea of how things look where pixel responsiveness isn’t really a limiting factor.



At 60Hz (above), the object itself appears fairly broad and blurry, lacking distinct detail. This indicates a moderate level of perceived blur attributed to eye (camera) movement. With the ‘OD’ set to ‘OFF’ you can see a fair degree of trailing behind the object, caused by slower the optimal pixel responses. This is not significant for the light background (bottom image) but is a factor for the medium background (middle) and quite noticeable for the dark background (top). Using the ‘Normal’ setting significantly cuts down this trailing, leaving just a hint of ‘powdery’ trailing for the dark and medium backgrounds. The ‘Extreme’ setting slightly reduces this further, without introducing any obvious overshoot (inverse ghosting). The ‘Extreme’ setting appears optimal at 60Hz and might be worth using if you’re stuck there perhaps because you’re using the monitor with a games console. The ‘Normal’ setting is also very good, though, and comes close to the reference image. The image below shows how things look ramped up to 98Hz.



The UFO now appears somewhat narrower and slightly more sharply focussed, indicating a significant decrease in perceived blur attributable to eye movement. There are various degrees of trailing behind this due to non-optimal pixel transitions. With ‘OD = OFF’ there is a moderate amount of trailing behind the object. The ‘OD = Normal’ setting gives an excellent reduction such that no conventional trailing is visible. There is a small amount of overshoot, which you can see as a slight shadowy trail behind the UFO cockpit area or a slight halo (bright trail) behind the body. In practice this trailing is very short and blends in readily with the background, so you get a comfortable decrease in perceived blur compared to ‘OFF’ without any obvious negative implications. Using ‘OD = Extreme’ significantly increases the overshoot, which is now visible as obvious bright and colourful trails behind the object. Without question, ‘Normal’ is optimal at this refresh rate. Below you can see what happens when refresh rate is increased to 120Hz.



The UFO now appears narrower once again and more sharply focussed, indicating a reduction in perceived blur due to eye movement. The trailing behind this, be it conventional (‘OFF’) or overshoot (‘Normal’ or ‘Extreme’) is broadly similar to at 98Hz. The ‘Normal’ setting is again optimal due to having the lowest level of perceived blur without obvious negative consequences. In reality we’d say the overshoot is even less noticeable than in the images, due to how short and well-blended the trailing appears. Below you can see what happens at the maximum refresh rate of the monitor – 144Hz.



The UFO becomes slightly narrower and details a bit sharper, indicating a further reduction in perceived blur due to eye movement. Trailing characteristics are again similar and it’s clear the ‘Normal’ is not only the best mode to use but also very well optimised. This is very much reflected in our subjective testing that follows. It is clear that ASUS (and, importantly, Nvidia) have tuned the pixel overdrive very well on this monitor. The ‘Normal’ setting is good to use over a broad range of refresh rates, which you’ll be subjected to as frame rate fluctuates if you have G-SYNC active.

Responsiveness in games and movies

On Battlefield 1 (BF1) the monitor put its 144Hz refresh rate to excellent use, where the frame rate kept up. With the monitor giving the user up to 2.4 times the visual feedback every second as a 60Hz monitor, there was an excellent ‘connected feel’ to the experience. You felt very in-tune with the game world, with a certain precision and fluidity that’s simply lacking with lower refresh rate models. This high refresh rate and frame rate combination also greatly reduced perceived blur by reducing eye movement, as explored earlier. This meant that the game environment and objects or enemies within it remained more sharply focused. This is useful from a competitive standpoint, but also to help better maintain the beautiful crisp visuals delivered by the high resolution and pixel density. There were no stand-out weaknesses in pixel responsiveness. There was a slight hint of overshoot (inverse ghosting) here and there, but nothing particularly eye-catching or bothersome. There were some faint halo trails which were lighter than either the background or object colour when moving against buildings in the fog, for example (medium and light shades). For some high contrast transitions there was a small hint of very light and short-lived powdery trailing. This was caused by a slim range of pixel transitions being just slightly slower than optimal. This was very subtle, not at all eye-catching and unlikely to bother even sensitive users. It only had a very minor impact on overall perceived blur and most users would struggle to see any weakness even compared to a fast and well-tuned TN model of this refresh rate. The high pixel density also helped contain this trailing so it was shorter and sharper with less overall impact on perceived blur than it otherwise might be.

This strong 144Hz performance was reflected on Dirt Rally. The superior ‘connected feel’ when driving the vehicle is something that racing fans could certainly appreciate, less so rookies like ourselves. But it was still nice to have. The significant reduction in perceived blur compared to lower refresh rates (and indeed frame rates) was also beneficial, making the experience somewhat less dizzying and allowing you to better admire the beautiful UHD scenery (or the course, if you’re paying attention) more easily. There were no bothersome weaknesses, again just minor things such as a little overshoot here and there which most users wouldn’t really pick up on. We also observed our Blu-ray test titles. Fluidity here is limited by the ~24fps at which they run, although the monitor didn’t present any noticeable weaknesses on top of this. With the frame rate set to 120Hz (or 144Hz – although you’re less likely to want to do this on the desktop due to the reduced chroma text issues) the juddering was also decreased compared to a 60Hz monitor. This is due to the frame rate of the content dividing nicely into the refresh rate of the display. You can set the refresh rate to 24Hz or 30Hz if preferred, too. The monitor also delivered a competent performance for higher frame rate movie content, for example 60fps YouTube videos.

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.

G-SYNC – the technology and activating it

Nvidia G-SYNC is a variable refresh rate technology that can be activated when a compatible Nvidia GPU is connected to a compatible monitor (such as the ASUS PG27UQ). Our article on the technology explores the principles behind the technology and its benefits, so we won’t be repeating too much of that. Essentially the technology allows the monitor to dynamically adjust its refresh rate to match, where possible, the frame rate outputted by the GPU. When the two are in sync it gets rid of the tearing (VSync off) and stuttering (VSync on) that occurs when the two are unsynchronised. An additional benefit for those who hate tearing and usually like to use VSync is a reduction in latency compared to ‘VSync on’ in the variable frame rate environment. As noted in the responsiveness section, though, we don’t have a way to accurately measure this.

This monitor supports G-SYNC via DP 1.4 (DisplayPort), once connected to a compatible Nvidia GPU such as the GTX 1070 on our test system. Once connected up, G-SYNC should be automatically configured and ready to use. There’s usually even a little notification icon in the system tray telling you that a G-SYNC compatible display is detected. To check everything is configured correctly, open Nvidia Control Panel and navigate to ‘Display – Set Up G-SYNC’. Ensure that the checkbox for ‘Enable G-SYNC’ is checked, then select your preferred operating mode. As the image below shows, this technology works in both ‘Full Screen’ and ‘Window’ modes, provided the correct option is selected for this. If the G-SYNC options seem to be missing from Nvidia Control Panel, this may be remedied by reconnecting the GPU or possibly connecting the monitor to a different DP output if there’s one available. If the options are still missing, reinstalling the GPU driver or updating this is recommended.

Enable G-SYNC

Next you should navigate to ‘Manage 3D settings’. Here there are a few settings of interest, the first of which is ‘Monitor Technology’. This should be set to ‘G-SYNC’ as shown below. Assuming this is all set up correctly, you should also see ‘G-SYNC Mode’ towards the top of the main OSD menu and the power light should glow red rather than white.

Set Monitor Technology to G-SYNC

The second setting of interest is VSync, which can be set to one of the following; ‘On’, ‘Use the 3D application setting’, ‘Off’ or ‘Fast’ (GPU dependent). The ASUS supports a variable refresh rate range of 30 – 144Hz, with the maximum value (ceiling) corresponding to the refresh rate you’ve selected for the monitor in Windows. That means that if the game is running between 30fps 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 VSync setting in the graphics driver. If you select ‘On’, VSync activates if the frame rate exceeds the static refresh rate that you’ve selected (e.g. 144Hz / 144fps) and the usual VSync latency penalty applies. If you select ‘Off’ then the frame rate is free to rise in an unrestricted way, but the monitor will only go as high as 144Hz – tearing and juddering will ensue if the frame rate rises above this. The ‘Use the 3D application setting’ largely works as you’d expect, but the general recommendation is to set VSync in the graphics driver if you wish to use it as in-game implementations can interfere with the smooth operation of G-SYNC. Some users prefer to leave VSync enabled but use a frame rate limiter set several frames below the maximum supported (e.g. 140fps) 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 ‘Fast’ option is available on some newer GPUs, such as the GTX 1070 used in our test system. This enables a technology called ‘Fast Sync’, which only applies above the refresh rate and frame rate ceiling (>144Hz / 144fps). Below this G-SYNC operates as normal, whereas above this a special version of VSync called ‘Fast Sync’ is activated. This is a GPU rather than monitor feature so isn’t something we will explain in detail, but it is designed to reduce tearing at frame rates well above the refresh rate of the monitor. If you’re interested in this technology, which may be the case if you play older or less graphically demanding games at very high frame rates, you should watch this section of a video by Tom Petersen.

Set VSync according to preferences

If the frame rate drops below the lowest refresh rate supported by the monitor (i.e. the G-SYNC floor of 30Hz / 30fps) then the monitor sets its refresh rate to a multiple of the frame rate. This occurs regardless of VSync setting. If for example the game ran at 20fps, the monitor would set itself to 40Hz. This keeps stuttering and tearing from the usual frame and refresh rate mismatches at bay. As we explore shortly, though, low frame rates are low frame rates regardless of the technology. So whilst it is always beneficial to have stuttering and tearing removed, it’s also beneficial to have an elevated frame rate where possible. It’s also worth remembering that G-SYNC can’t eliminate stuttering caused by other issues on the system or game environment such as insufficient RAM or network latency.

G-SYNC – the experience

As usual we tested a broad range of game titles using G-SYNC on this monitor, but we found the experience very consistent on all of them. We will therefore simply be focusing on Battlefield 1 (BF1) for the purposes of this section. Even with settings set rather conservatively, our GTX 1080 Ti rarely maintained a solid 144fps on this title. There were frequent dips below this, sometimes a bit above 100fps and sometimes a bit below. Without G-SYNC enabled this resulted in obvious (to us) tearing and an accompanying juddering effect if VSync was off or stuttering if VSync was on. The flow of the content was much improved with G-SYNC enabled, with these annoying interruptions cast aside. We still noticed a decrease in ‘connected feel’ and an increase in perceived blur as the frame rate dipped, because the frame rate itself is still important regardless of any variable refresh rate technology. This became more pronounced if the eye candy was turned up, which is of course very tempting when you’ve got such a nice pixel density to play with. Setting the game to ‘Ultra’, for example, yielded frequent dips far below 100fps and closer to or sometimes below 60fps. The ‘connected feel’ took a real hit here and perceived blur was significantly increased. Two things which really make you appreciate what 144fps and 144Hz can bring to the table. However; the lack of tearing and stuttering was also very pleasant. These factors can be particularly easy to notice at reduced frame rates.

Further increasing the graphics settings, for example increasing the resolution scale to drive the rendering resolution even higher than 3840 x 2160, yielded further drops in frame rate. If it dipped below 30fps and the monitor was therefore at its 30Hz floor of operation for G-SYNC, the refresh rate stuck to a multiple of the frame rate to keep tearing and stuttering in check. This worked well and the transition from normal G-SYNC operation to this felt very seamless to us. The horrendous level of perceived blur and awful ‘connected feel’ at such low frame rates is another matter, however. Another aspect to note is that Nvidia employs what they call ‘variable overdrive’, which means that the pixel overdrive is carefully tuned to a broad range of refresh rates. It loosens off as refresh rate decreases, as high levels of acceleration become undesirable as such snappy pixel transitions are no longer required and you can easily introduce obnoxious overshoot instead. The overshoot was well-contained even at these low frame rates and refresh rates and this is an area where FreeSync models typically struggle. Their pixel overdrive tends to be tuned to the static maximum refresh rate (144Hz) and more often than not overshoot becomes increasingly obvious as refresh rate decreases. So, we very much enjoyed using G-SYNC on this monitor and found it beneficial, although we also liked to keep a good balance between image quality and frame rate to get the most out of the monitor. Note that individual sensitivity to tearing, stuttering and indeed tolerance to low frame rate varies between individuals.

HDR (High Dynamic Range) and ‘Variable Backlight’

HDR (High Dynamic Range) on a monitor requires the simultaneous display of very deep dark shades and very bright light shades. Furthermore, it is necessary for the monitor to be able to display a large gamut of colours with good precision, from weakly saturated pastel shades to strongly saturated shades as well as those in between. The ideal HDR monitor would have very precise control over its illumination, ideally per-pixel (OLED and suchlike). This would allow very intricate mixtures of bright and dark to be displayed with exceptional contrast. Failing that, an FALD (Full Array Local Dimming) backlight is desirable whereby the backlight is split into several hundred or more dimming zones. This doesn’t give you the same control and precision as per-pixel illumination (which is essentially millions of dimming zones) but a large number of dimming zones can still deliver a strong HDR contrast experience. For colour reproduction, it is desirable for a monitor to offer a gamut of >90% DCI-P3 (a Digital Cinema Initiatives standard colour space). This is the near-term target, with the ultimate goal of complete coverage of an even wider colour gamut; Rec. 2020. Finally, it is desirable for the display to offer (at least) 10-bits per channel for colour output, giving it exceptional precision when displaying shades for HDR content.

For most games and other full screen applications supporting HDR, the ASUS PG27UQ will automatically switch into its HDR mode when the appropriate setting is selected in the game or application. It is specifically HDR10 that is supported on this model and indeed all current HDR-capable monitors. As of the Windows 10 ‘Creator’s update’, HDR support was integrated into the OS with a feature initially called ‘HDR and advanced colour’. This is now referred to as ‘HDR and WCG’ (meaning Wide Colour Gamut). A minority of game titles that support HDR will only run in HDR if this setting is active in Windows and if you wish to view HDR movies on a compatible web browser, for example, you’ll need to activate this setting as well. If you’re not actively viewing HDR content on the desktop then having this enabled can make things appear flooded and washed out, so it’s only supposed to be activated when it’s specifically needed. The setting can be found in ‘Display settings’ (right click the desktop) as shown below.

The ASUS PG27UQ is the first PC gaming monitor to receive VESA DisplayHDR 1000 certification and is also Ultra HD Premium certified. The first monitor to be certified in this way was the Philips 436M6VBPAB, although that’s not specifically a PC gaming monitor. A particularly important aspect of the VESA DisplayHDR 1000 certification is that the monitor can simultaneously display very deep dark shades and very bright light shades, which necessitates an effective local dimming solution. The ASUS features a 384-dimming zone FALD solution, which as we’ve demonstrated in our contrast testing earlier can deliver exceptionally strong contrast. The backlight zones are arranged as a 24 x 16 (horizontal x vertical) grid. A similar solution was found on the ASUS PA32UC, although this was less tightly tuned for gaming and the dimming zones were larger due to the extra 5” of diagonal screen space on that model. The FALD solution can be enabled for SDR (Standard Dynamic Range) content by activating the ‘Variable Backlight’ feature in the ‘Image’ section of the OSD. It can be enabled at one of 3 different responsiveness settings; ‘Fast’, ‘Medium’ and ‘Gradual’. By default it is enabled using the ‘Fast’ setting – we found this worked nicely and noticed no drawbacks compared to ‘Medium’ or ‘Gradual’ so we’d recommend sticking with it. The graphic below demonstrates this sort of FALD backlight arrangement, although this model uses far more dimming zones that are smaller and more tightly packed together than in the graphic. It’s just included here for illustrative purposes.



As you’ll note from our ‘Test Settings’, we left this option disabled for most of our testing. That’s because it’s good to get an idea of the contrast performance of the monitor when it operates as a normal monitor, with the whole backlight regulated as one unit. It allows more accurate ‘apples to apples’ comparisons to be drawn with other models. Some users might not find the feature ideal in a desktop environment, either, so it isn’t going to be an option every user will just want to set and forget. Fairly large areas of individual shade were handled with appropriate brightness and there was clearly an overall contrast advantage with the setting enabled. For more intricate mixtures of shade, though, there is a mixture of light and dark content covering a given dimming zone and it must essentially compromise for the overall makeup of the image in that region. Sometimes the brighter content, which may include text or lighter image content, was dragged down so it became a bit dimmer than we’d like due to the dimming zone also containing a good amount of dark content. For lighter text against a darker background, this could potentially affect readability. This wasn’t extreme and many users would likely find it acceptable, however. It occurred even with brightness raised to ‘100’ in the OSD, which brought in another issue of some lighter content being too bright for our tastes (uncomfortably for general desktop usage).

Bright elements surrounded by darkness (in particular white surrounded by black) had a ‘halo’ of sorts around it. This was because the dimming zones with mixed content (including the bright shade) were set brighter than the dimming zones containing only the darkness and therefore there was a difference in black depth and deep shades. If near the edge of the screen they also invited a bit ‘AHVA glow’. We found this ‘halo’ effect to be reasonably subtle overall, even in a dimly lit room, in as much as it didn’t really slap us in the face. The ‘halo’ effect was somewhat less pronounced than we observed on the ASUS PA32UC. The other advantage with this model is that the dimming zones reacted significantly more rapidly to extreme luminance changes. The PA32UC was certainly not as slow as some earlier models with FALD in that respect, but if you moved a white object against a black background you could see a sort of fading trail behind it that lasted around a second. With the ’Variable Backlight’ set to ‘Fast’ on this model, the transition was as good as instantaneous. And even the slowest ‘Gradual’ setting seemed significantly faster than on the PA32UC. The section of the video review below shows this ‘Variable Backlight’ feature in action, on the desktop first off and then using in-game examples.

Staring at largely static content on the desktop is one thing, where these issues could be observed and could potentially bother some users. In more dynamic scenarios, such as gaming or watching movies, these issues were not really noticeable. In fact, we found the distinct contrast advantages of using the ‘Variable Backlight’ feature really shone through. You rarely get large areas of solid black filling the screen and therefore don’t tend to get dimming zones set to super-low luminance levels. So you don’t get that deep and inky look, particularly if observing the screen in a fairly dim room. And you can observe ‘halos’ around brighter objects as per viewing on the desktop. But you greatly benefit from significantly lower black depth than without the feature active and a better overall atmosphere for dark shades as a result. Where these predominantly dark areas cover areas of the screen near the edge or bottom you also get a reduction in ‘AHVA glow’ as a result. This model already has a relatively low level of ‘AHVA glow’, but with this feature enabled it is reduced further. These dark areas essentially look more like they would if you had the monitor brightness set to a very low level, but instead of brighter elements also looking dim they have plenty of brightness. Especially larger areas of bright shades like fire, explosions and the moon in the sky. Such elements contrasted very nicely with their darker surroundings.

These distinctions between ‘bright’ and ‘dark’ became rather extreme with HDR enabled. We observed a range of HDR titles and found that BF1 and Hitman both provided a suitable testing ground for HDR. The implementation of HDR does vary from title to title and some titles make better use of it than others – these titles both put it to good use and we’ve tested various HDR displays using said titles so know what to expect. Our experiences here echo what you would see on other game titles that put HDR to good use on both PC and console, as well as HDR movies. Under HDR, the maximum luminance for the backlight zones was now increased to ~1285 cd/m², according to our earlier measurements. On BF1 we found bright elements such as the moon in the sky, burning fires and muzzle flashes stood out in a truly bright and brilliant way that is unlike anything you’d see from this or any other model we’ve tested under SDR. And indeed, most so-called HDR monitors you’ll come across at the moment. We did not find this painfully bright unless the room was very dim and we were staring at a static area of supreme brightness for prolonged periods, but individual sensitivity varies. And we would certainly recommend suitable lighting when using this monitor in HDR, you’ll still see these bright and brilliant flashes and appreciate the contrast with a bit of ambient light in the room. Large areas of darkness surrounding these bright elements appeared quite deep, too, providing excellent contrast between dark and dingy areas of the image and stunning bright elements. The image below is a scene from BF1 that we’ll use to pick out some specific examples. The image is just used to set the scene and in no way represents what the monitor looked like in person.

Here you could see two brilliant light sources, a lantern with a bright warm glow and a moon with a white glow. These bodies appeared extremely bright, so bright that the camera simply captured them as giant balls of light. In reality you can see excellent detail levels on both objects, such as craters on the moon and various components within the lantern, including the flame itself. The dark mass of building materials to the left of the image appeared rather deep, giving a nice atmospheric look to the scene and providing a stark contrast with the bright elements. The detail in the dark areas was also excellent, because as with the bright objects the enhanced precision under HDR is coordinated with the luminance control of the relevant dimming zones. Under SDR these elements just appear either ‘flooded’ or lacking in detail in comparison, even with the ‘Variable Backlight’ solution active (although that does improve things vs. having it disabled).

You can also see from the image that there’s quite an intricate mixture of light and dark. Ideally the dark elements (shadow detail, including cracks in the wood, lines in the brickwork etc.) would be deeper than they were. But this would require a greater number of dimming zones, or a panel with superior native contrast. Remember that the dimming zones are having to deal with intricate mixtures of bright and dark content rather than just big masses of very bright or very dark shades. You can also see a ‘halo’ around brighter shades immediately surrounded by darker shades as the dimming zones are brighter than those surrounding this, which are significantly dimmer. Around the compass and the HUD elements to the bottom right, for example. The brightening of the dimming zones here invited some ‘AHVA glow’, too, white added to the ‘halo’ effect in these regions a bit (especially if you view the screen from a sharper angle). The moths flying around the light against a darker background also had slight halos to them. We didn’t find any of these halos extreme or particularly bothersome even in a dimly lit room, although we did of course notice them and are able to describe them to you for that reason (duh). We also found the FALD solution very responsive as we moved around, so these halos did not leave odd trails that ate away into other sections of the screen. This is in stark contrast to our experience on the ASUS PA32UC.

It would be prudent to compare to a monitor which we felt gave a very convincing performance without such an advanced FALD solution. These intricate mixtures of bright and dark were handled better by the Philips 436M6VBPAB, even though it had a mere 32 dimming zones and is a significantly larger screen. That’s because of the significantly higher native contrast, which keeps black depth relatively strong even as the backlight zones brighten up a fair degree. There’s less of sharp distinction between the ‘bright’ and ‘dark’ elements where they intertwine. We also noted, though, that the Philips was next to useless in its VESA DisplayHDR 1000 operating mode. The extreme luminance called for pumped out by relatively large dimming zones simply flooded the image, creating an ugly mess of brightness where it wasn’t wanted. The PG27UQ on the other hand is able to deliver bright shades with a superior eye-catching brilliance. This was noticeable on BF1, but also on Hitman – with camera flashes lighting up the surrounding darkness being a particularly noteworthy example. The section of the video review below showcases some of the content discussed and indeed about to be discussed in relation to HDR on the monitor. It shows some specific examples on both BF1 and Hitman and will allow you to take a welcome break from this barrage of text. It also talks about the benefits that HDR brings to the table in daylight scenes rather than just considering the extreme contrast examples mentioned above and runs through the other side of HDR; colour reproduction. Something which we will be moving onto immediately after the video.

The other important aspect of the HDR experience is colour. The near-term target for HDR is a good degree of DCI-P3 coverage, with the most stringent current certification from VESA (DisplayHDR 1000) calling for at least 90% coverage of this Digital Cinema Initiatives colour space. As a reminder, the ASUS has a specified 97% DCI-P3 coverage and clearly offers a bit of extension beyond even this in the green region of the gamut. This is shown in the gamut diagram below. With this colour space at their disposal, game developers can provide a much broader palette of shades which can be accurately displayed by monitors like the PG27UQ. This cuts down on oversaturated elements that you’d see when sRGB content (SDR) is ‘stretched out’ onto the wide gamut of the monitor. On BF1 the developers are able to bring about the gritty aesthetic that they desire. Earthy browns are a more neutral colour with less of a red hue and you’ll notice some khaki greens of vegetation appearing suitably dusty and muted. At the other end of the gamut, you’ll notice some brilliantly vibrant and fiery yellows, reds and oranges for embers and flames. Some really lush and deep forest greens and some deep military paint colours. For other game titles, developers might decide to use this gamut to display an excellent array of special effects (various shades of ‘magic’ colour, for example) or enhance the natural variety of different skin tones for different characters. It’s a lot less restrictive than the sRGB reference space that they’ve been shackled to for so long.

Colour gamut 'Test Settings'