Is Glossy Better? - ASUS 240Hz OLED XG27AQDMG Review 

does the glossy screen look a lot clearer and vibrant? Im so used to matte screen (except my LG bx)

bro you have bitcoin and shit?

@stevensv4864 I dold the PG27AQDM for 550.00 and bought the XG for 700 so it wasnt too bad.

@AmirChemE it's not an insane difference like from the PG27AQDM compared to my Samsung S90C but its enough of an upgrade that I felt it was still worth it. The XG does look really good.

@@brentcox2961 oh nice

A dry magic fiber cloth from Amazon.

Clean, dry microfiber cloth to wipe away dust from the screen, then a different clean microfiber cloth lightly sprayed with distilled water to get the grease stains, fingerprints etc. off the screen. For the initial dry wipe any cloth soft enough to not physically damage the screen will do. The cloth you spray with water will need to be quite fine in order to avoid water streaks.

@@andrewmorris3479 Dayum, it's so difficult to clean that you require a magic cloth?

@@PD-ws4td Haha this guy is a jokester!

A $19 Polish Cloth from the Apple Store.

You’ll be dissatisfied as these numbers are nowhere near what it’s going to actually look like. It’s dim and none the colors pop like qdoled I’m actually sending mine back

😢, well it'll be better than the trash I'm currently using

@@makoshark17able oh for sure! If you don’t have a oled to compare you’ll be fine unless you’re needing bright monitor

@@makoshark17able I also got this asus, coming from the alienware aw2725df and yeah the color in hdr is a step down but its brighter than the alienware also no purple tint or raised blacks which useful for me since I game in a bright room with sunlight.

@@Forthepeople21 basically I'm buying this monitor as a test to see whatever OLED and 1440p is a good combination. I've struggled in games like COD because of low fps and poor visuals.

lg makes the coating

Ermmm... no? WOLED looks better than QLED in a light controlled room.. You can't beat the glossy finish. There isn't a single QD OLED panel with a glossy finish. I mean that's just what people see at first glance, and the display guy says this all the time. It's a weird comment too considering the whole point of QDLED mat finish is for ones inability to be in light controlled rooms.

@@Barb4saledells are Glossy

@@IdeoDLaw no they arent

@@Barb4sale What the heck are you talking about? All QD-OLED monitors are glossy other than the new Samsung G80SD which using a "glare-free" coating like what is used on the S95D. LG W-OLED monitors all use a matte coating.

@@Barb4saleunless you actually own both oled technology I wouldn’t speak on this. I’ve reviewed 2 mla oled monitors including the Asus glossy and none of them look as good as the qdoled monitors. Alienware and Aorus look the best and the brightest idc what these numbers say

Waiting for that one too, especially if it has BFI at 240 Hz it should offer a comparable motion clarity equivalent to 480 Hz bin strobed. But I hope there will be a glossy option.

@@pirx9798 they had it at Computex all week. I'm pretty sure it was glossy

ASUS PG32UCDM is already the best gaming monitor on the planet.

@@andrewmorris3479 no it's not. they all have the same exact same 3rd gen panels. Nearly all of them are identical performance this year. Gigabyte is the only one to have DP 2.1 UHBR20. it's leading the pack uncontested for next gen

@@mz1929 Haha so color accuracy and EOTF tracking don’t matter? What about the sRGB gamma and 2.2 gamma?

Samsung and Alienware already have one

Agree. Matte should not be the default. A matte coating should be an add-on that comes in the box that you can take on and off whenever you feel like it.

What settings yall using cause from all 4 oled monitors I have this Asus looks the dimmest and dullest

Nope, the 27” 1440P 480Hz MLA WOLED’s coming in the next few months are matte and have the new sub pixel structure.

@@andrewmorris3479 Got it!

I am fine with the visually lossless image of dsc but not the slow alt tabbing that can come with it

1440p 240Hz HDR fits within DisplayPort 1.4 bandwidth.

But not HDMI 2.0….

No you don’t. HDMI 2.0 is plenty for 1440p 120Hz.

@@thedisplayguy unless they changed that yes you do

@@handycartmexican5640 You're wrong, by the way. Probably should just accept that. HDMI 2.0 is enough for 1440p/120 on the PS5.

@@sodaboy581 lmao when you show me a link that says other wise I’ll be more then happy to say I’m wrong 💯

@@handycartmexican5640 lmao bro! Can’t post links to replies, weird. But yeah just go look up the manual for the XG27AQDMG, it has the service timings listed and 1440p 120 is supported over HDMI. If that’s not enough for you, go look at a RTINGS review of any recent monitor from a reputable brand which uses HDMI 2.0. Even a basic Dell G2724D supports 1440p120 over HDMI 2.0 and there’s even an Xbox Series X screenshot on Rtings showing the model’s capability. Monitors have supported this for a LONG time.

You forgot to turn the power save setting off which causes a 10% reduction in brightness. Major mistake. This monitor has great brightness

Who's emotional? Anyway, glossy being "objectively" better is true if we assign a goal to it. If the goal is to preserve image quality, then glossy is objectively better than matte. Otherwise, if you don't care about maximising visual quality, then matte vs glossy becomes a matter of personal preference. Matte coatings does degrade the visual quality of the screen, and that's just an objective fact, but it handles reflections differently and in a way you may or may not prefer.

​​​@@PD-ws4td I'm gonna answer your question and the rest of your text separately and I'm gonna start with everything besides the question as to who is emotional. So regarding the rest of the text, you are obviously right with what you're saying, but I'm also not sure why mentioning this because I never argued this wouldn't be the case. My point was not that glossy can't be better if you assign a goal to it, my point was that there are people who argue that glossy/matte is always better regardless of the goal. That's where the problem lies. If you however assign a goal to it, then obviously one can be better than the other, but there's also no problem with people claiming this and therefore that's not what I was discussing in my first comment. After all, it was my intent to discuss a problem and not to discuss something that's not a problem. And regarding the question, 'who is emotional'. Well, maybe the term 'emotional' right here appears a bit confusing, but what I meant is this observation where people get overly obsessed with either their preference for glossy or matze finishes to the point where rationality gets lost e.g. 'x is objectively better' even though this is obviously a false statement. When I'm claiming people are emotional I'm of course not meaning people are on the verge of crying or slamming their keyboard while writing, but instead that it is still an emotion or at least a psychological effect that triggers people to act overly defensive for their preferred finish to the point where statements become irrational. This irrational behaviour caused by our mind is what people should stop and because it is caused by emotions towards what you prefer, people should chill with the emotions over their preferred finish to stop this behaviour. And in case you dont think it's down to some sort of emotions/psychological effect: What else do you think makes people claim such obviously false things such as 'matte is objectively better' while this is objectively seen false? Are people really incapable of thinking more logical than such a false conclusion?

What are you referring to?

@@noclipphe probably means premium glossy glass. TVs, Phones & Tablets (also many laptops) have glossy glass screens since forever but for some reason monitors have trash matte plastic (sometimes glossy plastic).

Because the general public "think" they need a matte coating. These companies only follow what sells and what will result in them getting the most money.

26th

Exactly

Not when you’re in a brightly-lit office

spoiler

no

@@patrikmedia yes it is

Matte has its use, but it's about trends in the industry. If we don't insist on having glossy versions, manufacturers will just slap matte onto everything and call it a day. We're talking dedicated gaming monitors here, and most gamers have alien tech such as window blinds.

@@pirx9798 Matte costs more, with R&D etc. so us “insisting on glossy” is utter nonsense. You do belong as a subscriber on this channel. ROFL.

@@warpathh Buy cheap office monitor clown and leave premium monitors for hardcore users noob.

@@warpathh then why should buyers pay more for less image quality?

@@pirx9798 ROFL another firm subscriber here spewing the same dumb commentary the channel owner says in his videos. Who said anything about someone paying more for less image quality?

Matte is objectively worse. No other industry uses it for this reason. Matte is used on low quality devices typically.

@@thedisplayguy That's just your opinion man. It's not objective at all, it's subjective. Glossy feels really cheap and low-quality to me personally.

@@Ramesiel matte is at least measurably worse, it reduces clarity and brightens the black point.

I mean absolutely no offense, but surely all these manufacturers conduct market research and know what their customers want better than a random RU-vidr. You're absolutely welcome to your preference if glossy monitors. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that and I agree that there are some advantages. But you have to understand that you're part of a vocal minority. I watch a lot of your videos and to be honest the constant ranting about matte and obsessing over glossy seems a bit fanatical. With all due respect. Displays are often glossy by default, and they are made matte as an extra step. You've even made videos about removing that coating. They don't spend that extra time and money putting the coating on for no reason - the matte coating is a premium feature to provide a better viewing experience for most users. Their market research shows that most people want this, otherwise they would cut costs and not bother.

"vocal minority" :D Most people that care about glossy care about the fact that it looks BETTER. That's not an opinion that's an objective measure than can be perceived by everyone who sees them side by side anywhere, the colors just pop more. If you are saying its "better" because other metrics, then yes those can be opinions. But when you can see an image more faded out next to another, thats just simply not an opinion.

Only in dark room

@@User9681e in day light & night looks great. your matte coating needs a cave to get a similar deep rich contrast & vibrance a glossy coating has, that's how you have to think about it. You have to watch in a dark room for matte coating monitors to get the contrast.

​​@@User9681eyou're dum dumb, you need a dark room for matte displays to have somewhat the contrast & vibrance glossy has. Glossy is best literally in all situations

​@@User9681eglossy is best, literally in every way, you need a dark room to play on a matte coating to have somewhat the contrast & vibrance of glossy.

@@elliotpolanco159 It's the complete opposite. You need a dark room to get a half-decent image on the glossy screen. That's the only situation in which it doesn't get totally ruined by obvious reflections. The matte screen looks great in all scenarios.