Brightness and Contrast Ratio
For the brightness (luminance), contrast, and color accuracy tests, we depend on a hardware colorimeter and software to help calibrate the displays. We use a Monaco Optix XR (DTP-94) colorimeter and Monaco Optix XR Pro software, and we also test with ColorEyes Display Pro. Results in nearly every case have been better with Monaco Optix XR Pro, so we only report the ColorEyes Display Pro results on the monitor evaluation pages. We'll start with a look at the range of brightness and contrast at the default LCD settings while changing just the brightness level. (In some cases, it will be necessary to reduce the color levels if you want to achieve a more reasonable brightness setting of 100 or 120 nits.)
Nearly all of the LCDs have a maximum brightness level of around 400 nits, which is more than sufficient and is actually brighter than what most users prefer to use in an office environment. Minimum brightness without adjusting other settings is often above 100 nits, so it will be necessary to go in and adjust color levels as mentioned already. The Gateway FPD2485W is the prime example of this, where the default settings have a minimum brightness of 356 nits. Black levels are also reasonably consistent among the LCDs, with maximum and minimum black levels corresponding to the maximum and minimum white levels.
More important than the luminosity is the contrast ratio that is achievable at the various brightness settings. Here we begin to see some differences, with many of the LCDs following in the 800:1 ~ 900:1 range. The Dell 2408WFP and Samsung 245T stand out as having some of the highest contrast ratios, with the Dell taking the lead as it maintains the high contrast ratio even at low brightness settings. However, we should also mention that in practice the difference between 500:1 and 750:1 really isn't very significant for most users. It's only when you fall below 500:1 that colors really start to look washed out.
Color Gamut
We've already discussed color gamut of individual LCD evaluations, but it's a new addition to our LCD testing. This is something we wanted to add previously, but we lacked a good utility for generating the appropriate charts and data. We recently found out about Gamutvision, a utility developed by Imatest LLC. They were kind enough to provide us with a copy of their software, and it does exactly what we need. We compared the color profiles of all previously tested LCDs to the Adobe RGB 1998 color profile. Graphs of the individual gamut volumes are available on the evaluation pages. Below is a chart showing the percentage of the Adobe RGB 1998 gamut from the various displays.
We basically end up with two tiers of quality in terms of color gamut. Filling the bottom tier are mostly older displays that have 82% NTSC color gamut backlighting. These may seem drastically inferior to the newer LCDs, but keep in mind that if you are just using the standard sRGB profile these LCDs look fine. It's only when you work in applications like Adobe Photoshop with its improved color space that you begin to notice a difference between the displays. Most of the newer displays now have ~95% Adobe RGB color gamuts, and the Dell 2408WFP actually surpasses the Adobe RGB 1998 color space. The only display in this round up that doesn't make it into the upper tier is the Samsung 2493HM.
Power Requirements
Another new test we decided to add with this roundup is a quick look at power requirements. Like the above tests, power requirements are checked at default LCD settings while varying the brightness setting. Also note that minimum power requirements are going to depend largely on how dim the backlight is at the minimum setting, so looking at the above charts it shouldn't be difficult to figure out that the Samsung 2493HM will require less power than the others when it's only putting out 16 lumens.
We've only begun collecting this data with this batch of LCDs, so we don't have any clear patterns established yet. However, it's interesting to note that the two S-PVA panels to seem to draw slightly more power than the three TN panels. At equivalent brightness settings, the differences in power draw are very small.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
89 Comments
View All Comments
feraltoad - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link
Do you think a subsequent Dell Revision will fix this or as you suggest are we seeing possible limitations in that panel technology?Currently some users are reporting a "red tint" on the left side of their monitors. Has anyone experienced this?
Owners of the Dell 2408 I would appreciate some opinions about this monitor, because I want to upgrade to a 24inch LCD (& get rid of a CRT on a second PC), but as I currently have a 21inch LCD (HP f2105) that I am mostly happy with I want to get something thing that will be a definite improvement. As Jarred states the Dell, sans any lemons, looks to be perfect except for the slight input lag, and that's the concensus I've seen among opinions on various sites. I don't think I could even notice but I would like to hear some people with experience with the 2408. I would value Anandtech readers' opinions more than reviews off Dell's site since we are probably more on the same page.
Gast - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid...">http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid...From this should come your dork binding monitor, which looks to be the DoubleSight DS-263N with the chance of a polarizer. I'm sad that the article neglected to even mention this great resource.
rcraig - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link
I, too, am waiting for a review of the DoubleSight DS-263N. I have read a lot about this monitor in another forum and it seems to be the one monitor to rule them all. Great colors for phtotgraphs, low lag for games, IPS for great viewing angles, and 26 inches for only $680! It only lacks the many input features some offer, but it does offer dual DVI, VGA, and 4 USB's.JarredWalton - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link
I've sent a couple email messages to DoubleSight, so far with no response. Same goes for a variety of other manufacturers. I'd love to go out and buy the LCDs I want to review, but that's not financially practical. :-(XtAzY - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link
I'm just skimming through the article, but does it mention anything about GHOSTING?JarredWalton - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link
You're talking about pixel response times. See page 12 and look at the images.musicman1352000 - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link
I have been waiting - desperately hoping and praying - that anandtech would review the dell 2408. It seems to be a stand out performer to me but I've been really put off buying it by the number of complaints of pink/red "tint", uneven brightness, colourful font halos, and bad input lag posted in forums. Reviews contradict each other and many people are waiting for a revision to solve the perceived problems like input lag (coming from an engineer, I am fully aware this particular problem can't be solved by a revision!). What I'd like to know is whether you noticed any of the problems I mentioned (not including the input lag which you obviously picked up on), and what revision of monitor you received (A00 or A01)? Also, Dell don't seem keen on telling users what versions of HDMI and displayport are used - do you know anything about this?JarredWalton - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link
I noticed no problems with the quality of the panel on the 2408WFP I received, with is revision A00. However, that doesn't mean some panels don't have problems. If overall quality is that important, LaCie seems to do a better job judging by their reputation (and price).I imagine part of the problem users have is that the default brightness on many monitors is way too high, and sometimes color settings need to be turned down as well. You can see that at 80-80-80 RGB with 50 on brightness and contrast, the Dell achieved exceptional color accuracy even without calibration. Is this just a cherry-picked sample? I certainly hope not!
I have no idea what version of DisplayPort the 2408 uses - and lacking any video cards with the feature I couldn't even test it right now. For HDMI, I would assume it's not 1.3, but I could be wrong. Probably v1.1 or maybe 1.2 - is there any easy way to tell? If someone can point me to a utility that will report the HDMI version, I'll be happy to test.
musicman1352000 - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link
Mmm okay - thank you for replying.One of the worst things about living in New Zealand is the increased cost of buying computer parts, and the reduced ranges available (see http://www.pricespy.co.nz/cat_5.html#g147)">http://www.pricespy.co.nz/cat_5.html#g147). The Dell costs $1199.00 NZD here (and the Lacie is unavailable). That's approximately $930 when translated to USD. As I understand it the cost is ~$700 in the US?
With regards to the HDMI/displayport versions: unfortunately I don't know of any way in which you could test the display to find out. Tektronix offers software for 1.3b compliance testing (trial: http://www2.tek.com/cmswpt/swdetails.lotr?ct=SW&am...">http://www2.tek.com/cmswpt/swdetails.lo...CDSA7160...
but I think this is more engineering oriented. Maybe someone else has a suggestion?
Thanks once again for your opinions :)
feelingshorter - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link
I hope anandtech reviews some of the cheaper monitors in the future also. The cheapest monitors reviewed, being the gateway/samsung at 450 is a steep price for some of us.Just to name the cheaper ones on newegg, SCEPTRE X24WG is at 300 (AR) and seems to be the poor man's 24, or the KDS K-24MDWB at 350 is also at a reasonable price. Plus wouldn't comparing the low end be a good idea to see if you can justify paying for a $1000 lacie (or 500+) gets you more?