Asus ROG Swift PG49WCD 49-inch gaming monitor review: The most colorful OLED yet

[Barefooter]

From Tom's Hardware

Full review here Asus ROG Swift PG49WCD 49-inch gaming monitor review: The most colorful OLED yet

 

Quote

Tom's Hardware Verdict

Despite a slower refresh rate than other 21:9 and 32:9 OLEDs, the Asus ROG Swift PG49WCD has everything one could ask for in a gaming and productivity monitor. It delivers a stunning image and replaces two 27-inch 16:9 screens.

Pros

• Stunning picture with tremendous contrast and vivid color
• Accurate with no need for calibration
• Superb HDR quality
• Smooth gameplay
• Premium build quality

Cons

• Only 144 Hz
• No internal speakers

 

What better way to solve this problem than with an OLED panel? This technology brings back the off-axis quality of CRT and the infinite contrast. Asus’ ROG Swift PG49WCD raises the bar for this genre with all that plus 144 Hz, Adaptive-Sync, HDR, and the widest color gamut I’ve yet measured for any OLED monitor. Let’s take a look.

 

When 49-inch 32:9 monitors first appeared about six years ago, I was not impressed. The earliest examples had low resolution, just 88ppi density, and VA panels, which made the sides of the screen look quite different from the center.

 

Since then, I’ve spent time with some of the best ultrawide gaming monitors with DQHD resolution (5120x1440), but the issue of viewing angles remains. Even with a curve, it’s tough to find the right place to sit so the entire image is uniform in color and brightness.

 

The star of the show here is the PG49WCD’s QD-OLED panel. QD stands for Quantum Dot, which is the same technology used to extend LCD color gamuts. The principle is a film coated with a substance that emits a different color light than what excites it. In LCDs, it’s used between the backlight and the TFT layer. In OLEDs, it goes between the pixel matrix and the front anti-reflection layer. The net effect is a wider color gamut. The PG49WCD has the largest color volume I’ve measured from any OLED panel, monitor, or television at 114.16% coverage of DCI-P3. For perspective, the record among monitors I’ve reviewed is Acer’s X32 with an IPS panel that covers 119%. Yes, the PG49WCD is extremely colorful.

 

Accuracy is also assured, with a factory calibration verified by my tests. No additional adjustments are needed in the PG49WCD’s Racing mode. It’s plenty bright, too. Though it won’t put out the searing peaks of a Mini LED monitor, I found a respectable 453 nits peak for HDR when measuring a 25% window. Asus claims 1,000 nits for a 3% window, which I do not doubt.

 

The PG49WCD is a gaming monitor with a max refresh rate of 144 Hz and Adaptive-Sync. It has been certified by Nvidia and will run FreeSync from 48 to 144 Hz. The response time is a claimed 0.03ms, and that is something I don’t doubt. OLEDs as a category have nearly perfect motion resolution with no need for overdrive. Frame rates have an effect, though, and I have found smoother motion processing in other screens that run over 200fps.

 

As a member of the ROG line, the PG49WCD delivers a full list of premium features. Gaming aids include aiming points, refresh rate counters, timers and a sniper mode. LED lighting comes in the form of a giant ROG logo on the back made from large pixels that display a variety of colors and effects. A KVM switch lets you bind a single mouse and keyboard to multiple source components. DisplayWidget software lets the user control everything from the Windows desktop. There’s also an extensive OSD for changing settings.

 

The PG49WCD takes care of itself with screen protection routines that fight burn-in. In addition, the monitor is built with extensive heat sinks that cool internal components. A graphene film sits behind the OLED layer to dissipate heat from the screen. There is little doubt that the PG49WCD will last for the long haul. And that’s a good thing since it will extract around $1,500 from your wallet.

 

49-inch mega-wides have grown on me as I review more of them. The PG49WCD’s OLED panel makes a positive leap that I find extremely compelling.

 

 

 

[pio]

As a 49" Ultrawide owner, no thank you.

[Barefooter]

54 minutes ago, pio said:

As a 49" Ultrawide owner, no thank you.

Just curious... why do you say that?

[pio]

29 minutes ago, Barefooter said:

Just curious... why do you say that?

Well, its kind of interesting and probably long winded, but I'll try to keep it TLDR.

 

I started down the "ultrawide" rabbit hole back in 2007 with PLP Eyefinity with 2x 20" Dells and a 30" Dell monitor.  Absolutely loved that setup for over a decade.  I tragically lost that setup........

 

So, I bought into the marketing hype of modern ultrawide displays, and picked up a 32:9 5120x1440 / 120Hz display.

 

It's not the same, at all.

 

GAMING - Fantastic (when the games work properly at ultrawide, older games have problems)

Daily Use - HORRIBLE.  I'm always using windowed programs anymore, I can't fullscreen videos (due to the wasted space).

For actual daily use / multitasking, I absolutely hate ultrawide now.  I'll take 3 monitor Eyefinity again please.    Gaming is certainly easier on a single ultrawide monitor.  Absolutely.  Everything else is harder.

Edited April 16 by pio

[Barefooter]

7 minutes ago, pio said:

Well, its kind of interesting and probably long winded, but I'll try to keep it TLDR.

 

I started down the "ultrawide" rabbit hole back in 2007 with PLP Eyefinity with 2x 20" Dells and a 30" Dell monitor.  Absolutely loved that setup for over a decade.  I tragically lost that setup........

 

So, I bought into the marketing hype of modern ultrawide displays, and picked up a 32:9 5120x1440 / 120Hz display.

 

It's not the same, at all.

 

GAMING - Fantastic (when the games work properly at ultrawide, older games have problems)

Daily Use - HORRIBLE.  I'm always using windowed programs anymore, I can't fullscreen videos (due to the wasted space).

For actual daily use / multitasking, I absolutely hate ultrawide now.  I'll take 3 monitor Eyefinity again please.    Gaming is certainly easier on a single ultrawide monitor.  Absolutely.  Everything else is harder.

Ok I can relate to that. It's easy to drag a tab or window to the monitor next to it.  Windowed mode you are always having to resize them.

 

I currently use a 38" 21:9 widescreen with 3840x1600 resolution and have two 27" aux monitors vertically next to it.  I would like to get an OLED for gaming, but just haven't found the perfect size or resolution to replace my current widescreen with.

[The Pook]

+1 for anti-ultrawide gang

 

strongly considering grabbing an Asus' PG32UCDM but going to wait to see if anything similar/cheaper comes around (plus it's OOS everywhere for MSRP).

[Sir Beregond]

2 hours ago, The Pook said:

+1 for anti-ultrawide gang

 

strongly considering grabbing an Asus' PG32UCDM but going to wait to see if anything similar/cheaper comes around (plus it's OOS everywhere for MSRP).

The 48" C1 is going to go to the living room and I think a 42" C4 is in my future.

 

I've always hated ultrawides and don't think that will change anytime soon.

Edited April 17 by Sir Beregond

[Snakecharmed]

To me, resolution, especially vertical resolution reigns supreme over everything else. I like my 38" 21:9 ultrawide but that's mostly because the screen resolution works out well to match 4K's 3840 width and has a respectable height of 1600. My previous 3440x1440 ultrawide was annoying in that regard, and 1440p ultrawides are a dealbreaker for me now. I hate all these ultrawides coming out now that are still 1440p despite being 39", 45", 49", and beyond. Meanwhile, 1080p ultrawides are so useless in my book that they may as well not exist.

 

My monitor isn't without its flaws though. Ultrawide LCD monitors have unacceptably awful QC compared to any LCD TVs. I played panel lottery to settle on my current one, which was the third unit I had shipped out to me.

 

As far as daily usability goes, I have no issues with 3840x1600 ultrawide at all. A properly configured Windows PowerToys FancyZones makes multitasking and window management almost as easy as discrete monitors, and then I use Sizer to force application windows to specific dimensions and XY coordinates if needed.

 

Would I be better served with a 40" 4K on my desk, if such a thing existed? Maybe. I hadn't thought of that before because I don't want too much extra physical height for nearfield viewing outside of games. The 38" ultrawide works because I still have two zones configured on it with lots of extra height over 1080p. The reason the height of my 55" 4K TV isn't an issue is because I have it divided into 2x2 1080p zones to make it tolerable for nearfield viewing.

 

The main problem with my workspace is that this 38" ultrawide at 34.6" cabinet width is about as wide as I can realistically go on my desk, so even a hypothetical 40" 4K's physical dimensions would make the monitor/TV wider than the available space. The closest fit is a 42" LG OLED, but the cabinet is just a bit too wide at 36.4". The next smaller, common 4K screen size is a paltry 32" with a too small cabinet width of about 27-28".

 

As for the PG49WCD in the review, the built-in KVM is convenient. That's about all that I like about it. Otherwise, I'd find that 1800R curve obnoxious if you're trying to work while simulating two 2560x1440 screens that would typically be flat. I've yet to read any reviews that mention how Samsung has addressed the awful burn-in issues of first-gen QD-OLED technology beyond any vague burn-in prevention techniques that clearly didn't work well enough for first-gen QD-OLED displays. Above all, I hate the vertical resolution.

 

I'll also say that "No internal speakers" as a con is the most utterly laughable con I've seen for a high-priced monitor. Imagine spending $1500 on a monitor for an immersive OLED gaming experience and then deciding that you're going to cheap out on proper speakers. FOH. I can't tell you what either my monitor or my TV sound like, but I guarantee they're both crap.

Edited April 17 by Snakecharmed

[Fluxmaven]

11 hours ago, Sir Beregond said:

The 48" C1 is going to go to the living room and I think a 42" C4 is in my future.

 

I've always hated ultrawides and don't think that will change anytime soon.

 

One of the things that's stopped my from buying a 42" is what to do with my 48" CX that I'm using now. I already have a 75" in the living room and a 49" in the bedroom. I don't really want strangers from marketplace coming to the house and no longer have a vehicle it will fit in to meet elsewhere lol. 

 

I also hate 32:9 ultrawides for everything other than the racing sim.