Asus ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDP review: Within sight of perfection

32-inch 4K OLED gaming monitor with 240 Hz, 480 Hz at FHD resolution, Adaptive-Sync, ELMB, HDR400 and wide gamut color.

Reviews
By
published
Asus ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDP
Editor's Choice
(Image: © Tom's Hardware)

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Our HDR benchmarking uses Portrait Displays’ Calman software. To learn about our HDR testing, see our breakdown of how we test PC monitors.

OLED monitors like the PG32UCDP look amazing no matter what content they show, but where they shine brightest is in HDR mode. Asus has provided four HDR picture modes and brightness adjustability, which is a rarity.

HDR Brightness and Contrast

Image 1 of 3
Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDP
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

I use 25% window patterns to test HDR monitors and the PG32UCDP hit an impressive 706 nits. Asus claims 1,300 nits for a 1% window, and I have no reason to doubt that. This is a major advantage of WOLEDs over QD-OLEDs, peak brightness. You only give up a small bit of color volume.

There are two main HDR modes to consider here. The brighter image comes from the Console HDR mode. It has the same color accuracy as the reference mode, DisplayHDR 400 TrueBlack. But its luminance tracking is a bit different, as I’ll show you in a moment. If you go with TrueBlack, it peaks at around 456 nits. In either case, black levels and contrast cannot be measured.

Grayscale, EOTF and Color

Image 1 of 3
Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDP
(Image credit: Portrait Displays Calman)

The first two grayscale/EOTF charts show the difference between the Display HDR and Console HDR modes. The former tracks the EOTF reference almost perfectly. It’s a tad dark from zero to 40%, then rides slightly above the line until it hits the tone-map transition at 65%. Console shows the same behavior but amplified. The visual result is that Console has a bit more impact. Grayscale tracking is the same in both modes.

Color tracking is also the same in both modes, which is a very good thing. This makes them interchangeable since luminance is the only thing that changes. If you need a reference mode, pick Display. For gaming and entertainment, I preferred Console. Either way, color tracking is perfectly on hue with slight over-saturation throughout.

Test Takeaway: The PG32UCDP’s HDR image is stunning in either Console or Display modes. I settled on the former for gaming as it had more visual impact with no downside to color accuracy. High peak brightness makes highlights pop and makes those deep blacks seem even deeper. I have played games on a lot of OLEDs and the PG32UCDP is my favorite to date.

MORE: Best Gaming Monitors

MORE: How We Test PC Monitors

MORE: How to Buy a PC Monitor

MORE: How to Choose the Best HDR Monitor

Christian Eberle
Christian Eberle
Contributing Editor

Christian Eberle is a Contributing Editor for Tom's Hardware US. He's a veteran reviewer of A/V equipment, specializing in monitors. Christian began his obsession with tech when he built his first PC in 1991, a 286 running DOS 3.0 at a blazing 12MHz. In 2006, he undertook training from the Imaging Science Foundation in video calibration and testing and thus started a passion for precise imaging that persists to this day. He is also a professional musician with a degree from the New England Conservatory as a classical bassoonist which he used to good effect as a performer with the West Point Army Band from 1987 to 2013. He enjoys watching movies and listening to high-end audio in his custom-built home theater and can be seen riding trails near his home on a race-ready ICE VTX recumbent trike. Christian enjoys the endless summer in Florida where he lives with his wife and Chihuahua and plays with orchestras around the state.

15 Comments Comment from the forums
  • husker
    This looks very nice and I'm in the market. Thanks for the in-depth review. I would include the $1200 price as a con, however. You might say that the price is quite fair for an OLED monitor with these features and I'm in no position to argue. But $1200 is still an entry barrier for many people, regardless. You might also say you review monitors, not prices, and I would agree again. But still... $1200 is a big chunk of change and it needs to factor in somewhere.
    Reply
  • Roland Of Gilead
    Yes, I agree. It's a nice monitor. I too will be looking for something like this down the line, but first wanna upgrade my GPU.
    Reply
  • DavidLejdar
    husker said:
    This looks very nice and I'm in the market. Thanks for the in-depth review. I would include the $1200 price as a con, however. You might say that the price is quite fair for an OLED monitor with these features and I'm in no position to argue. But $1200 is still an entry barrier for many people, regardless. You might also say you review monitors, not prices, and I would agree again. But still... $1200 is a big chunk of change and it needs to factor in somewhere.
    Then again, when you put it into a category of 4K 240Hz OLED (or similar OLED), what other monitors are there to compare prices with? E.g. the Asus ROG Swift PG42UQ, which is (still) listed as "Best OLED 4K Gaming Monitor" in Tom's best 4K monitor list, doesn't seem to come cheaper. Nor does the as "Best 4K Gaming Monitor" listed Gigabyte Aorus FO32U2P. And so on.

    But there sure are cheaper monitors. Personally, I am likely to upgrade to 4K, at least 32'', at some point. And I could justify the price tag - when counted across e.g. 6 years, it comes down to less than $20 per month. Not sure about how well the technology advanced to prevent image retention (and then burn-in) on OLEDs though. Which is why I may stay with LCD (such as IPS and VA), which come cheaper in particular at the 144Hz range.
    Reply
  • oofdragon
    Nah. 32 inch doesn't make sense for 4K, 40+ does. Give me a 42" 4K 240Hz with 480Hz FHD and then we r talking. While it doesn't happen any 240Hz 27" is pretty much the same as this but at half the price
    Reply
  • helper800
    oofdragon said:
    Nah. 32 inch doesn't make sense for 4K, 40+ does.
    I disagree. 32" is perfect for me. No curve either.
    Reply
  • vijosef
    No data on ghosting
    Reply
  • helper800
    vijosef said:
    No data on ghosting
    Its OLED, so there is virtually none to be had.
    Reply
  • vijosef
    helper800 said:
    Its OLED, so there is virtually none to be had.
    Theoretically. But if we were to trust theories, we would not be reading reviews.
    Reply
  • helper800
    vijosef said:
    Theoretically. But if we were to trust theories, we would not be reading reviews.
    Here is a review of the exact same panel in LG's implementation. Enjoy!
    Reply
  • UnforcedERROR
    oofdragon said:
    Nah. 32 inch doesn't make sense for 4K, 40+ does. Give me a 42" 4K 240Hz with 480Hz FHD and then we r talking. While it doesn't happen any 240Hz 27" is pretty much the same as this but at half the price
    Then buy a TV???

    This monitor isn't marketed for you. It's for people who want the best of everything: reasonable size, PPI, and performance.

    42" is larger than most people have desk space for, and you'd need to sit back from it anyway. Your current dream monitor is an extremely niche product.
    Reply