ASUS MX299Q Monitor Review
by Chris Heinonen on September 23, 2013 12:00 AM ESTAll our monitor testing and calibration data is obtained using SpectraCal’s CalMAN 5.1.2 software. Meters used are a SpectraCal C6 colorimeter and an XRite i1Pro spectrometer.
There are many different preset modes on the MX299Q and for once, sRGB didn’t turn out to be the best option. sRGB is accurate but also cuts off access to brightness and all other adjustments. The Standard mode using the default User color setting (100, 100, 100) provided a more accurate mode out-of-box and more adjustments. Because of that it was utilized for all the pre- and post-calibration measurements.
|
Pre-Calibration |
Post-Calibration, |
Post-Calibration, |
White Level (cd/m^2) |
202.65 |
200.00 |
81.903 |
Black Level (cd/m^2) |
0.1914 |
0.1967 |
0.0776 |
Contrast Ratio |
1059:1 |
1017:1 |
1055:1 |
Gamma (Average) |
2.1907 |
2.2016 |
2.3687 |
Color Temperature |
6673K |
6511K |
6498K |
Grayscale dE2000 |
1.5635 |
0.4557 |
0.6155 |
Color Checker dE2000 |
2.0681 |
1.1397 |
1.1248 |
Saturations dE2000 |
1.59 |
1.0133 |
1.1605 |
As of this review, I’m no longer including the standard Gamut chart. All of the data that gamut provides is available in the saturations chart, making the Gamut chart redundant. The Gamut error calculation also includes the white-point error in the data, making an accurate grayscale account for 25% of the gamut error. This is included in the Saturations data as well, but accounts for a far smaller amount (1%) of the overall total. I’m also testing a new Saturations error chart that includes far more readings and utilizes a line chart to show the error. The X-axis is missing, but left is 0% saturation and right is 100%.
The pre-calibration numbers are really quite good. The main issue on the ASUS MX299Q is that the gamma isn’t totally linear and there is a red-push that results in poor skin tones. The overall grayscale is good but has too little blue. None of the colors are truly egregious in their error levels but greens and yellows fare the worst overall.
Calibrate it to 200 cd/m^2 and these issues are gone. The gamma is perfectly linear now and the grayscale errors are missing. Skin tones are good and colors are better but green and yellow are a bit over-saturated. The contrast ratios remain incredibly high, and the overall image on-screen looks remarkable.
The sRGB gamma and 80 cd/m^2 calibration provides similar excellent results. There is a bit of a bump at 95% in the gamma but otherwise it is quite good. Green and Yellow maintain a bit of over-saturation but most colors are very accurate.
Looking at these before and after results the MX299Q starts out well but ends up even better. The 21:9 panels are being designed to be capable of incredibly strong overall performance.
44 Comments
View All Comments
coolhardware - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
For the past few years I have been using a Dell 30" 2560x1600 in landscape, sandwiched by two Dell 20" 1600x1200 displays in portrait mode.http://www.jdhodges.com/blog/shed-to-office-conver...
With the two side monitors rotated, all three monitors end up being the same height and pixel density... :-)
http://www.jdhodges.com/blog/ultimate-triple-monit...
(sorry the post is somewhat confusing, it was quickly put together when I was planning and initially installing... I really should update it!)
compcons - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
I have a 27x9H which is a similar style to this one. There are NO VESA mounts and the stand mounts similar to most LCD TVs. One option is all that is available. Confirm that you can rotate it if necessary. Personally, I mounted my old gateway 22" on a monoprice desk mount and rotate it vertically when I need it.Nagorak - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
Sounds to me like you're just going to end up with a crick in your neck.sjpxk992013 - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link
I have the Dell U2913 in portrait mode attached to a Thinkpad W520 with another Dell 24" as the landscape 1080p panel. With the laptop LCD running Metro in the center stack the two choices make working super easy.Road and Track for instance looks perfect in p-mode where my banking sites look better in standard l-mode
ComputerGuy2006 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Although its nice not to be stuck in the old 1080p monitors, id like to see something with more sensible resolutions. Something between 1600p and 4k would be nice, or even 4k 60hz at decent prices....Kevin G - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
3200 x 1800 resolution exists as it is found on some 15" notebooks. I wouldn't mind such a resolution on a 24" desktop display.There is also 3280 x 2048 resolution displays used for medical imaging but they're prohibitory expensive. 4K displays like the Asus PQ321Q are actually cheaper.
blanarahul - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Really, really awesome review. I especially loved the "Contrast Uniformity" chart. I hope others would do it too.althaz - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
8,000 cd/m^2 is REALLY bright - it's about half a percent (0.5%) of the brightness of the sun. Half a percent might not seem like much, but we're talking about the sun, which is REALLY bright.DanNeely - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Assuming your comparison is using cd/m^2 for both and are measuring the sun as seen from the Earth; at any reasonable viewing distance that monitor would have a higher total luminosity than the sun.Geek tanning both anyone?
piroroadkill - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Wow, a monitor that wide is incredibly ugly.