Overclock.net banner

[Guru3D] Asus Announces ProArt PQ22UC 21.6in Ultra HD HDR OLED monitor

11K views 52 replies 31 participants last post by  ILoveHighDPI 
#1 ·
Asus just announced their ProArt PQ22UC, a 21.6" OLED monitor with a massive 3840x2160 pixels resolution, it's HDR compatible as well. The screen is intended as a portable monitor and weighs about one kilogram.

The ASUS ProArt PQ22UC takes no-compromise content editing and creating on the road with a professional-grade 4K OLED boasting HDR support. And you can leave outlets behind with the battery-powered ZenScreen Go MB16AP, which stashes in a laptop bag and hooks up to computers or phones to provide maximum versatility for anyone who travels.

Measuring an expansive 21.6", the PQ22UC bucks the trend for portable monitors by providing a canvas that almost matches the size of a desktop monitor but is still light enough to carry between client meetings all day. Thanks to its thin-and-light OLED panel, the display weighs in at just 2.2 lbs; that's less than our premium ZenBook 3 Deluxe ultrabook, making the PQ22UC a great alternative to a hefty portfolio filled with hard copies of your best work.

Source /
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/asus-announces-proart-pq22uc-21-6in-ultra-hd-hdr-oled-monitor.html
 
#2 ·
First news about a 88 inch monstrosity and now this. Damn, stop teasing us, bring OLED in proper desktop size already.
 
#3 ·
Thats neat. Cool idea. Portable 4k OLED screen.
Personally I find the ZenScreen Go MB16AP to be more intriguing for my personal uses. It would be great for connecting to my NV shield when I travel occasionally. Especially to my grandmothers in Florida. I believe her TV is still 480p.
 
#4 ·
So, finally, someone took JOLED's panel and brought it to consumers. If only they started thinking about 21-24'' 4K120...

In any case, I hope they use some "defective" units to make a more budget-oriented model.
 
#5 ·
Would be useful if my laptop could handle the 4K resolution... Sadly, unless you have the latest, high end mobile 10 series GPU's, a 4K display isnt feasible for professional or gaming use on mobile.

The 1080p screen is much more practical for the average user TODAY. I can easily see it being used as a second monitor for increased productivity.
 
#6 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Robot View Post

First news about a 88 inch monstrosity and now this. Damn, stop teasing us, bring OLED in proper desktop size already.
Exacty. Many of these panels have been around a while, they are made for profi use in movie making etc. but even those often get discontinued and cost insane $.
Laptops have OLED a while now too.

At least 24" OLED Asus... not 21.6" and if it's 4k that's nice but it should do 120-144Hz strobed at least and more at 1080p as much as the DP connection allows, should be 480Hz, again strobed, just imagine OMG 24" 1080p OLED 480Hz strobed... and then for desktop and reading bam 4k 120Hz... I would tap that.
Quote:
The 21.6″ panel packs 204 pixels per inch, which offers plenty of detail for editing large photos that usually have to wait until you get back to the office.
Get back to office and look at the IPS etc. oh yeah, "so good so good". It's like comparing what I see in the OLED viewfinder on my el cheap camera vs IPS monitor. No, just no. They can boast their snail 60Hz PA IPS line all they want.
 
#53 · (Edited)
Quote:Originally Posted by Zen00 

21.6" 4K? Can you even see the desktop icons at that small?

The point is to have pixel pitch well beyond diminishing returns, so everyone can pretend they have 20/9 vision.
Jaggies are easily visble at pixel densities far beyond this.

Human vision has different sensitivities to different types of patterns. “Edge Recognition” is one of the specialities of your eyes, but high frequency visual data overwhelms the photocell structure relatively quickly.
The way you “See” is a heavily processed image that uses motion and data gathered over time, from two sensors, to produce the image that pops up in your head, but all the HDTV marketing trying to say what pixel density is “Worth It” for the last 20 years has relied on a high frequency line pattern test that specifically defeats all of the mechanisms your eyes use to perceive fine detail.

It was effective marketing to sell corporate bigwigs on enormous upgrade budgets, and sell consumers on the new “High Definition” TV format that was supposed to be the best thing possible, but fundamentally anyone who has studied how your eyes work would have known very well that the marketing was misleading.

How people should practically decide on the value of increased pixel density is on a scale of diminishing returns.
Below 60 Pixels Per Degree you’re perceiving 100% of the detail, above that you start to gradually lose perception of some details that are too low in contrast or too high in frequency. Where a person with 20/20 vision will actually hit the theoretical wall of zero gain from higher density is around 300 Pixels Per Degree.
In general I base my numbers off the data here: https://michaelbach.de/ot/lum-hyperacuity/index.html
Or you can extrapolate what your highest posssible perceivable resolution is by looking at a lower resolution display from a greater distance than normal (which for most people gives results a bit above 300 Pixels Per Degree).
 
#11 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallsignVega View Post

Oh another actual OLED monitor. Going to have to buy some spectacles for this one.
3 in surround?
biggrin.gif
 
#15 ·
That Oled is way to small....but extremely sexy. If it supported 120hz I would do it.....but if its only 60hz I would rather use my C7
 
#16 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallsignVega View Post

Oh another actual OLED monitor. Going to have to buy some spectacles for this one.
and people on this site told me my 28" 4k display was too small to be usable
rolleyes.gif
 
#17 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoloCamo View Post

and people on this site told me my 28" 4k display was too small to be usable
rolleyes.gif
28" at 1080p is too large but scaling needs to be at 2x or 1x, nothing in between or it is very blurry. This is why a 28" 4K is either too small or too big.
tongue.gif


Effectively 1080p at 21.6" is actually a very nice size while also allowing high DPI rendering. This monitor will look amazing with high DPI aware applications and still decent with legacy ones, too bad it is probably* only 60Hz.
sad-smiley-002.gif


*I haven't seen refresh rate mentioned in any of the announcements or articles, does anyone have some information I missed?
 
#18 ·
This is scaled exactly 25% from a 27" monitor, just sit 25% closer. The size is fine.

It's profoundly confusing that this wouldn't be released as a dedicated desktop monitor, nonetheless I might even make use of its portable nature.
As long as it doesn't cost over a thousand dollars this sounds fantastic.

(Ugh, then we still have the whole HDMI 2.1 VRR issue that the industry really needs to clarify sooner than later, products without VRR will have severely reduced value.)
 
#19 ·
I am so sick of resolution > framerates/hz
Give me a 1080p 144hz+ 24"~ OLED

Like why are we starting out with 4K OLED? Aren't prices enough of a problem with OLED monitors as it is?
Lets not go with a reasonable resolution or anything for anywhere near a reasonable price
And 21"? Why...
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunched View Post

I am so sick of resolution > framerates/hz
Give me a 1080p 144hz+ 24"~ OLED

Like why are we starting out with 4K OLED? Aren't prices enough of a problem with OLED monitors as it is?
Lets not go with a reasonable resolution or anything for anywhere near a reasonable price
And 21"? Why...
4K is an artifact of the 1080 panel manufacturing chain. It was chosen simply because four 1080 panels could make one 4K, or something like that - not because there was an intrinsic benefit of 4K resolution that made it so much better than other resolutions.

If resolution progress had been sane we would have moved directly from 720 to 1440 instead of 720 to 1080 to 4K.

But, sanity doesn't benefit the planned obsolescence crowd.

You see, there are diminishing returns, especially in HDTV, for pixel density (pixel pitch). 1440 is basically good enough for HDTV, given reasonably normal vision and reasonably normal viewing distances. Well, TV makers wouldn't have been so happy not selling people a whole extra round of televisions (1080) that could clearly look blurrier than the next round when people are up close at the showroom.

1080 doesn't offer enough vertical resolution, in particular, to satisfy the limitations of even 20/20 human vision. 4K is pretty much overkill for HDTV. 1440 was the sweet spot for pixel pitch when all of the factors are considered. But, instead of that, we're now supposed to drool over 8K.

4K makes some sense on the desktop, when people are up close to the panel. But, the benefits of 4K over 1440 typically are outweighed by the drawbacks, especially with TV and film.
 
#21 ·
I expect portability = touchscreen, but no go on that aspect.

it's a start i guess, i feel like this might actually be somewhat reasonably priced.
 
#22 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunched View Post

And 21"? Why...
You'd have to ask JOLED, the company that made these, but the guess is that bigger than 21'' would probably not be very usable for its intended purposes. The fact that this is coming out as a "designer" monitor is just another use Asus decided to give the panel.
 
#24 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunched View Post

I am so sick of resolution > framerates/hz
Give me a 1080p 144hz+ 24"~ OLED

Like why are we starting out with 4K OLED? Aren't prices enough of a problem with OLED monitors as it is?
Lets not go with a reasonable resolution or anything for anywhere near a reasonable price
And 21"? Why...
Because JOLED.



This is not a new panel, it has been around a while, just no one sold it in brands like Asus to the masses.
Why don't they print a 24-30" 4k I have no idea either. OLED is easier to manufacture than LCD, and cheaper when mass produced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by superstition222 View Post

But, the benefits of 4K over 1440 typically are outweighed by the drawbacks, especially with TV and film.
? There is no drawback to 4k over 1440p as far as I know. Scaling 1080p to 4k is easy and modern movies are shot 6k+ meaning the 4k blurays actually don't look like upscaled garbage. Being too close to the screen is definitely an issue with large screens of 32" and above and having a source that is 1080p only :/ Such as watching movies on PC on large screens you can see all the lack of detail, on 27" it's not so bad but 32" was very very noticeable.
4k for gaming... yeah that's an overkill until companies learn to make rendering more optimized, there have been some attempts but more of it probably needs to be done in hardware itself to support it. The variable rendering quality center of screen vs sides, and dynamic quality adjustment altogether to keep a certain minimum frame rate.
 
#26 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCridercho View Post

2018 - 21.6"
2019 - 27" + ?
2016 = 21.6"
2017 = 21.7"
2018 = 21.8"
...

R.I.P.

It's a 2016 panel. Just sold by Asus in a product in 2018. Can't blame them though, it's JOLED that takes time to get them out. LG is worse IMHO, they are sitting on the OLED and only willing to sell huge panels for TVs.

From Dec 5.
Quote:
In June 2017 JOLED announced that it started to sample 21.6" 4K OLED panels, with plans to initiate low volume production at its 4.5-Gen pilot inkjet production line. JOLED announced today that it has began commercial shipments of these panels. We do not know JOLED's first customer but it is likely to be Sony.

JOLED first commercial 21.6'' 4K OLED panels photo on glass

JOLED says that it has now achieved the necessary product quality and production yields. The product was already selected for use in medical monitors (again, we believe this is Sony, who we know received JOLED's first samples and already has its own 25" OLED medical monitor that uses Sony's own OLEDs). JOLED also aims to ship these panes to other OLED monitors applications.
Is the ASUS one also glass? Or do they have another version?

So far from all info it seems JOLED is still on low volume = prices are higher than mass produced would be, but it is an ink jet printed panel. Mass production 2019, meanwhile LG is a happy camper.
Quote:
JOLED OLED on glass

Specifications
Screen size 21.6 inches
Screen dimensions
(Width x Height x Diagonal) 478.1 x 268.9 x 548.5 mm
Resolution 3,840(RGB) x 2,160, 204 ppi
Peak luminance 350 cd/m2
Contrast ratio 1,000,000:1
Panel thickness 1.3 mm
Weight 500 g
And the huge LG OLEDs are probably made using different technique, and I read medium sized are not well suited for it, no idea why, are all small OLEDs printed and the huge ones use different method? Leaving the PC market = medium size completely dead for now? Seems silly that some technique would have size limitations.

Meanwhile even stupid car lights are OLED now and PC monitor market is left to die.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top