Asus intros ROG Strix XG32UQ 32-inch 4K gaming monitor with 160Hz refresh rate

Tudor Cibean

Posts: 182   +11
Staff
In a nutshell: The new Asus ROG Strix XG32UQ combines a 4K resolution with a high refresh rate, making for a high-end gaming experience if you have a powerful enough GPU. The DisplayHDR 600 certification means its HDR image quality is at least passable, and it also features two full-speed HDMI 2.1 ports to connect to the latest consoles.

Asus has added a new high-end gaming monitor to its lineup, the ROG Strix XG32UQ. It features a 32-inch IPS panel with quantum dot technology, a native resolution of 3840 x 2160, and ships with a 144Hz refresh rate, although you can "overclock" it to 160Hz by toggling a switch in the OSD.

The ROG Strix XG32UQ has 10-bit color support and covers 96 percent of the DCI-P3 color space and 130 percent of the sRGB color space. It has a typical brightness of up to 450 nits in SDR mode and can hit a 600-nit peak brightness when displaying HDR content, earning it a DisplayHDR 600 certification. The panel is also factory calibrated to a Delta-E of less than 2.

Connectivity-wise, the XG32UQ has one DisplayPort 1.4, two HDMI 2.1 ports (with 48 Gbps bandwidth), a 3.5mm headphone jack, and a built-in USB hub with two 5Gbps USB-A ports. The HDMI ports are limited to 144Hz at 4K, so you'll have to use DisplayPort if you want to take advantage of the display's maximum refresh rate.

The included stand offers 80mm of height adjustment, tilt between +20 and -5 degrees, and a 40-degree swivel range, while pivot support is notably missing. In case you want to use a third-party monitor arm, the screen is also VESA mount-compatible with 100mm x 100mm hole spacing.

The Asus ROG Strix XG32UQ will be available for purchase in the third quarter of 2022. Pricing is still unknown, but don't expect it to come cheap, as similarly-specced monitors are currently hovering around the $900 mark.

Be sure to check out our top picks for 4K gaming monitors if you're in the market for a high-end display. If, however, you're looking for an alternative that's a bit more sanely priced, take a look at our gaming monitor buying guide in $100 increments.

Permalink to story.

 
FullHD is proper for monitors between 24'-27'.
2K monitors between 27'-32' (34' for 3440x1440).
4k monitors above 34'.
This monitor looks nice, but it's dimension is too low for 4K.
So the price should be as a 2k (expensive) monitor.
 
FullHD is proper for monitors between 24'-27'.
2K monitors between 27'-32' (34' for 3440x1440).
4k monitors above 34'.
This monitor looks nice, but it's dimension is too low for 4K.
So the price should be as a 2k (expensive) monitor.

Having just swapped from a 43" 4K screen to 32" 4K, 32" is perfect for a 4K screen. Super crisp image.
 
FullHD is proper for monitors between 24'-27'.
2K monitors between 27'-32' (34' for 3440x1440).
4k monitors above 34'.
This monitor looks nice, but it's dimension is too low for 4K.
So the price should be as a 2k (expensive) monitor.
4K is overrated. I am using my 4K 55' OLED at 2K resolution. The difference in quality is small, noticeable really only on older titles, in newer titles with all the effects 2K quality is very close to 4K.
 
You know they need to make it a darn standard. IF Y OU ARE EDGE LIT YOU DON'T HAVE HDR. Can we stop with these stupid ratings for horrible HDR. FALD should be REQUIRED for any HDR certification.
 
4K is overrated. I am using my 4K 55' OLED at 2K resolution. The difference in quality is small, noticeable really only on older titles, in newer titles with all the effects 2K quality is very close to 4K.
Thx dude, I want to buy a new monitor and was thinking to choose between
Alienware AW3423DW 34" QD-OLED Monitor or a 4K one.
I think I'll buy Alienware AW3423DW 34" QD-OLED Monitor.
I have already another 3440x1440 monitor and I like it.
 
What model is your new 4k-32'?
At previous 43' could you spot the pixels 1m away from it?

Sorry late reply.
Current is a Gigabyte M32U.
Upgraded from a TCL 4K TV.

Could not spot the pixels on the TV, and FWIW it wasn't the worst set either as density goes. Color, viewing angle (TN panel), and refresh rate were the biggest setbacks with it.
 
Back