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
JJ_Judge - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
It would be VERY useful if somebody would actually test a 21:9 monitor for gaming, and not just speculate on "how cool it would be for games". Because the only thing that's stopping me from buying such a monitor is the fear it wouldn't be compatible enough with major gaming titles...cheinonen - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
You can read the prior 21:9 monitor review from LG to see more details on how I found it with gaming. I found most titles worked fine, though Diablo III didn't when I tried to test it with that.flyingpants1 - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link
Saw one in Canada Computers. Loaded a 1080p youtube video of BF3 being played at 2560*1080. Seemed very cool.Hrel - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
This is getting so ridiculous. Movie makers need to just all agree to use 16:9 in their films, and if they need more in the shot width wise they can just zoom out. 2.41:1 ratio, yeah, I've seen that. One of my largest monster peeves. Since it's not a pet peeve because I'm right any anyone who thinks you need something wider than 16:9 is OUT OF THEIR FUCKING MIND!flyingpants1 - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link
This post is a good example of speaking from ignorance. You clearly know nothing about film, movies, aspect ratios, monitors, etc. I don't think you're even aware of what you're suggesting.Most already-released movies are wider than 16:9, cropping them is obviously unacceptable.
Our eyes are situated side by side, not top and bottom. We have a ~180 degree horizontal FOV.
There just isn't very much to look at on the ground and in the sky.
16:9 is bad for web content. Portrait is better, because we scroll up and down to read, not left and right. It's also inferior to 16:10 because you simply lose the vertical pixels.
I don't mind using 16:9 myself, but it's VERY far from ideal.
peckiro - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
There obviously is a lack of major antipsychotic medication in a poster here.xaml - Sunday, September 29, 2013 - link
What aspect ratio and resolution does this poster have?VN_Tran - Sunday, September 29, 2013 - link
It so amazing !!!johnnyboy101 - Sunday, October 6, 2013 - link
Hello - my apologies if this is a dumb question, but in other's experience with 2560x1080 monitors (I have the Dell variant), do games actually render the full 2560x1080? Or do they render 1920x1080 and then stretch it? Given that it is a non standard resolution? Any insight appreciated!gatygun - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
render in full