ASUS MX299Q Monitor Review
by Chris Heinonen on September 23, 2013 12:00 AM ESTUniformity is measured using 25 points on the screen in CalMAN and compared to the center measurement. Since the important aspect of uniformity is how accurate the screen looks compared to itself, and not the overall error, this provides a far more accurate method of measurement.
The white uniformity of the MX299Q leaves a bit to be desired. Some areas of the screen have a 10% fall-off in brightness while others rise almost 8% relative to center. This amount of drop-off isn’t easily noticeable but is a bit higher than I would like to see.
Black uniformity suffers far more than white uniformity. The upper-right corner and lower-center have much brighter readings due to some light leakage at the border. Everywhere else has a lower black reading, which is always better, but those three zones measure poorly compared to every other reading.
Most areas of the screen wind up with a better contrast reading than the center thanks to their lower black levels. The three zones with higher black levels suffer of course, but everywhere else on the screen is between 1,009 and 1,201, providing excellent contrast results overall.
Surprisingly the areas of the screen with light leakage don’t suffer from any dE2000 errors as a result of that. Usually you would see higher errors in those areas but we don’t on the MX299Q. We do see some less-than-ideal numbers on the right side of the display when compared to the left side. The overall average still remains below the target of 3.0 overall, but some of the individual results are certain to fall above 3.0. The center and left side of the screen are excellent overall, but the right side suffers a bit on the MX299Q.
The MX299Q is overall uniform but has a couple areas of concern. The light leakage hurts the contrast ratios and the right side has some color errors as well. Most people will not notice these, but serious designers might.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
44 Comments
View All Comments
Icehawk - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Hmm, would love to see a few images from FPS to see what they look like on a 21:9 - do I get useful additional info or is everything so fishbowled or out of my direct sight that it isn't a positive?cheinonen - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
There is a gallery in my prior 21:9 display review with some gaming images comparing 16:9 to 21:9 screen area. Those can be found here: http://www.anandtech.com/Gallery/Album/2630mdrejhon - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
>>"The lowest black level any meter can reasonably measure is 0.0001, which would mean a peak white level of 8,000 cd/m^2."Actually, that's not quite fully accurate. Some expensive million-dollar meters can measure light at the SINGLE photon levels (Hint: They're used to detect neutrinos). There are some lab-quality meters at the thousand-dollar level that can measure less than 0.0001cd/m2. It is only a simple matter of how much you're willing to pay for a light meter.
A more scientifically accurate way to say this is "The lowest black level any _consumer_ meter can reasonably measure is 0.0001"
cheinonen - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
I'm only referring to meters that would be used for measuring displays, like this. At the high end there is the Konica Minolta CS-2000 for $26,000 that can measure down to 0.003 cd/m2 and the Klein K10-A for $5,500 that measures down to 0.00006 cd/m2. Regardless, any contrast number out there that is past 100,000:1 and it's an OLED is playing games most likely.Wwhat - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
In your spec listing you mention 1 Year warranty, However in the EU the minimum warranty for all electronic devices is 2 years.And incidentally, because most people are not aware of that, many shops and manufacturers pretend they are doing you a special favor by giving you 2 years warranty., but hey that's commercialism.
And some are quite incredibly rude and don't mention that fact when they try to sell you additional extended warranties, including big companies like apple I hear.
Wwhat - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Quite outrageous to not have VESA mounting holes on a monitor in my view, but I guess they sell anyway so it's not going to end any time soon that manufacturers do that.cbrownx88 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
I'd have already purchased one if this panel had VESA mounts or 120hz/lightstrobe.Larzy - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
On the input lag, it isn't split up like the other screens are shown, the first segment showing input lag and the second segement showing pixel response times, but on this display is it 10ms pixel response and no input lag at all ?Larzy - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
If that's true, then 9ms (rather) it's certainly one of the best 21:9 for gaming.cheinonen - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
No, this has been discussed as using SMTT allowed for breaking it up into two separate measurements. Since SMTT is no longer available and the license has expired, I can't use it to test anymore. Now I just have a single lag number that encompasses both of them. It's unfortunate but the way it is.