Asus ROG Strix XG35VQ Monitor Review: A Prime, Curved Pick for FreeSync Gaming

OSD Setup & Calibration

The OSD is packed with features and includes blur reduction, something rarely seen in a FreeSync monitor. Dig in, and you'll find a full set of calibration options, along with more than enough image modes and controls for the ROG Strix XG35VQ’s lighting effects.

Eight preset modes adorn the XG35VQ's OSD. Racing mode is the default, and in our tests, it proved to be extremely accurate, even more so than sRGB, which locks out all image controls and fixes the brightness level at 175 nits. If you want to engage in color-critical work, opt for Racing, or calibrate the User mode as we did.

Four levels of blue-light filter are available if you need to warm up the look of white-background applications such as spreadsheets or word processors. Level 0 represents the off position.

The Color menu is where tweakers will spend most of their time. Saturation is grayed out in Racing but available in User. Either mode is a great starting point for calibration. You can choose among three color-temperature presets or roll your own white balance in User Mode. There are three gamma presets, which cover the wide range of 1.8 to 2.5. (We tried an experiment during our tests that we’ll tell you about on page four.)

Overdrive comes in five different strengths and works perfectly well up to level 4. The fifth slot produces too much black ghosting in moving objects to be usable. ASCR is the Asus version of dynamic contrast. We don’t see a need for it as the XG35VQ’s VA panel already provides excellent black levels and bright highlights. ELMB is the blur-reduction feature, and it works by strobing the backlight just like ULMB in a G-Sync monitor. It has only one pulse-width setting and reduces output by about 53%. It has no effect on contrast, though, which is a definite win. You will have to give up on using FreeSync, but it works up to the 100Hz maximum.

If you want to view two video sources simultaneously, the XG35VQ offers PIP and PBP. The PIP window is resizable and can be moved about. PBP offers aspect-ratio options, and the images can be swapped, as well.

Light In Motion, which we mentioned earlier on, refers to the LEDs that project on the desktop. They can be dimmed or turned off if desired. Aura Sync and Aura RGB have the controls for the colored ring around back of the display panel. You can also manipulate the color in the OSD and sync with software to work with your games. This menu ends with an AllReset function that returns all settings to their factory defaults.

The MyFavorite menu has four slots for storing user settings, which makes switching between configurations easy. Every monitor sold on Planet Earth should have this feature. Most televisions do, why not computer displays?

GamePlus

Asus’ latest iteration of GamePlus is the best yet. In addition to four different crosshairs (two shapes and two colors) you get the usual countdown timers, frame-rate indicators, and display alignment graphic. The fps counter can be either a large number or a bar graph. Once engaged, it can be moved around the screen with the joystick, as can the timer and crosshair. You can’t use the functions together, though--only one at a time.

Calibration

The XG35VQ’s Racing mode is a good fire-and-forget preset. That’s how it comes out of the box, and we suggest that, if you don’t want to tweak matters, just set the brightness level to your taste and enjoy. You can calibrate in Racing or User, as we did. RGB sliders take gray-scale tracking from good to reference-level, and gamma tracks quite well using the 2.2 option. Regardless of mode, the native gamut is sRGB, and it is followed very closely. If you want a slightly darker gamma (something we often do want with VA monitors), it will affect color saturation. Then, it becomes a matter of personal preference. To set up your XG35VQ, feel free to try our recommended settings below.

Asus ROG Strix XG35VQ Calibration Settings
GameVisualUser
Brightness 200cd/m242
Brightness 120cd/m217
Brightness 100cd/m211
Brightness 80cd/m26
Contrast80
Saturation50
Gamma2.2
Color Temp UserRed 100, Green 100, Blue 94

MORE: Best Gaming Monitors

MORE: Best Professional Monitors

MORE: How We Test Monitors

MORE: How To Choose A Monitor

MORE: All Monitor Content

18 comments
    Your comment
  • shallots
    Actually LFC works with any Adaptive Sync panel with more than 2:1 highest to lowest now (initially they said 2.5:1). So this screen supports LFC.

    And the Sammy CF791 has a 1500R curve, so this isn't the tightest curve available.

    This looks a lot like my ASUS MX34V which I purchased over 12 months ago... Which is also pretty good.
  • loki1944
    Bit of a late review; this panel has been out for about 4 months now. I bought mine mid-February 2018; fantastic colors. Replaced my Rog Swift (TN); will not ever touch another TN panel and I'm not a fan of over-bright IPS either. This is the best monitor I've ever had out of all my TN/IPS/VA panels.
  • Ninjawithagun
    Unfortunately, it's been proven by sales numbers from multiple manufacturers that the FreeSync monitors have horrible return in revenue. In other words, they just don't sell very well. G-Sync monitors are significantly outselling FreeSync monitors. The plain fact of the matter is G-Sync is more expensive, but works better than FreeSync. The two main superior factors of G-Sync over FreeSync are higher refresh rates and wider range in which the dynamic refresh rate works. The one and only advantage FreeSync has is it is cheaper, but that's it.
  • shallots
    Gsync is only better if you can't understand a spec sheet and need someone to spoon feed you information.
    Freesync can basically do everything Gsync can on the top end. It can run on the best HDR panels with the best colours, and the highest and widest range of refresh rates. But Freesync also provides advantages to mid and low end monitors, so it's much more versatile.
    And people say Gsync is better when Freesync can do the same and more (for $less), lol.
  • zyh1987
    can you still call it rog if it’s freesync, or ROG monitor will be strictly fixed refresh rate plus vsync under the whole gpp thing. And Arez Strix for all free sync stuff.
  • Valantar
    This is SO ******* close to being perfect, it kind of pisses me off. The real deal breaker is the huge stand and lack of VESA mount option - that thing will never, ever fit on the raised monitor shelf on my desk, and I won't go back to the hell of neck pain that living without it was. Such a shame, as the size, curvature, panel type, resolution, refresh rate, color accuracy and feature set is entirely spot on, ticking every single box.*


    *Except for: an external power brick? Seriously? Asus expects us to pay almost $800 for a monitor and still deal with an unmanageable and annoying lump on the power cord, making the setup messy and impractical no matter the effort? Really? At least I'd expect it to be high enough quality to not fail in an expensive monitor like this, but in general I don't trust external monitor power bricks - using an external generally means the OEM is cheaping out compared to spending a few bucks extra for heat-resistant components required for an internal one, and I expect them to die within ~3 years.
  • shallots
    It does have a VESA mount I think. It's hidden in the circle on the back.
  • Co BIY
    I think the lack of AMD video card availability has to be hurting Freesync monitor sales. Although overpriced nvidia cards are at least for sale.

    What are the best cards to drive a monitor like this up to it's potential?
  • Kaziel
    Do these have the same panels as Samsung's curved VA's with all the issues that come with them?
  • Valantar
    2708354 said:
    It does have a VESA mount I think. It's hidden in the circle on the back.


    Hm. The spec sheet does indeed say 100x100 VESA mount, but I've never seen that on these LED projector-equipped monstrosities before. Intriguing.

    Review staff: would you mind looking into this? Is there some way to unscrew the upright?
  • Ninjawithagun
    2708354 said:
    Gsync is only better if you can't understand a spec sheet and need someone to spoon feed you information. Freesync can basically do everything Gsync can on the top end. It can run on the best HDR panels with the best colours, and the highest and widest range of refresh rates. But Freesync also provides advantages to mid and low end monitors, so it's much more versatile. And people say Gsync is better when Freesync can do the same and more (for $less), lol.


    Incorrect. G-Sync is still superior in all areas. Guess you can't read a spec sheet. Silly peasant fan boys, when will they ever learn? Cheaper is not always better. Oh, and you are getting confused between FreeSync and Adaptive Sync. Easy mistake for you I'm sure ;-)
  • Ninjawithagun
    2012116 said:
    I think the lack of AMD video card availability has to be hurting Freesync monitor sales. Although overpriced nvidia cards are at least for sale. What are the best cards to drive a monitor like this up to it's potential?


    Your generalization is wrong, but that's okay. Just go to Amazon for a quick reminder of reality. Bottom line, all Nvidia and AMD mid and high end graphics cards are overpriced right now thanks to crypto currency mining extravaganza. To answer your actual question, the best AMD card for use of the Asus ROG XG35V would be a RX Vega 56 or RX Vega 64 card. ~5 million pixels (3440 x 1440 = 4,953,600 pixels) with graphics settings turned to medium or high requires a lot of brute force power from a GPU. Of course, you could choose to use Cross Fire, but micro stutter is something I am no fan of when gaming.
  • shallots
    146263 said:
    2708354 said:
    Gsync is only better if you can't understand a spec sheet and need someone to spoon feed you information. Freesync can basically do everything Gsync can on the top end. It can run on the best HDR panels with the best colours, and the highest and widest range of refresh rates. But Freesync also provides advantages to mid and low end monitors, so it's much more versatile. And people say Gsync is better when Freesync can do the same and more (for $less), lol.
    Incorrect. G-Sync is still superior in all areas. Guess you can't read a spec sheet. Silly peasant fan boys, when will they ever learn? Cheaper is not always better. Oh, and you are getting confused between FreeSync and Adaptive Sync. Easy mistake for you I'm sure ;-)


    Lol you have no idea what you're talking about. I think you're the one confusing Adaptive Sync, it doesn't do stuff like LFC which helps even the playing field with Gsync. Nice try though.

    Freesync can basically do everything Gsync can and more. I guess you got confused because there are some low and mid range panels which also work with Freesync. Shame on Freesync for also making them better!!?
  • Ninjawithagun
    2708354 said:
    146263 said:
    2708354 said:
    Gsync is only better if you can't understand a spec sheet and need someone to spoon feed you information. Freesync can basically do everything Gsync can on the top end. It can run on the best HDR panels with the best colours, and the highest and widest range of refresh rates. But Freesync also provides advantages to mid and low end monitors, so it's much more versatile. And people say Gsync is better when Freesync can do the same and more (for $less), lol.
    Incorrect. G-Sync is still superior in all areas. Guess you can't read a spec sheet. Silly peasant fan boys, when will they ever learn? Cheaper is not always better. Oh, and you are getting confused between FreeSync and Adaptive Sync. Easy mistake for you I'm sure ;-)
    Lol you have no idea what you're talking about. I think you're the one confusing Adaptive Sync, it doesn't do stuff like LFC which helps even the playing field with Gsync. Nice try though. Freesync can basically do everything Gsync can and more. I guess you got confused because there are some low and mid range panels which also work with Freesync. Shame on Freesync for also making them better!!?


    Bla bla bla. You have already lost credibility of any kind. Go back into your troll hole.
  • shallots
    146263 said:
    Bla bla bla. You have already lost credibility of any kind. Go back into your troll hole.


    Sure... I guess you proved me a troll by calling me names and deflecting from the facts...

    *slow clap*
  • g-unit1111
    Ninjawithagun - watch the language and name calling or you will be taking a short vacation from the forums. Keep it civil or you will be taking a break. Consider this your only warning in this thread.
  • mossberg
    146263 said:
    Unfortunately, it's been proven by sales numbers from multiple manufacturers that the FreeSync monitors have horrible return in revenue. In other words, they just don't sell very well. G-Sync monitors are significantly outselling FreeSync monitors. The plain fact of the matter is G-Sync is more expensive, but works better than FreeSync. The two main superior factors of G-Sync over FreeSync are higher refresh rates and wider range in which the dynamic refresh rate works. The one and only advantage FreeSync has is it is cheaper, but that's it.


    Nvidia commands most of the market share, on GPU's. G-sync only works with Nvidia cards. Freesync only works with AMD cards. Kinda a no brainer why G-sync is selling more.

    Also real ninjas don't use guns.
  • barryv88
    146263 said:
    2708354 said:
    Gsync is only better if you can't understand a spec sheet and need someone to spoon feed you information. Freesync can basically do everything Gsync can on the top end. It can run on the best HDR panels with the best colours, and the highest and widest range of refresh rates. But Freesync also provides advantages to mid and low end monitors, so it's much more versatile. And people say Gsync is better when Freesync can do the same and more (for $less), lol.
    Incorrect. G-Sync is still superior in all areas. Guess you can't read a spec sheet. Silly peasant fan boys, when will they ever learn? Cheaper is not always better. Oh, and you are getting confused between FreeSync and Adaptive Sync. Easy mistake for you I'm sure ;-)


    Superior in all areas? HardOCP actually did a vid on YT, the conclusion being that all those people saw minimal differences and all of them agreed (as most gamers world wide) that paying $200 for the one isn't justifiable.
    I've actually seen some Gsync screens cost as much as $300 more than the FS equivalent ones. THAT right there is the dealbreaker - that kinda cash could easily have gone towards an even beefier GPU. I guess us 'peasant' boys are just wrong about everything hey?