Asus ROG Strix XG35VQ Monitor Review: A Prime, Curved Pick for FreeSync Gaming
Brightness & Contrast
To read about our monitor tests in-depth, please check out Display Testing Explained: How We Test Monitors and TVs. Brightness and Contrast testing is covered on page two.
Uncalibrated – Maximum Backlight Level
VA monitors are still relatively rare in our review database, but we have a few curved displays in today’s comparison group. From Acer comes the Z301C, AOC brings the AG352UCG, and Asus is represented by its XG32VQ. To fill out the ultra-wide category, we included IPS screens: ViewSonic’s XG2703-GS and Acer’s XR382CQK.
- 01 maxwhite
- 02 maxblack
- 03 maxcontrast
Most ultra-wide monitors don’t deliver a ton of output, but our top two contenders manage to exceed 350 nits. This is the bare minimum for any sort of blur reduction, in our opinion. You’ll need some overhead to compensate for that backlight strobe. The ROG Strix XG35VQ loses 53% brightness when ELMB is engaged. There’s no variable pulse width, though we can see enough reduction in blur that we wouldn’t want to make things any darker. And don’t forget that FreeSync is disabled, as well. The good news is that there’s no contrast penalty, which is a first in our experience. Blur reduction usually reduces image depth, but not in this case. ELMB is very well implemented. Black levels are superb, as we’d expect from any VA panel, and resulting contrast is comfortably over 2000:1.
Uncalibrated – Minimum Backlight Level
- 04 minwhite
- 05 minblack
- 06 mincontrast
The XG35VQ’s minimum brightness setting is just about perfect for gaming in a dark environment. You’ll definitely want to forgo ELMB at this point, since the image would be quite dark. Black levels drop proportionally, as they should, keeping contrast at around 2100:1. This is consistent performance.
After Calibration to 200cd/m2
- 07 calblack
- 08 calcontrast
Apparently, not all VA panels are created equal. Though the XG35VQ easily outdistances its IPS competition, its contrast isn’t quite as high as the Z301C and XG32V. The difference is small but visible. You can never have too much dynamic range, after all. We’d still rather game on this screen than nearly any other.
ANSI Contrast Ratio
Intra-image contrast is superb, with the XG35VQ taking second place in the ANSI test. Only Asus’ own XG32V can boast better numbers. When coupled with accurate color, good saturation, and proper gamma tracking, the image here is better than the vast majority of monitors we’ve reviewed, gaming or otherwise. This is a premium-priced display, but it is worth every penny of that cost.
MORE: Best Gaming Monitors
MORE: Best Professional Monitors
MORE: How We Test Monitors
MORE: How To Choose A Monitor
MORE: All Monitor Content
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.
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.
*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.
What are the best cards to drive a monitor like this up to it's potential?
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?
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 ;-)
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.
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.
Sure... I guess you proved me a troll by calling me names and deflecting from the facts...
*slow clap*
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.
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?