Skip to main content

Asus PQ321Q 4K Monitor Review: Top-Shelf Ultra HD For $3500

Results: Pixel Response And Input Lag

To perform these tests, we use a high-speed camera that shoots at 1000 frames per second. Analyzing the video frame-by-frame allows us to observe the exact time it takes to go from a zero-percent signal to a 100% white field.

The pattern generator is placed at the base of the monitor so our camera can capture the precise moment its front-panel LED lights up, indicating that a video signal is being received by the monitor. With this camera placement, we can easily see how long it takes to fully display a pattern after pressing the button on the generator’s remote. This testing methodology allows for accurate and repeatable results when comparing panels.

Here’s a shot of our test setup. Click on the photo to enlarge.

The brighter section of the camera’s screen is what actually appears in the video. You can see the lights of the pattern generator in the bottom of the viewfinder. We flash the pattern on and off five times and average the results.

Here’s the screen draw result.

The screen draw time matches most of the IPS monitors we’ve tested. But a 4K monitor probably won't be the choke point for performance when you're driving this many pixels. Even with the fastest video cards, you won't be pushing more than 60 FPS in most games.

Although the IGZO technology Asus is using offers theoretically faster response times, there are obviously other factors in the signal chain preventing measurable gains. At least for now, it’s safe to say that 4K monitors aren't the fastest option for fast-paced gaming.

And here are the lag results.

This is pretty much expected performance for a 60 Hz IPS screen. And since Asus' PQ321Q is the first IGZO-based display in our chart, it gives us a baseline for that technology, too. We don't anticipate these input lag measurements being an issue until modern graphics subsystems become more powerful. And the display's processing power matters as well. The control circuitry needs to catch up before the technology's advantages are fully realized.

  • cynic77
    "We’re sure it’s only a matter of time before an Ultra HD panel becomes available in wide-gamut form."That time is now. The Dell 24" UP2414Q and 32" UP3214Q are Ultra HD monitors that cover 100% sRGB and 99% AdobeRBG. This Asus you've reviewed has already been outclassed.
    Reply
  • cynic77
    "We’re sure it’s only a matter of time before an Ultra HD panel becomes available in wide-gamut form."That time is now. The Dell 24" UP2414Q and 32" UP3214Q are Ultra HD monitors that cover 100% sRGB and 99% AdobeRBG. This Asus you've reviewed has already been outclassed.
    Reply
  • cats_Paw
    Dat Price...Good thing is you need a crazy GPU to use that resolution anyway so by the time the 4k Monitors and tvs drop down in price we might have gpus that manage them in the upper midrange of the GPU segment.
    Reply
  • Shneiky
    In the last chapter of the article, last paragraph:" crop of TN-based panels were announced at CES for sub-$1000 prices, and as those become available to test, you can be we'll review them. "Shouldn't that "be" be "bet"?
    Reply
  • lockhrt999
    If they are putting that much resolution on this screen then why not make it 3D too (polarized)? I think it's perfectly doable and won't exceed budget.I'm talking from professional point of view. I bored of using anaglyph 3D for content creation.
    Reply
  • panzerknacker
    For me this is just a gimmick that can't be taken seriously. The way they had to logically divide the screen in 2 because there are no scalars yet simply screams 'niche product that you pay way too much for only to be the first person on earth using it'. Also for gaming this screen is completely useless to me with a input lag of 80ms, you take this to a LAN party and get crapped upon by those using a $100 tn panel. In the end I think this screen is a step in the right direction but for me personally they could rather revert to producing crt's again.
    Reply
  • wtfxxxgp
    Wow. That's pricey. O,o
    Reply
  • huilun02
    Tiled screens but at least its 60Hz goodness. And proof that no bezel is possible.
    Reply
  • zodiacfml
    Good job but too pricey. The backlight used is for cheap TN screens. There still is no single port/cable in the market. The cutting edge is too inconvenient.
    Reply
  • AMD Radeon
    i bet no one will use the internal speaker
    Reply