ASUS has announced the ProArt Display PA32KCX, a 32-inch professional-grade monitor, which packs 8K (7680 × 4320) resolution into a Mini-LED-backlit IPS panel with a pixel density of 275 ppi and 4,032 local dimming zones. Peak brightness reaches 1,200 nits, while full-screen brightness can sustain 1,000 nits, a number that could genuinely require sunglasses if you check your emails at night (Randomn example *cough*). The monitor supports HDR10, HLG, and Dolby Vision (via firmware), features a built-in motorised colourimeter for self-calibration, and offers a claimed colour accuracy of ΔE < 1.

Connectivity includes dual Thunderbolt 4 ports with 96 W power delivery, HDMI 2.1, DisplayPort 2.1, and a full USB hub. An integrated Auto-KVM switch allows seamless switching between systems, making it practical for complex multi-workstation environments.

Why the ASUS ProArt PA32KCX matters for post-production

For editors, VFX artists, colourists and CG professionals this display offers several real advantages. The 8K resolution provides an enormous desktop workspace, allowing full-resolution viewing of 4K footage within the full NLE-Interface, or multiple UI panels without scaling compromises. The colour gamut coverage, factory calibration, and self-calibrating hardware make it particularly attractive for colour-critical grading or print photography. Meanwhile, the Auto-KVM and comprehensive I/O design mean one monitor can serve multiple systems, for instance, a grading suite and a simulation/rendering workstation, without cable switching.

What it’s not for

At a typical viewing distance of half a metre, the human eye struggles to perceive much more detail beyond a good 4K display (For example this one: Asus ProArt). For most desktop workflows, 8K is therefore more about workspace real-estate than visual acuity. The 60 Hz refresh rate and studio-grade focus also make this unsuitable for gaming or interactive design preview. Pricing has not been officially confirmed, but reports place it around the 8,000 USD mark, clearly aimed at professional facilities, not casual users.

Our take

Based on recent ASUS ProArt monitors we’ve tested, ASUS is currently on a roll. The company has been consistently delivering stable, colour-accurate, high-brightness displays that behave predictably under real production conditions. So while this new 8K PA32KCX is undoubtedly a niche product, we’re cautiously optimistic, the ProArt line hasn’t let us down so far.

For anyone working with HDR content, editing hihres footage, or running complex 3D or simulation software that benefits from massive on-screen real-estate, this could be a compelling addition. For everyone else, 4K or 5K probably remains the sweet spot. As always, test before deployment: confirm colour drift, calibration precision, uniformity, and HDR mapping in your actual workflow before integrating such a display into production.

Full Specifications

Display
Panel size: 32″ (16:9 aspect ratio)
Resolution: 7680 × 4320 (8K UHD)
Pixel density: 275 ppi
Panel type: IPS, Anti-Glare Low-Reflection (AGLR)
Viewing angle: 178° horizontal / 178° vertical
Local dimming zones: 4,032
Pixel pitch: 0.092 mm

Colour and Image
Colour gamuts: sRGB 99 %, Adobe RGB 95 %, DCI-P3 97 %
True 10-bit colour depth
Colour accuracy: ΔE < 1

Brightness, Contrast and HDR
Peak brightness (HDR): 1,200 nits
Sustained full-screen brightness: 1,000 nits
Contrast ratio (HDR, max): 1,000,000 : 1
Contrast ratio (typical): 1000 : 1
Response time: 5 ms (GTG)
Refresh rate: 60 Hz
HDR support: HDR10, HLG, Dolby Vision

Features
Built-in motorised colourimeter for calibration
Auto- and self-calibration on Windows and macOS
Auto-KVM switch between systems
Picture-in-Picture and Picture-by-Picture modes
Eye Care+ with LuxPixel anti-glare and low-reflection technology

Connectivity
2 × Thunderbolt 4 (96 W PD)
2 × HDMI 2.1
1 × DisplayPort 2.1
1 × USB-C (service)
3 × USB-A 3.2 Gen 2

Power
Typical consumption: < 81.4 W
Power saving mode: < 0.5 W
Input voltage: 100 – 240 V AC, 50/60 Hz

Dimensions and Ergonomics
With stand (W × H × D): 72.7 × 60.1 × 24.5 cm
Without stand: 72.7 × 44.5 × 9.0 cm
Net weight (with stand): 14.1 kg
Tilt: –5° to +23°
Swivel: –30° to +30°
Pivot: –90° to +90°
Height adjustment: 0–100 mm
VESA mount: 100 × 100 mm
Detachable monitor hood included

Warranty and Compatibility
3-year warranty (LCD ZBD coverage)
Supports Calman and Light Illusion ColourSpace CMS

The post ASUS unveils 32″ 8K HDR Mini-LED ProArt monitor. Yes, 8K. first appeared on DIGITAL PRODUCTION and was written by Bela Beier.

Electronics supermarkets for general audiences are offering calibration of TVs as an option now, and some gaming monitors will even bring along an individual calibration chart.This is part 4 of our color monitoring series (it started here).

TV and cinema

Well, according to our recent measurements, the decently priced ProArt models by Asus can suffice for Rec. 709 and even some more. We were quite surprised finding a wide QHD gaming monitor by Xiaomi also coming with a chart and meeting the specs when checked with our probes and software. But then, this all applies to screens which can meet Rec. 709 without much effort. While professional grading for cinema in DCI P3 would normally be done in a dark room with a calibrated projector, what about grading for HDR? 

Well, let’s first get some misconceptions out of the way, since most of the marketing stuff is confusing things (intentionally?). DCI P3 would be the standard for cinema, as explained above. It expects a gamma of 2,6, but only 48 nits for white – after all, it’s for a dark environment and a very large screen. You may not even notice in cinema that it has a white point around 6.300 K, which is better suited to Xenon lamps. You would not really like to watch that it in a living room or, even worse, outdoors. 

So, Apple created a thing now called Display P3. This has never really been standardised, but has been adopted by others, mainly for phones and tablets. So, a majority out there might be able to watch video like that now instead of the older Rec. 709 for TV. The white point is 6.500, standard white is 120 nit, and gamma is 2.2. The only thing it has in common with cinema is the wider color space of P3. While Rec. 709 (or sRGB) is only covering about one third of human vision for color (as defined by CIE 1931), P3 is doing more than half. And Rec. 2020?

Rec. 2020, a standard for the future

The color space for HDR TV in the foreseeable future is defined by Rec. 2020. It would cover 75% of human vision for colors, but very few technologies of today can reproduce it. RGB pure laser projectors can achieve up to 98% of the Rec. 2020 color space, and one from Christie will cost you only 84.000 € (plus tax and lens). It will eat 1.800 watts of power and resolve HD natively, but simulate more by pixel-shift (see more here at Christie’s).

Oh, and one of those is normally used for presentations in special venues, like theme parks, projection mapping, IMAX, and impressive exhibitions, not in your average local cinema. Anyway, some cinemas are going for them now for attraction and future proofing. If we are trying to get more realistic, we will look at ordinary monitors, the best of which may cover 86% of that color space. 

Technologies to get there as of today are WOLED, QD-OLED and mini-LED, to which Apple recently added Tandem-LED in the iPad Pro – as usual, without telling us the exact percentage of Rec. 2020 achieved. For some realism, read this. BTW, even a huge QD-LED based reference monitor from Flanders Scientific, a manufacturer respected by professional colorists, the XMP551, will cost you around 20.000 € and covers ‚only‘ 90% of Rec. 2020 color gamut.

What about HDR?

HDR, though, is mainly about contrast. Generally, you could increase contrast by stronger highlights, which is driving up power consumption and heat, or by deeper blacks. OLED is one of the technologies getting pitch black, other than conventional LCD screens. It also has very wide viewing angles without any image degradation. Unfortunately, OLED has a hard time with very high brightness, which may ruin it quickly without protective measures. What’s on the market right now?

Flanders XMP310 and XMP270 both can handle 1.000 nit for Dolby Vision, which is only one of the competing standards, and reach ’only’ 80% of the 2020 color gamut. But even these are well beyond 10.000 €. Apple claims 1.600 nit for their XDR screens. While these are still expensive in larger sizes, they come for less in mobile devices. But all such maximum values are for local highlights. If it would show that full screen, the poor thing would go up in flames. 

So, to protect the OLED, all of such displays use an ABL (auto brightness limiter), just like LG OLED TVs, which are also popular with pro colorists. In consequence, all of them will be able to show highlights to a varying degree of brightness, but only in a limited area. Even the expensive Flanders have ABL, and you can only switch that off by going deep into hidden service menus and ruining your warranty. Ouch! 

For any such screen, the maximum brightness achieved will be related to the percentage of screen estate that highlights are covering, and normally there’s even a difference between peak values displayed for a short time and sustained ones. Of course, any decent screen will sustain more than 120 nits on the whole screen, so it should not be a surprise if we calibrate to 120 even for HDR. What comes as a bad surprise are changes in the whole scene when ABL kicks in. So, what to choose?

We may see Apples Tandem-LED screens in future MacBooks, but I doubt any time soon in larger monitors. Under the current iPadOS you can can’t calibrate an iPad. In the end, we had a closer look at an OLED screen for gamers, the Asus PG27AQDP. It comes calibrated for SDR with an individual chart from the factory. Getting up to 600 nit and covering P3 would already give you a decent HDR look with perfect blacks. It’s not a QD-OLED, but didn’t I start with the slogan „Color Grading for Cheapskates“?

Measuring an OLED monitor

At first view, it’s very obviously targeted at hardcore gaming, being part of the „ROG“ (republic of gamers) product family. The headline we cited above also aims at that community. Nevertheless, it comes with an individual chart, surprisingly made for Rec. 709 (actually, sRGB), with a gamma of 2,24 and an average color accuracy of 1,37 Delta-E, not exceeding 2,1. It carries the DisplayHDR True Black 400 label, which is an independent label by VESA, even if the lowest level (screens with higher ones are considerably more expensive). For details, see here.

Of course, we did not want to trust just the chart or label alone, and also see what we get for the newer standards. Older probes like our trusted Color Munki or X-rite (see here) can’t handle OLEDs correctly. If you’d try the approach described in my other articles, you’d be disappointed. At first view, the values look really bad. That’s not a limitation of the screen, but those older probes are not ready for recent technologies. 

This time, we got a Spyder Pro by Datacolor (more about it in another article), which is capable of taking on OLED and very wide gamut, and handling up to 2000 nits. It is not recognised by DisplayCal, so we used the Software coming with the probe, aptly named SpyderPro, in version 6.2.

Adjustments

The software is pretty easy to operate and fast. As described in our articles linked above, one should first try to get the screen as close to specs as possible with its internal adjustments. While the color adjustments didn’t help much, at least you can turn down the brightness to the levels needed according to standards.

But we observed a strange phenomenon here: brightness always went up a bit when leaving the OSD. So, you’ll need a bit of fiddling to get it right, we ended up with a value of 42 in the OSD (for HDTV). There might be some ABL switching on and off even at these levels.

Another confusion resulted when checking the gamma: while the OSD is offering choices of gamma values, it’s always far too high, according to the Spyder Pro. We needed the lowest setting of 1.8 to meet the standard for web at 2.2, and the next value to get 2.4 for proper BT. 1886. These deviations may be corrected by Asus with firmware upgrades, but their installer didn’t work for us.

Since we didn’t get any better results from trying to adjust colors, we decided to try the presets offered by the monitor’s menu. BTW, all of these adjustments are available in performance mode only, in energy saving mode you’ll be stuck in gaming settings, for whatever reason. 

Results

Once we got brightness and gamma right, the results were not bad at all. Rec. 709 is fully covered, and P3 to 96%, which you’d hard pressed to tell from 100% visually. Rec. 2020 colours are covered to 71%, but check above how much you’d pay even to get 80. For the time being, stick to P3 for HDR. Brightness peaks close to 1.200 nits, but only for a tiny area of 2% of the screen. 

For comparison: Apple doesn’t tell us how much their Liquid XDR with Mini-LEDs in the recent MacBook Pro can cover at 1.600. While Rtings measured less than 1.500 for 2%, it can sustain close to 1.200 even for the full screen. The color gamut is full P3 and close to 73% of Rec. 2020 ( see here). Its only weakness is some blooming, and, of course, the size.

Nevertheless, you can get over 600 for 10% of the Asus screen, which is decent for practical work in HDR. Contrast ratio is, of course, kind of infinite, since black is black. One big advantage over Mini-LEDs is the absence of blooming. The screen offers detailed features to fight burn-in, the achilles heel of OLED. This may be even more important than for games if you have one single GUI like DaVinci Resolve on the screen all day long. Asus says they are using a custom heatsink to get such bright highlights.

The software by Datacolor comes with a separate app for analysis of a screens quality, called Spyder MQA. Compared to factory calibration by Asus, most of the skin tones and lighter gray values got improved by the Spyder’s calibration, while one dark cyan (1F) suffered, even into slightly visible deviation. All other patches stayed under 3 or only a tiny bit over, with an average close to 2.

Datacolor explained this one deviation at 1F by the difficulty to calibrate a monitor with very wide native colors to Rec. 709 or even P3. Without a high-end probe around, we can’t verify this, but it seems plausible. If trade-offs are unavoidable, it makes perfect sense to go for good skin tones and a neutral greyscale. While some uniformity issues for brightness are normal at this price level, color uniformity is excellent, being under 2 Delta-E at 100% brightness.

Handling

Mechanics of the PG27AQDP leave a few points to be desired. Proper horizontal alignment is difficult to find, there is no fixed position for it and the adjustment shows a lot of friction. The height adjustment simply didn’t hold for us, always returning to the top position. Reviewing only one sample, we can’t tell if this is a problem with our unit only, but I’d assume it is. 

And then, the support with its three legs is prone to let it fall off the table when there is no wall behind and it’s pushed back too far. The ProArt PA279CV doesn’t have such issues and is coming with a heavy, rectangular plate. While the gaming screen looks stylish, you ask yourself how it gained two design awards – form follows function doesn’t matter any more? Even gamers complain about the space blocked by those legs in the front.

Service

The chatbot for support is not the brightest candle, a very specific question about a ProArt PA279CV being compatible with Asus’ Display Widget Center was answered with standard marketing information, not meeting the point. But you may download very detailed manuals as PDF in several languages. Our experience with their serve center in Germany when needing repair for a ProArt PA279CV about two years old with broken backlight was excellent. No, we didn’t inform them about reviewing it, but appeared as a regular private user.

Recommendation

While you can’t get the PG27AQDP for the price of a Xiaomi G34WQi or an Asus ProArt PA279CV, which are decent for SDR, it is one of the best low-cost options for HDR. Small highlights pop in HDR, but aggressive ABL can kick in. For those who also need to grade for SDR, it’s also fine with a separate calibration. 

If you are not into hardcore gaming too, you can get the very similar Asus XG27AQDMG with a lower refresh rate for less. It’s also VESA HDR 400 approved, but glossy. So, the choice also depends on your environment, since the PG27AQDP is matte and has a bit less punch. Definitely look for that minimum VESA label, including the True Black notion, since everybody is calling their screens HDR these days, without any proper justification.

We also had an issue with fine text. It is a bit rough and less readable than on the Xiaomi G34WQi, which has the same vertical resolution. A different sub pixel layout seems to be the cause. But that doesn’t matter if you use it strictly for monitoring your final video and have another monitor for the GUI, where many prefer a wider screen anyway.

Specs of the Asus PG27AQDP OLED

Resolution: 2560 × 1440 (QHD)
Aspect Ratio: 16:9 @ROG+6@ROG+6@ROG+6
Panel Type: WOLED (3rd‑gen OLED + MLA lens array)
Pixel Pitch: 0.229 mm
Display Colors: True 10‑bit (1.07 billion colors)
Color Gamut: 99 % DCI‑P3, 135 % sRGB
Contrast Ratio: 1,500,000 :1 typical
Viewing Angle: 178° horizontal, 178° vertical
Surface Finish: Anti‑glare
Standard Max Brightness: 450 cd/m² (nits) @ROG+9@ROG+9@ROG+9
Peak HDR Brightness: 1,300 cd/m² (3 % APL) @ROG+4@ROG+4@ROG+4
Contrast: OLED-level true blacks @ROG
HDR Format: HDR10, VESA DisplayHDR True Black 400 certified
Refresh Rate: Native 480 Hz @ROG+2@ROG+2@ROG+2
Response Time: 0.03 ms gray‑to‑gray
Adaptive Sync: NVIDIA G‑SYNC Compatible, AMD FreeSync Premium
Flicker: OLED Anti‑Flicker technology
Factory Calibration: ΔE < 2 (average)
User Calibration: Supported via DisplayWidget Center
Burn-In Management: ASUS OLED Care+ functions (pixel cleaning, screen saver, pixel shift, logo dimming)
Display Inputs: DisplayPort 1.4 (w/ DSC), HDMI 2.1
Uniform Brightness Mode (limits ABL)

All Specs are here at the Asus Site

The post „For Those Who Dare“ first appeared on DIGITAL PRODUCTION and was written by Uli Plank.

The ZenScreen is an additional monitor for your computer that only requires one cable – and is flexible in terms of form factor and can be positioned very freely – including a cover that can be folded up so that you can easily extend it on the move without straining your back. So far, so understandable.

And anything but a novelty – “small extension screens” have been around for years – but let’s be honest: most of the ones we’ve seen so far are seriously flawed – colour greyness that makes you despair of Excel, energy consumption like the event lighting at a rock festival and manufacturers whose complaints competence is more than dubious. But now that we have one in the magazine, have the devices grown up? Read more!

What is it exactly?

First of all: The “ASUS ZenScreen OLED MQ16AH” (catchy name!) is a portable 15.6-inch OLED monitor (total size including housing 16 inches, weighing 600 grams), which extends the desktop with FullHD (1920 × 1080) and supposedly 100 per cent DCI-P3 – according to Asus with 1 millisecond response time and HDR 10. Mini HDMI and USB-C are available as connections.

And the colours?

The screen is OLED, so the colours are much richer than LCD. But be careful: According to Asus, it is not intended as an “external Class-A monitor”, but for GUIs, light media consumption and all the other things that are normally summarised under the term “productivity”. For those who want more colour fidelity, we will be testing Asus’ “ProArt” screen in the next issue or two – same principle, but designed for colour. But back to the ZenScreen: The various modes in the menu show that it is a flexible helper with no claim to perfect colours. The presets available are: Standard, sRGB, Landscape Mode, Theatre, Game, Night, Reading Mode and the ever-popular Darkroom Mode – it’s clear what that means.

The landscape mode and the theatre mode have extreme gamma and contrast – and are presumably optimised for “outdoors” in order to be able to see anything at all in poor monitor conditions.
But even if it’s not the main application, we couldn’t resist a little measurement – and Calman says that the CIE Illuminant D65 target was hit quite well with a CCT of 6,528 K – with a black point of 0.002 candela, a luminance of 120 candela and a measured contrast of 74,907:1. We measured this with the Calibrite Display Plus HL probe.

The values summarised mean that the screen would be usable for SDR/on-the-go grading (with lightbox) – with the proviso, of course, that transport and lugging around make regular remeasurement necessary. By default, the ZenScreen comes with the standard preset of a P3 Colorspace – so Asus doesn’t want a perfect 100 percent sRGB view, but rather bright colours that make everything more colourful. The panel could be better if it wanted to be, but we are complaining at a high level here.

But in practice..

Let’s be honest: it’s not complicated – just more screen space that interacts with the system in a completely predictable way and is recognised as an additional monitor – and because it doesn’t make any problems and offers solid colours, it quickly became the dedicated “near” screen in everyday editorial work, while “communication” and browsers were running on the other screens – the familiarisation time was minutes. For video processing (in this case with Premiere), we used the entire additional area as a transcription window – and in one case as a waveform area.

As you can see in the screenshot, the screen (attached to a small tripod) was directly above half of the keyboard – while the main screen is directly above it. As both brightness and contrast are excellent for everyday use, this feels very much like a classic typewriter – especially if you’re not typing completely blind. Other applications are possible! Thanks to the tripod thread and the low weight (650 grams), microphone arms and the like are also possible – if you want to have it at a specific workstation position. And of course, the standard thread means that there are cheap accessories for every situation – be it clamps, stands, holding straps or anything else.

Screen in a box

A very clever idea from the developers was to make the box multifunctional. The transport “case” made of sturdy, black cardboard with a few small magnets can be folded into a “light protection bonnet”, which makes a good picture on the DIT trolley or during a streaming job, for example – or provides a certain amount of privacy in other applications. Four “foam corners” are included for fastening, and there is plenty of space under the screen for cables and accessories – or even the emergency flat man (we’ve all had SUCH productions!) really everything in a small box. By the way: If you often use the screen when travelling, you can also order a screen protector in the exact dimensions (see here: is.gd/amazon_schutzfolie_asus).

Pro

What we like about the ZenScreen: A great deal – for small, light, flexible, surprisingly usable panel and it fits into the workday without bitching as long as you have a USB 3/USB-C port. With its low power consumption, it won’t drain your laptop battery, and “firmly” set up and positioned, it noticeably increases efficiency. And, also cool, is the box – a sturdy mount that’s big enough for two people to see. Although it’s not as sturdy as a dedicated photo viewing cover, Asus cleverly avoids packaging waste – the box is sturdy enough for occasional use, and if you throw it away, it’s really your own fault. There is also a “proximity sensor” – so if the device is attached to the laptop but you walk away, the screen won’t drain the battery.

Cons

Sooo, but let’s get down to the niggles: It’s just another device on the table – and if you want to set it up as “cleanly” as possible, you might want to get an angled USB cable. And the second gripe? The stand cover has exhausted our (admittedly extremely rudimentary) origami skills – and we simply used a tablet stand for “permanent use”. And then after a few days we replaced it with another “mini stand”, which meant that the height was ideal. So: neither of these complaints are deal-breakers, but we just wanted to say so.

Conclusion

So, to summarise, who is the ZenScreen suitable for? In our opinion, for anyone who needs more screen space but doesn’t have room for a “full” monitor – as well as for those who want to work more efficiently on the move or have jobs where they want to use more complicated software. We can definitely recommend it – the average price on Amazon is 450 euros, used/refurbished devices are also often available at around 350 euros.

At Asus: is.gd/asus_zenscreen_mq16ah

Display size: 15.6 inch
Aspect ratio: 16:9
Visible area: 344.21 x 193.62 mm
Panel: OLED, 10-bit
Viewing angle (CR≥10, H/V): 178°/178°
Resolution: 1920 x 1080
Colour space (DCI-P3): 100 percent
Brightness: 360 cd
Contrast (HDR, Max): 1,000,000:1
Contrast (Typical): 100.000:1
Response Time: 1 ms (GTG)
Refresh Rate (Max): Typically 60 Hz
HDR Support: HDR10

Video Feature
Trace Free: Yes
Colour Temperature Selection: Yes (4 Modes)
Colour Accuracy: ∆E≤2
GamePlus: Yes
QuickFit: Yes
(Photo/Alignment Grid)
HDCP: Yes, 1.4
Dark Boost: Yes
DisplayWidget: Yes,
DisplayWidget Lite
Low Blue Light: Yes

I/O
Two USB-C ports (DP Alt Mode)
Mini HDMI
Digital Signal Frequency:
HDMI: 60 HZ (V) / USB-C: 60 HZ (V)

Power consumption
Consumption: 4.84 W
Standby: < 0.5 W
Voltage: 100-240 V, 50/60 Hz

Dimensions
Without stand (W x H x D):
359 by 227 by 9 mm
Lightbox (W x H x D):
550 by 390 by 125 mm
Weight: 650 grams
Thread: 1/4″ tripod thread

Accessories
Mini-HDMI to HDMI cable
Power plug
Quick start guide
USB type C to A adapter
USB-C cable
Tripod thread cover
ZenScreen “Smart Cover”

The post Zenscreen: Would you like a little more? first appeared on DIGITAL PRODUCTION and was written by Michael Radeck.

This article originally appeared in DP 04 : 2022.

This article is brought to you by notebooksbilliger.de.

NVIDIA Studio Laptop – computing power like a gamer PC always with you

Nvidia Studio laptops give you enough computing power for a professional streaming setup, video editing or complex CAD, DCC and rendering applications. With the GeForce RTX A3000, RTX 3080, RTX 3070, RTX 3060 and RTX 3050Ti from Nvidia, your laptop is equipped with extreme graphics power for demanding gaming. Click over to notebooksbilliger.de now.

The article starts here: Your Digital Production hopes you enjoy reading the following free article.

In principle, we would advise anyone looking for a lot of performance for as little money as possible to buy a powerful desktop computer. That would still be a PC, because Apple does not yet have expandable M1 computers in its programme. This means a computer running Windows or Linux with a powerful GPU or a corresponding Intel-based Hackintosh. Unfortunately, the availability and prices of high-performance GPUs are still problematic and digital nomads just want performance in their laptops. by Prof. Uli Plank

We have only compared the Asus Studiobook 16 OLED (Asus for short) with a similarly equipped Macbook M1 Pro (Mac for short) here under DaVinci Resolve, as a general test of the Asus has already appeared in DP 01:22.

Appearances and the price

Both computers have a 16-inch display (41.5 cm) and 32 Gbytes of RAM. Apple’s M1 Pro costs 3,200 euros in this country. The Asus laptop has a Ryzen 9 CPU 5900HX and an Nvidia RTX 3070 laptop GPU with 8 Gbytes of VRAM. The model policy of Asus from Taiwan is somewhat confusing (to put it kindly), but our test model does not seem to be available in Germany at the moment or is no longer available. Based on the standard 1:1 conversion from US dollars, it should cost between 2,200 and 3,000 euros depending on the features. The version with an IPS display costs 2,400 US dollars in the USA, we estimate our model with OLED at around 2,500 to 2,600.

The Mac weighs 2.1 kilograms, while the Asus is not only slightly heavier at just under 2.3, but also a little larger in all three dimensions. Apple’s power supply unit with plug and clever MagSafe cable adds 350 grams, the Asus 570 grams (plus matching power cable). The workmanship on the Mac is top-notch and, according to the manufacturer, the case is made of 100% recycled aluminium. We couldn’t find any exact details for the Asus, but the casing is also made of metal, at least at the top, and makes a much more stable impression than the usual cheap laptops, whose casing bends just by typing. It also looks serious when you come to the customer and not like a gaming laptop. However, although it is labelled “military grade” (MIL-STD 810H) by Asus, slight bends were visible on the upper part of the casing under the SD card slot and the USB port on the right-hand side as soon as the new device was unpacked from its undamaged packaging. This is not quite as confidence-inspiring as on the Mac. On the other hand, the two-part housing with openly accessible screws appears much more service-friendly. Once you have unscrewed the lower lid, both slots for RAM and PCIe 3.0 M.2 are easily accessible for your own upgrades. The screen appears softer than on the Mac and also bounces slightly when typing vigorously. The dark casing shows fingerprints a little more clearly than Apple’s space grey.

Display

The screen of the Asus is a novelty so far, because it is an OLED display with full 4K resolution (3,840 x 2,400 pixels). The Mac also has an excellent display, but only a resolution of 3,456 x 2,234 pixels. The Asus draws its very high contrast from the perfect black of the OLED, but does not achieve the brightness required for HDR. The Mac, on the other hand, has a display that delivers a considerably higher peak brightness of 1,600 nits for HDR. Our Asus was far too green ex works, but covered 99.4% of P3 after calibration and remained below a Delta-E of 3 in the maximum deviation with an average of 0.11. The Mac fulfils P3 to a good 98% with Delta-E consistently below 1. It also offers further specifications ex works, which are met very well. With the Asus, these would first have to be added through further calibrations.

The Mac can also display 24, 25 or 50 frames per second smoothly, which is particularly advantageous for film makers or European TV productions. There are presets with 48 and 50 fps for this, while other computer displays with 60 fps show motion artefacts (the Mac manages up to 120). You have to set the display on the Asus to 200% if you want to see the complete GUI of Resolve, on the Mac to 2,056 x 1,329 – you should have very good eyesight for both. Alternatively, you can work with the recommended scaling, but then not everything will be displayed at the same time, especially on the colour page.

Disadvantages? OLEDs can burn in, and the Mac’s mini-LEDs can slightly outshine bright elements on a black background. But in comparison with the majority of current laptops, both offer excellent image quality for creative work, and Asus has taken measures in the software with OLED Care to largely prevent burn-in.

Sound and webcam

The sound of the Asus is clean and concise, voices are easy to understand, but despite the discreet Harman Kardon label, there is a lack of transparency and bass. The Mac produces a very full sound, especially the 16-inch model with its larger woofers. The sound almost seems to detach itself from the device, especially with Dolby Atmos. Music or films are a pleasure in quiet surroundings.

The quality of the 720p webcam in the Asus is no longer quite up to date, but it can be covered with a slider – a nice detail instead of adhesive tape. Apple has finally come up with a better camera in the latest models, and the microphones are also better at cancelling out ambient noise than on the Asus.

Operation

The keyboard is good on both devices with a slight pressure point as feedback. As a novelty, the Asus offers a rotary wheel for the left hand, which reacts sensitively and makes a subtle detent noticeable. It is currently only fully usable with some programmes from Adobe’s Creative Cloud. It is easy to imagine that, with the appropriate programming, it would also be useful for film transport or the precise adjustment of parameters in Resolve.

But the wheel needs space. The keyboard has therefore been moved relatively far up and the function keys have been reduced in size. Apple has once again dispensed with the unloved touch bar and has replaced it with standard-sized function keys. The keyboard on the Mac can be illuminated, which can be quite helpful on a laptop. While the Mac uses up the space for the better speakers, the Asus still has a numeric keypad.

The touchpad on the Mac is huge and very sensitive to use, but the Asus is hardly inferior and has a third, centre mouse button. This is particularly important in Resolve for selecting the section in the viewer, whereas with the Mac you are happy to buy a 3-button mouse. Both computers have fingerprint recognition in the power button, although the recognition on the Asus is sometimes a little less responsive than on the Mac, but Windows supports facial recognition as an alternative.

Connections

In terms of connections, the PC laptop is somewhat more comprehensively equipped. In contrast to the Mac, it also has Ethernet and two USB-A ports. This usually saves you having to lug around an adapter. The HDMI output corresponds to version 2.1 and can therefore deliver up to 120 Hz in UHD, while the Mac only goes up to 60 Hz. On the other hand, the Mac has three USB-C ports, all of which also support a display. For once, Apple has also listened to users and brought back the ingenious MagSafe connection on the USB-C charging cable. This has probably already saved many laptops from crashing in the literal sense.

Both can also be supplied with power via USB-C or charge other devices, as per the standard. A special feature is the SD card slot on the Asus, which already supports the new SD Express. However, these cards are not yet widely used and the usual SD cards are transferred much slower at around 90 Mbytes per second than in the Mac’s SDXC slot, which reads a Sony Tough card more than three times faster, for example. As with all AMD CPUs, there is no Thunderbolt support.

Mass storage

With a Mac, you have to decide at the time of purchase how much RAM and storage space you want, whereas both are easily accessible and expandable by the user with the Asus. Our sample of the PC had two SSDs with 1 Tbyte as RAID-0, which helps to achieve enormous speed: a good 4.3 Gbyte/sec. when reading and over 4.4 Gbyte/sec. when writing. On the Mac, our modest 512 Mbyte SSD is not exactly slow either, it reads at over 2.6 Gbyte and writes at almost 2.4 Gbyte.

With the exorbitant prices that Apple charges for the larger (and even faster) SSDs, the question arises as to whether you really need them for video. We have not only tested the standard low-cost Samsung T5 and T7 on the Mac, but also a Samsung 980 Pro in an Acasis case that supports Thunderbolt in addition to USB-C. This then runs externally on the Mac at almost 2.8 Gbyte/sec. when writing and 2.7 when reading. To be able to compare, we placed a boot system on the external SSDs. From the chime to the password request, the Mac booted in 13 seconds from the internal, in 18 from the NVMe and in 27 from the Samsung T7.

But how often do you really have to reboot a modern system? We preferred to compare how long it takes Resolve to start up and load a project lasting 1.5 hours with around 1,800 edits. This took 11 seconds for all three variants, meaning that the type of SSD and its connection is completely irrelevant in practice. Only material in uncompressed raw from Arri’s Alexa 65 with a good 30 Mbytes per image naturally stuttered on the simple USB-C discs, while it ran smoothly from the NVMe SSD via Thunderbolt.

So you can simply order the Mac with the essentials for the system and programmes and later add more storage to one of the three interfaces as required. Caching in Resolve also runs just as well from a fast external SSD, but it’s better to keep the database on the internal one.

Editing professional formats

Let’s get to the essentials: What can laptops like this do? We tested both with the third beta of DaVinci Resolve 18, on the Mac under Mac OS Monterey 12.4 and on the PC under Windows 11, but at first the PC crashed constantly even during the simplest work steps. So we set about the favourite activity of video people (and gamers) under Windows: searching for a suitable driver. We found the Studio 512.96 driver from Nvidia, which led to largely normal operation of the Asus after a clean install. The Mac ran smoothly straight away. In the first round, we used a UHD timeline at 25 fps to test the extent to which the computers are even capable of playing back demanding sources from professional devices smoothly. The clips were only provided with a correction LUT to Rec. 709 if they were log recordings. The raw material, which is also referenced in our test project, comes from the manufacturers themselves. Only with the Canon R5 did we use our own recordings in 8K H.265 with maximum data rate and also 8K Canon Raw, which Tony Mellinger used for his video at
is.gd/eos_r5_youtube, which Tony Mellinger kindly offers for download at is.gd/tony_r5_download . You can find the rest of the raw material here and for download at www.digitalproduction.com.

is.gd/arri_sample_footage
is.gd/bmd_sample_footage
is.gd/red_sample_footage
is.gd/sony_sample_footage

To minimise the impact of frame rate conversions, all clips have been set to 25 fps under Clip Attributes. All tools such as cache, optimised media or timeline proxies were deactivated. According to the alphabet: Arri Raw 65 ran smoothly in full resolution from a fast SSD in both versions (Resolve and Arri). BRaw from the Blackmagic 12K is so efficient that both machines can play it back smoothly, but Canon Raw only in “Full res – Resolve”. Canon 8K in H.265 at 10 bit 4:2:2 can only be played back smoothly on the Mac because the PC has no hardware decoder for this. There it jerks along at 6 to 8 fps, but the Asus can also manage corresponding material in UHD resolution.

Since the Komodo was released, RED has switched its compression from the wavelet, which was long hailed as superior, to the widely used DCT (this also applies to the Raptor). As the number of pixels increased, the performance obviously became problematic. This is also noticeable during playback: 6K from the Komodo or 8K from the Raptor is played back smoothly in “Half res. premium”, with 8K from the Helium you have to reduce to “Quarter res. good”. Finally, clips from the Sony Venice run in 6K OCN-XT from a fast SSD in both “Full res – Resolve” and “Full res – Sony”.

These specifications apply to both computers with a timeline of 24 or 25 fps, while recordings in 50 fps in a corresponding timeline are tight for both, so that the decoding quality has to be adjusted or even proxies have to be used. The Mac only manages BRaw 12K in full quality, as the division of labour between CPU and GPU is obviously somewhat better.

Benchmark project

And what about finishing on a laptop like this? Unfortunately, the renowned Puget benchmark for Resolve is still not available on the Mac, so we have created our own small project with the most difficult tasks possible. You can download the project from us, but you’ll have to get the originals from the manufacturers or from Tony Mellinger, apart from HEVC in 8K from our download.

First of all, we have had sophisticated functions calculated individually on 10 seconds of material each. Temporal noise filtering, which requires a lot of memory depending on the radius, has been on board for a long time, but the spatial version is also computationally intensive in Resolve. With our settings (as in the test project for the 6th clip), the PC needed 1 minute 34 seconds, but the Mac 6:34. Speed Warp, on the other hand, which provides one of the best intermediate image calculations for video, needs 3:55 on the Mac and 5:13 on the Asus on the second attempt after a crash.

Version 17 already had a cut detection function that is supposed to be based on AI. It managed a 30-minute film on the PC in 2:54, on the Mac in 3:28. The Surface Tracker, on the other hand, is completely new in version 18, which took 37 seconds on the Mac with the same network density, but just over a minute on the PC. The new object tracking with the Magic Mask, on the other hand, was about the same speed on both.

The sensation in the 18, however, is certainly the new Depth Map, to which Arthur C. Clarke’s famous sentence can be confidently applied: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” While very expensive phones still have to use LIDAR for this, Blackmagic does it with software. The distance from the camera in a scene is calculated with astonishing accuracy. This doesn’t necessarily look entirely credible for a subsequently reduced depth of field (nor does the phone). However, you can use it to create very good atmospheric effects together with Fast Noise.

The Mac needs 6:28 for Depth Map alone, whereas the PC only needs 2:50 – if it doesn’t crash first! H.265 in 8K plus Speed Warp kills Resolve 18 on the PC, as does RED in 3:1 with Depth Map and Lens Blur. The Nvidia 3070 in the Asus was obviously unable to cope with these combinations and we had to try it with more easily decodable material. Together with Fast Noise
for the clouds, the Mac came out on top in the flyover from Alexa (1st clip) with 6:16, the PC needed 9:41.

Stability problems

The test project is intended to calculate different material together with very demanding functions. Initially, we tried to output our UHD timeline directly in H.265 with 10 bit. The Mac did this reliably in 26 minutes and 25 seconds; sooner or later, the PC either crashed to the desktop or got stuck in the rendering process. Mostly without an error message, occasionally the following message also appeared: “Cannot find appropriate codec for encoding the video frame.” This is obviously nonsense if it doesn’t appear right at the beginning.

As the GPU in the Asus also has to handle the encoding to H.265, we also tried DNxHR in HQX 10 bit, but again the calculation on the PC got stuck at different positions. Only with GoPro CineForm at YUV 10 bit did the Asus manage it in 28:07. Alternatively, we left the encoding to H.265 to the AMD GPU. This worked, but only produced reduced quality in 8 bit. These problems only occurred with the original material. If we supplied the PC with previously converted DNxHR in 6K, rendering in 4K or UHD ran smoothly, but this took a lot of time and memory.

So as not to start a religious war, we must remember that this is beta software. It is very time-consuming for every manufacturer to test all the configurations available on the market for Windows. With the Mac, the manageable number of models comes with hardware and system from a single source. With the PC, something like this first has to mature extensively, which is why there is a public beta. To be on the safe side, we also tried it with the same raw material under Resolve 17.4.6, but unfortunately the same problems occurred on the PC.

We therefore tried to get to the bottom of the problem. This is difficult when crashes occur at different points in the editing process without an error message. The most likely cause is a memory problem or overheating. We therefore ran the free tool GPU-Z
and observed both. In fact, the Nvidia GPU is constantly running at its limit, according to GPU-Z with up to 91.5 degrees and utilisation of a maximum of 8,097 Mbyte
VRAM.

Although the cooling can be maximised with the ProArt Creator Hub by setting it to Full Speed Mode, the computer then constantly makes a lot of noise, even though the CPU usually doesn’t have much to do. Things are slightly better with the adaptive performance mode, but this is also so loud at its peak that you don’t want to sit close to the computer. Nevertheless, we still had crashes during rendering in both settings. This indicates problems with the VRAM.

If you watch the Mac with TG Pro at work, the temperature remains below 65 degrees with full cooling (which still sounds more discreet). With adaptive, very quiet cooling, the maximum temperature in the GPU is 80 degrees, and then you can only hear the Mac’s fans with your ear directly on the screen. It is interesting to note, however, that the Mac only fully utilises the 16 cores of the GPU in our test project; the CPUs mostly twiddle their thumbs, just like on a PC. Nevertheless, up to 28 Gbytes of RAM are used by our 32, although Resolve should be able to cope with 16 without Fusion. So here the M1 draws on the full potential of its unified memory, while the Nvidia in the PC only has 8 Gbyte
VRAM – who would have thought a few years ago that we would be writing “only” here ..

Whether the problems lie with the memory or the temperature cannot be conclusively clarified. What is clear is that the Mac runs stably even with the beta version and uses a maximum of 60 watts for the GPU and CPU.

Power consumption

The Asus can also work at full power in battery mode. However, the warning message appears after just 56 minutes during rendering and it switches off after a good hour. When it is connected to the mains again, the 90 Wh battery is already at 95% after 1 hour and 17 minutes and full after 1:45. With its 100 Wh battery, the Mac manages an astonishing 4 hours and 50 minutes until the warning and only switches off at 5:16. It reaches 95% charge after 1:10 on the mains.

On the Asus, GPU-Z clearly shows where the power (and heat) ends up during rendering: Up to 135 watts end up in the GPU board, of which a maximum of 110 is for the chip. In the dark mode of the standard setting, the OLED screen should even be more economical than the mini-LEDs of the Mac. Of course, both computers will last much longer if you only edit and occasionally try out a look. But Apple’s new processors are so efficient that you can actually work through a long flight or a day away from civilisation.

Comment

The Asus ProArt currently seems to be the best Windows laptop on the market in terms of price-performance ratio for creative professionals, as long as it is not overtaken by the in-house competition with an Intel CPU (not tested here). It is perfectly suitable for editing professional material on the move if you have a solid desktop computer at home for the final calculations. Where this is not the case, you have to take the diversions via the CineForm codec instead of being able to output H.265 in high quality directly. Those who indulge in pixel mania will also not be happy with Nvidia’s 8K in H.265 as a source.

On the other hand, if you are prepared to invest a little more and make friends with Mac OS, the Macbook M1 Pro is the more reliable device with significantly lower power consumption. It may be a little slower than the Asus for some tasks, but the reliable output in any desired codec ultimately saves more time. Since the 16 GPU cores of our M1 Pro are constantly utilised at 100% when rendering under Resolve, the more expensive laptops with the M1 Max or the compact base model of the Mac Studio should be significantly faster.

The post Asus or Apple for Resolve on the move? first appeared on DIGITAL PRODUCTION and was written by Patrick Poti.