ASUS MX299Q Monitor Review
by Chris Heinonen on September 23, 2013 12:00 AM ESTAfter recently reviewing a pair of 21:9 displays I have some mixed feelings about the monitors overall. On the positive side, they seem to be excellent gaming displays. They have low lag, offer accurate colors, wide viewing angles, and a bigger field-of-view in games that support it. They’re also fantastic for watching movies on that are shot in scope format. They have very good uniformity overall, though they're not perfect by any means.
The one area where I am not in love with them is for general office productivity. The vertical resolution is limiting compared to the horizontal when it comes to word processing and most other work. Programs are still barely designed to be ideal for 16:9 displays instead of 4:3, and certainly not 21:9. Even running two applications side-by-side it can feel vertically cramped. It also comes in at a cost that is equal to that of high-performance 16:9 displays like the Dell U2713HM.
The ASUS MX299Q, like all 21:9 monitors, falls into a niche. If you have content that really benefits from the wide viewing angle, you’ll like it. If you play games where the extra FOV is useful and you don’t want a multi-monitor setup, then you’ll probably like it as well. If you’re going to be working on editing documents or spreadsheets all day, then you’ll almost certainly want to have a taller aspect ratio than 21:9. I have had emails from people that want to know more about the 21:9 displays as they're handicapped and can look side-to-side easily but not vertically, so there are instances where 21:9 can offer benefits over 16:9, even if you lose vertical resolution. However, most of those use cases are as noted quite specific niches.
If you want a display with a 21:9 ratio then the ASUS MX299Q has a lot going for it. The screen is very nice with accurate out-of-the-box results and incredibly good calibrated result. The contrast ratio is one of the best I have seen in a long, long time. The uniformity is very good considering the size and ratio of the screen as well. Input lag is non-existent compared to everything else I have tested and will work fantastic for gaming. In short, so far it's the best of the 21:9 displays I've tested, but I personally still prefer 2560x1440 panels.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
44 Comments
View All Comments
dylan522p - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Strongly considering getting one of these and putting it in portrait as that would be much better for web content alongside my 2 1080p monitors. Anyone think that would be viable?meacupla - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
I don't understand how 1080x2560 is better for web content, but I think your main problem would be getting this monitor in that orientation to begin with, since it doesn't look like it has any VESA mounting for an arm that can lift the screen off the table that high.Also, web content is now being made for 1280 width in mind, so wouldn't you be better off with a 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 monitor in portrait mode?
peterfares - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
You would. These 2560x1080 monitors are basically ONLY good for movies and some games.OscarGoldman - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
Except there's no delivery medium for 21:9 movies. Blu-Ray and streaming services put the image into a 16:9 frame anyway, so the only way you're going to fill a 21:9 frame is zoom into the 16:9 image. That's gonna look wonderful.michaelheath - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
I wonder if you missed the first paragraph of the conclusion:"They’re also fantastic for watching movies on that are shot in scope format."
Which I would presume means Chris actually watched a film in Cinemascope. Blu Ray supports anamorphic widescreen and can map a pixel aspect ratio of 1:1, so the only worry is Netflix.
nathanddrews - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link
Blu-ray does NOT support anamorphic encoding. Believe me, I would be ecstatic if that were true! 16:9 is all we get whether the content is scope (2.35/39/40), 1.78, or 4:3, wrapped up in letterbox or pillarbox black bars.An upscale for a typical scope Blu-ray (actual content is ~1920x810) to one of these screens (2560x1080) isn't so terrible, really. That's only a 33% upscale. With a good scaler or scaler software, it should look fine... but does anyone really care about black bars so much that they would buy this screen?
I would buy this for gaming and that's about it, but only if it did 120Hz. Seriously, WhenTF are we going to get more 120Hz native displays?
RocketChild - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Asus's other 29" model like this one has VESA mounts. Model PB298QJlHADJOE - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
longcat. 'nuff said.DanNeely - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
I've rotated my 2560x1600 monitor a few times. It's too tall. Even with the stand at minimum the top of the screen was too high to look at without tilting my head. If you want a monitor for portrait use stick to a 20 or 22" model.spacecadet34 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
You don't need this tall a monitor to do what you want; I'm currently running a triple monitor setup: two 1080P's and one (rotated) Dell @ 1200x1920. Thanks to the "keyhole problem" (http://www.aristeia.com/TKP/), virtually *every* website works better in a vertical orientation. Just make sure the rotated display is an IPS, S-PVA, or similar panel that gives decent viewing angles. A TN panel would look horrible as you move your head side-to-side. Once you get used to this setup you'll never go back, unless you're into gaming.