{"id":22,"date":"2022-02-07T14:53:50","date_gmt":"2022-02-07T14:53:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/engadget.vip\/?p=22"},"modified":"2022-02-07T14:53:50","modified_gmt":"2022-02-07T14:53:50","slug":"asus-rog-strix-xg438q-review","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/engadget.vip\/?p=22","title":{"rendered":"Asus ROG Strix XG438Q Review"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class='booster-block booster-read-block'><\/div><p>It&#8217;s huge, includes plenty of great quality features \u2013 but the high price and unique form factor mean it won&#8217;t be suitable in every instance.<\/p>\n<h2>Pros<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>Huge, immersive 43in 4K screen<\/li>\n<li>Great core image quality<\/li>\n<li>Punchy, powerful speakers<\/li>\n<li>Good set of features<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>Cons<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>Looks a little dated<\/li>\n<li>Size could not suit some situations<\/li>\n<li>Not big enough for some living rooms<\/li>\n<li>Middling HDR options<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 id=\"key-specifications\">Key Specifications<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>Review Price: \u00a31112<\/li>\n<li>3840 x 2160 resolution<\/li>\n<li>43in diagonal<\/li>\n<li>VA panel<\/li>\n<li>120Hz AMD FreeSync 2<\/li>\n<li>1 x DisplayPort, 3 x HDMI<\/li>\n<li>2 x USB 3.0<\/li>\n<li>4ms response time<\/li>\n<li>2 x 10W speakers<\/li>\n<li>VESA DisplayHDR 600<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 id=\"what-is-it\">What is it?<\/h2>\n<p>The Asus ROG Strix XG438Q is more expensive than almost any other gaming monitor on the market \u2013 and with good reason.<\/p>\n<p>This screen combines a vast 43in diagonal with HDR, AMD FreeSync 2 and a 4K resolution, and it\u2019s designed to sate both PC and console players \u2013 no surprise when it\u2019s the size of a TV.<\/p>\n<p>But is it worth the \u00a31112 ($1099) price?<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"design-and-build\">Design and build<\/h2>\n<p>The Asus\u2019s most prominent feature, figuratively and literally, is its 43in diagonal. Alongside the familiar aspect ratio of 16:9, this screen look almost overwhelming: it\u2019s 631mm tall and 975mm wide.<\/p>\n<p>What does that mean for gaming, though? Well, as ever, there are pros and cons.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>If you\u2019re a PC gamer, then using a keyboard and mouse and sitting right in front of a 43in screen may not be ideal. The Asus\u2019s sheer size means the panel is almost overwhelming, depending on how close you are to the screen \u2013 and in some situations you\u2019re going to have to strain your neck to see to the corners.<\/p>\n<p>If you sit further back at your PC, with a pad or with a keyboard and mouse, then the 43in size makes more sense. The screen is imposing, sure, but you can still take it all in.<\/p>\n<p>Console gamers will be able to position the Asus in the living room or bedroom, just like they would a regular TV \u2013 and they can take advantage of its 120Hz refresh rate, which is rare among normal televisions.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s great, but there are caveats here too. The 43in diagonal is a little small compared to the majority of TVs, so if you\u2019re sat further away then it might be difficult to make out HUD elements and page furniture.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, it comes down to where you\u2019re going to position this panel.<\/p>\n<p>At the moment, the 43in Asus is a rare product. The vast majority of gaming monitors over 32in in size are widescreen, curved panels that will only be suitable for some gaming scenarios. Those panels tend to have sizes that range between 34in and 49in, and prices vary wildly \u2013 from \u00a3400 or $500 to more than \u00a32000 or $2000.<\/p>\n<p>There are a handful of larger 16:9 screens around, but they\u2019re far more expensive than the Asus.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"features\">Features<\/h2>\n<p>The 3840 x 2160 resolution makes sense for a screen of this size, because you\u2019re going to want more pixels to keep things looking crisp from across the room.<\/p>\n<p>AMD FreeSync 2 works on both AMD and Nvidia graphics cards, and it runs at 120Hz. That refresh rate isn\u2019t as high as the 144Hz or 240Hz rates found on smaller panels, but this isn&#8217;t a problem; it will be tricky for any graphics card to play tough single-player games at 4K and at the 144fps or beyond, and titles will still look butter-smooth at 120fps. The XG438Q isn\u2019t designed for high-end, competitive eSports either \u2013 so a higher rate isn\u2019t needed for those games.<\/p>\n<p>VESA DisplayHDR 600 is a mid-range HDR standard, so you\u2019ll only get a modest boost to HDR content. It will be better than DisplayHDR 400, which is more common, but not by much.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>Underneath all of this is a VA panel with 10-bit colour. That\u2019s good, because it means this screen can display 1.07 billion colours rather than the 16.7m rendered by 8-bit displays. The 4ms response time is fine, too: good enough for single-player gaming and casual multi-player titles.<\/p>\n<p>However, this technology does come with caveats. If you want to run 4K, 120Hz and HDR at the same time, you\u2019re restricted to 8-bit colour. There just isn&#8217;t enough bandwidth for 10-bit, too. This isn&#8217;t a big deal, though, because the difference won\u2019t be discernible during gaming.<\/p>\n<p>It\u2019s also worth mentioning that the Asus uses a TV panel rather than a PC display, so it has an underlying BGR pixel layout rather than the more common RGB layout.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>This means that small text on the Asus isn\u2019t quite as sharp. Imagine how text sometimes doesn\u2019t look crisp when you\u2019re close to a TV.<\/p>\n<p>The lack of crispness is only noticeable on close inspection, and it isn&#8217;t an issue during games. Scaling up text and icons in Windows 10 to even 150% makes text crisper and cleaner, and you\u2019ll need to do that for a 4K panel anyway. And, if you\u2019re really determined to improve things, there are guides online with deep dives into image settings.<\/p>\n<p>The feature set is impressive, especially considering the rest of the market. If you want a huge panel with a better response time or a faster refresh rate then you\u2019ll have to pay a few hundred pounds or dollars more \u2013 and at that point you start to suffer diminishing returns, because few people will notice a jump to a 1ms response time or a 200Hz refresh rate.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"setup\">Setup<\/h2>\n<p>The XG438Q looks more like a TV than a PC monitor, albeit a TV from a few years ago.<\/p>\n<p>The bezels around the screen are thicker than those routinely found on both gaming monitors and TVs these days, and the screen is 70mm deep, so it\u2019s thicker than most TVs and gaming panels.<\/p>\n<p>Add in the base and the Asus is 242mm deep. Combine that with its 975mm width, daunting height and 15.3kg weight and you\u2019ve got a significant bit of kit, so it\u2019s worth getting the tape measure out before purchasing.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>Its sheer size also means adjustment options are limited. The Asus tilts back and forward and supports 100mm VESA mounts, but that\u2019s it \u2013 no swivelling and no height adjustment.<\/p>\n<p>The design does look outdated, but the Asus is better when it comes to some practical areas.<\/p>\n<p>There are two USB 3.0 ports, two audio jacks and an HDMI port on the side of the screen, which makes them easy to access. Two additional HDMI ports and a DisplayPort connection face downwards, which is trickier, but there&#8217;s a neat cover to obscure cables.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>Since the XG438Q takes design cues from TVs, it also means that this panel has beefy speakers. The two 10W units are good, offering plenty of volume, clear treble and a punchy high-end that avoids being tinny. They don\u2019t have enough bass, but they\u2019re easily good enough for gaming.<\/p>\n<p>Asus\u2019s usual on-screen display is fast, easy to navigate and well organised. It has the usual options for adjusting colour, brightness, gamma and contrast, and it has picture-by-picture and picture-in-picture options that support up to three inputs. Gamers can also add reticules, FPS counters and timers to the screen.<\/p>\n<p>A joystick and four large buttons sit on the rear of the monitor, but that isn&#8217;t the most practical navigation option. Handily, Asus includes a neat remote control with the XG438Q, and a Windows app is available. It\u2019s also possible to make the OSD larger, so you can see the menu from across a room.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"image-quality\">Image quality<\/h2>\n<p>By default, the screen uses its Racing mode, and with this option selected the Asus pumps out a peak brightness level of 412 nits. That\u2019s significant \u2013 higher than most gaming monitors, and enough to deliver ample punch from across the room.<\/p>\n<p>The black point of 0.11 nits is fantastic, too \u2013 and, again, better than most gaming panels. It means that darker areas in games have incredible depth.<\/p>\n<p>Those figures create a contrast ratio of 3745:1. And yet again, this is better than almost anything else out there. It means that you get plenty of vibrancy and lots of depth from this screen. As such, games will look vivid and impressive.<\/p>\n<p>Those great results are joined by great colour figures. The Delta E of 1.96 is top-notch and the colour temperature of 6208K is solid \u2013 a little warm, but close enough to the 6500K ideal to not prove problematic. Those results mean you\u2019re going to get consistently accurate colours.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>The Asus can handle 99.9% of the sRGB colour gamut and 91% of the DCI-P3 gamut. The former result is excellent \u2013 it means that this screen will render any shade that games need. The latter figure is decent and is used for HDR, but a slightly better result would have delivered an even wider colour gamut.<\/p>\n<p>In some other areas the Asus is less impressive. Image modes, for instance: we\u2019d leave the Asus in its default Racing option, because the RTS, RPG and FPS modes drastically reduce contrast, and the MOBA mode is too oversaturated. The sRGB mode doesn\u2019t improve on the panel\u2019s default settings.<\/p>\n<p>Uniformity levels aren&#8217;t great, either. The Asus lost nearly 20% of its backlight strength along both sides. These figures aren&#8217;t disastrous \u2013 if you\u2019re in the middle of a gaming session then you won\u2019t notice discrepancies, and they\u2019ll become less obvious once the brightness is reduced. It\u2019s also hardly a surprise on a screen at this size \u2013 widescreen panels suffer similarly.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>The XG438Q\u2019s HDR performance is also a little disappointing. Positively, using this screen\u2019s HDR modes ramps up the brightness to 650 nits, which surpasses VESA DisplayHDR 600\u2019s requirements. However, in HDR modes the panel\u2019s black level sat at 0.32 nits.<\/p>\n<p>Those results meant that the Asus produced a contrast level of 2030:1 in HDR mode.<\/p>\n<p>Ordinarily those results are decent, but in HDR mode they aren&#8217;t good enough \u2013 the contrast level actually falls below what this screen achieves in normal use.<\/p>\n<p>The increase in brightness means that HDR content viewed on this panel has impressive punch at the top-end, but the weaker black and contrast levels mean HDR images lack depth in darker areas and in the mid-range. You get a slight improvement, but HDR here looks a little insipid; it&#8217;s no match for a proper HDR TV.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"should-i-buy-it\">Should I buy it?<\/h2>\n<p>The Asus ROG Strix XG438Q is an eye-catching screen that offers plenty to recommend it, although there are caveats for gamers.<\/p>\n<p>Its sheer size works well in bedrooms and living rooms, which bodes well for console players \u2013 and it will suit some PC players too. Core image quality is decent, and the Asus serves up great speakers, good connectivity and solid build quality.<\/p>\n<p>The addition of 120Hz FreeSync 2 and a 4K resolution deliver smooth, crisp gaming now while adding a greater degree of future-proofing than the majority of itsrivals. Most 16:9 gaming monitors at this size top out at 60Hz, for instance, unless you opt for an expensive widescreen or spend hundreds more.<\/p>\n<p>However, the Asus looks a little dated, uniformity could be better, and the panel isn&#8217;t great for HDR. Text isn\u2019t particularly crisp as a result of that BGR design, and the price remains high, even if the Asus is good value when compared to similar screens.<\/p>\n<p>Note that this screen\u2019s size won\u2019t work for everyone, either. It won\u2019t be big enough for some living rooms, but it will be too big for some PC setups. Widescreens will also be better for some genres.<\/p>\n<p>But if your gaming setup will suit a huge 16:9 screen, the Asus ROG Strix XG438Q serves up excellent core image quality \u2013 and there\u2019s nothing else at this price that offers such a broad range of features. Despite its foibles, it\u2019s worth the investment.<\/p>\n<h2>Specs<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\u2039<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tUK RRP<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tUSA RRP<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tManufacturer<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tScreen Size<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tSize (Dimensions)<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tWeight<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tRelease Date<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tFirst Reviewed Date<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tResolution<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tHDR<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tTypes of HDR<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tRefresh Rate<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tPorts<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tDisplay Technology<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tScreen Technology<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tSyncing Technology<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAsus ROG Strix XG438Q<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\u00a31112<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t$1099<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAsus<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t43 inches<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t974.58 x 74.6 x 570.62 MM<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t13.2 KG<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t2019<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t06\/11\/2019<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t3840 x 2160<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tYes<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tDisplayHDR 600<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t120 Hz<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t1 x DisplayPort, 3 x HDMI 2.0 x USB 3.0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tVA<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tVA<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAMD FreeSync<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\u203a<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>It&#8217;s huge, includes plenty of great quality features \u2013 but the high price and unique form factor mean it won&#8217;t be suitable in every instance. Pros Huge, immersive 43in 4K screen Great core image quality Punchy, powerful speakers Good set of features Cons Looks a little dated Size could not suit some situations Not big [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":23,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[10,11,13,14,15,16,12],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/engadget.vip\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/engadget.vip\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/engadget.vip\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/engadget.vip\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/engadget.vip\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=22"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/engadget.vip\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/engadget.vip\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/23"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/engadget.vip\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=22"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/engadget.vip\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=22"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/engadget.vip\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=22"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}