ips led lcd panel review factory

If you’ve ever begun searching for a new computer screen, chances are you’ve probably come across the term IPS. It’s at this point that you may be asking yourself, what is an IPS monitor? And how do I know if an IPS monitor is right for me?

So, why is this important? A monitor’s panel technology is important because it affects what the monitor can do and for which uses it is best suited. Each of the monitor panel types listed above offer their own distinctive benefits and drawbacks.

Choosing which type of monitor panel type to buy will depend largely on your intended usage and personal preference. After all, gamers, graphic designers, and office workers all have different requirements. Specific types of displays are best suited for different usage scenarios.

The reason for this is because none of the different monitor panel types as they are today can be classified as “outstanding” for all of the attributes mentioned above.

Below we’ll take a look at how IPS, TN, and VA monitors affect screen performance and do some handy summaries of strengths, weaknesses, and best-case uses for each type of panel technology.

IPS monitors or “In-Plane Switching” monitors, leverage liquid crystals aligned in parallel to produce rich colors. IPS panels are defined by the shifting patterns of their liquid crystals. These monitors were designed to overcome the limitations of TN panels. The liquid crystal’s ability to shift horizontally creates better viewing angles.

IPS monitors continue to be the display technology of choice for users that want color accuracy and consistency. IPS monitors are really great when it comes to color performance and super-wide viewing angles. The expansive viewing angles provided by IPS monitors help to deliver outstanding color when being viewed from different angles. One major differentiator between IPS monitors and TN monitors is that colors on an IPS monitor won’t shift when being viewed at an angle as drastically as they do on a TN monitor.

IPS monitor variations include S-IPS, H-IPS, e-IPS and P-IPS, and PLS (Plane-to-Line Switching), the latter being the latest iteration. Since these variations are all quite similar, they are all collectively referred to as “IPS-type” panels. They all claim to deliver the major benefits associated with IPS monitors – great color and ultra-wide viewing angles.

When it comes to color accuracy, IPS monitors surpass the performance of TN and VA monitors with ease. While latest-gen VA technologies offer comparative performance specs, pro users still claim that IPS monitors reign supreme in this regard.

Another important characteristic of IPS monitors is that they are able to support professional color space technologies, such as Adobe RGB. This is due to the fact that IPS monitors are able to offer more displayable colors, which help improve color accuracy.

In the past, response time and contrast were the initial weakness of IPS technology. Nowadays, however, IPS monitor response times have advanced to the point where they are even capable of satisfying gamers, thus resulting in a rising popularity in IPS monitors for gaming.

With regard to gaming, some criticisms IPS monitors include more visible motion blur coming as a result of slower response times, however the impact of motion blur will vary from user to user. In fact, mixed opinions about the “drawbacks” of IPS monitor for gaming can be found all across the web. Take this excerpt from one gaming technology writer for example: “As for pixel response, opinions vary. I personally think IPS panels are quick enough for almost all gaming. If your gaming life is absolutely and exclusively about hair-trigger shooters, OK, you’ll want the fastest response, lowest latency LCD monitor. And that means TN. For the rest of us, and certainly for those who place even a modicum of importance on the visual spectacle of games, I reckon IPS is clearly the best panel technology.” Read the full article here.

IPS monitors deliver ultra-wide 178-degree vertical and horizontal viewing angles. Graphic designers, CAD engineers, pro photographers, and video editors will benefit from using an IPS monitor. Many value the color benefits of IPS monitors and tech advances have improved IPS panel speed, contrast, and resolution. IPS monitors are more attractive than ever for general desktop work as well as many types of gaming. They’re even versatile enough to be used in different monitor styles, so if you’ve ever compared an ultrawide vs. dual monitor setup or considered the benefits of curved vs. flat monitors, chances are you’ve already come into contact with an IPS panel.

TN monitors, or “Twisted Nematic” monitors, are the oldest LCD panel types around. TN panels cost less than their IPS and VA counterparts and are a popular mainstream display technology for desktop and laptop displays.

Despite their lower perceived value, TN-based displays are the panel type preferred by competitive gamers. The reason for this is because TN panels can achieve a rapid response time and the fastest refresh rates on the market (like this 240Hz eSports monitor). To this effect, TN monitors are able to reduce blurring and screen tearing in fast-paced games when compared to an IPS or VA panel.

On the flip side, however, TN panel technology tends to be ill-suited for applications that benefit from wider viewing angles, higher contrast ratios, and better color accuracy. That being said, LED technology has helped shift the perspective and today’s LED-backlit TN models offer higher brightness along with better blacks and higher contrast ratios.

The greatest constraint of TN panel technology, however, is a narrower viewing angle as TN monitors experience more color shifting than other types of panels when being viewed at an angle.

Today’s maximum possible viewing angles are 178 degrees both horizontally and vertically (178º/178º), yet TN panels are limited to viewing angles of approximately 170 degrees horizontal and 160 degrees vertical (170º /160º).

TN monitors are the least expensive panel technology, making them ideal for cost-conscious businesses and consumers. In addition, TN monitors enjoy unmatched popularity with competitive gamers and other users who seek rapid graphics display.

Vertical alignment (VA) panel technology was developed to improve upon the drawbacks of TN. Current VA-based monitors offer muchhigher contrast, better color reproduction, and wider viewing angles than TN panels. Variations you may see include P-MVA, S-MVA, and AMVA (Advanced MVA).

These high-end VA-type monitors rival IPS monitors as the best panel technology for professional-level color-critical applications. One of the standout features of VA technology is that it is particularly good at blocking light from the backlight when it’s not needed. This enables VA panels to display deeper blacks and static contrast ratios of up to several times higher than the other LCD technologies. The benefit of this is that VA monitors with high contrast ratios can deliver intense blacks and richer colors.

MVA and other recent VA technologies offer the highest static contrast ratios of any panel technology. This allows for an outstanding visual experience for movie enthusiasts and other users seeking depth of detail. Higher-end, feature-rich MVA displays offer the consistent, authentic color representation needed by graphic designers and other pro users.

There is another type of panel technology that differs from the monitor types discussed above and that is OLED or “Organic Light Emitting Diode” technology. OLEDs differ from LCDs because they use positively/negatively charged ions to light up every pixel individually, while LCDs use a backlight, which can create an unwanted glow. OLEDs avoid screen glow (and create darker blacks) by not using a backlight. One of the drawbacks of OLED technology is that it is usually pricier than any of the other types of technology explained.

When it comes to choosing the right LCD panel technology, there is no single right answer. Each of the three primary technologies offers distinct strengths and weaknesses. Looking at different features and specs helps you identify which monitor best fits your needs.

IPS monitors offer the greatest range of color-related features and remain the gold standard for photo editing and color-critical pro uses. Greater availability and lower prices make IPS monitors a great fit for anyone who values outstanding image quality.

LCD or “Liquid Crystal Display” is a type of monitor panel that embraces thin layers of liquid crystals sandwiched between two layers of filters and electrodes.

While CRT monitors used to fire electrons against glass surfaces, LCD monitors operate using backlights and liquid crystals. The LCD panel is a flat sheet of material that contains layers of filters, glass, electrodes, liquid crystals, and a backlight. Polarized light (meaning only half of it shines through) is directed towards a rectangular grid of liquid crystals and beamed through.

Note: When searching for monitors you can be sure to come across the term “LED Panel” at some point or another. An LED panel is an LCD screen with an LED – (Light Emitting Diode) – backlight. LEDs provide a brighter light source while using much less energy. They also have the ability to produce white color, in addition to traditional RGB color, and are the panel type used in HDR monitors.

Early LCD panels used passive-matrix technology and were criticized for blurry imagery. The reason for this is because quick image changes require liquid crystals to change phase quickly and passive matrix technology was limited in terms of how quickly liquid crystals could change phase.

Thanks to active-matrix technology, LCD monitor panels were able to change images very quickly and the technology began being used by newer LCD panels.

Ultimately, budget and feature preferences will determine the best fit for each user. Among the available monitors of each panel type there will also be a range of price points and feature sets. Additionally, overall quality may vary among manufacturers due to factors related to a display’s components, manufacturing, and design.

If you’re interested in learning more about IPS monitors, you can take a look at some of these professional monitors to see if they would be the right fit for you.

Alternatively, if you’re into gaming and are in the market for TN panel these gaming monitor options may be along the lines of what you’re looking for.

The Studio Display – Apple"s new 27-inch, 5K monitor that was released alongside the new Mac Studio desktop – is one of the most difficult displays I"ve had to review. On the one hand, the price tag is sky-high for a 27-inch 5K panel that "only" promises coverage of the DCI-P3 gamut and is basically incompatible with Widows. On the other hand, it"s extremely color accurate, color uniformity is excellent, and if you doown a Mac, it offers a seamless experience previously only available on the muchmore expensive Pro Display XDR.

I have a hard time praising the Studio Display because it"s not the "baby Pro Display XDR" that I was hoping Apple would release. I"d much rather Apple had budgeted the $1,600 differently by swapping the webcam, speakers, and microphones for a miniLED backlight and a true 10-bit panel that covers 98%+ of bothDCI-P3 and AdobeRGB. That"s what I consider a "Studio" quality display.

All of the variations use the same 5K 27-inch 60Hz IPS LCD panel that promises full coverage of the Display P3 color gamut (DCI-P3 with a D65 white point), for a base price of $1,600. That will get you the standard glass version with either a tilt-adjustable stand or a VESA mount. Spend an extra $400, and you can upgrade to a nicer stand with a height adjustment mechanism similar to the one you found on the Pro Display XDR, albeit without any rotation. And if you want to go all out, you can spend another$300 for the Nano-texture glass.

If you"re using an NVIDIA-powered device, you are able to control basic display parameters like color format and bit depth from the NVIDIA Control Panel, and we can confirm that this works. Changing from 8 bits per channel (bpc) to 10 bpc in the control panel actually made the change at the hardware level. But settings like Brightness, Contrast and Gamma won"t work properly if you adjust them at the level of the GPU.

If you have an NVIDIA-powered PC, you can control a few settings from the NVIDIA Control Panel app. Things like resolution, color format, and bit depth.

The experience above is in sharp contrast to using this display with a Mac, which is totally seamless. All of your settings are controlled from the MacOS Display menu, there are a bunch of accurate built-in profiles, and you can even fine tune the white point of the display at the hardware level by adjusting it in settings (more on that in a second).

The panel at the heart of this display is, spec wise, identical to the panels used in the 5K iMac and the 5K LG UltraFine display that Apple has been selling for several years, but it is not the same panel. Apple confirmed to me that this is a new panel specially designed for this new thin-bezel monitor.

Apple also confirmed this is not a true 10-bit panel. There were several mentions of "over 1 billion colors" during the presentation, but it"s an 8-bit panel with temporal dithering (AKA Frame Rate Control) just like the LCD panels in the 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pros. The only true 10-bit panel is Apple"s lineup is still the Pro Display XDR, and it"s safe to assume that it will stay that way.

We"ve highlighted this feature before in our MacBook Pro 16 review, but in case you missed it, all you have to do is type in the measured white point and brightness from your colorimeter, the target white point and brightness that you"re hoping for, and voila... RGB gains are automatically adjusted to get you there.

Of the 34 test patches, 29 passed recommended tolerance with a Delta E of less than 2, and the remaining 5 were all within nominal tolerance with a maximum Delta E of less than 4. This is exceptional performance that you really only see from high-quality photo- and video-editing displays that put a premium on panel uniformity.

From a performance perspective, this is an excellent panel. My only complaint is the color gamut, which could definitely be wider given the $1,600 price tag. But 99% coverage of DCI-P3 is already great, and when you combine that with the color accuracy and uniformity results above, you"ve got a display that can and should be used for color-critical work.

But while these features, when combined with a color-accurate 5K panel, justify the Studio Display"s $1,600 price tag, I would argue that Apple missed the mark by focusing too much on day-to-day usability and too little on the real-world photo-, video-, and graphic design studios that this display is supposedly meant for. Most studios don"t care about webcams or built in speakers, and some even use PCs in addition to (or instead of) Macs.

I said this was a difficult review for me, and this is why: most of my gripes aren"t with the monitor, but with what the monitor might have been if Apple hadn"t chosen to save all their latest display tech for the next generation of the Pro Display XDR.

During their review of the Apple Studio Display, the Verge noticed that the webcam quality is quite poor. We compared it to the MacBook Pro and the 4K Logitech Brio camera to find out for ourselves.

Earlier today, in their review of the Apple Studio Display, The Verge pointed out that the Studio Display"s webcam image quality left something to be desired. Not properly testing the camera quality was a major oversight on my part, and so I"ve gone back to compare the Studio Display"s built-in webcam against the FaceTime HD camera inside the 14-inch MacBook Pro and a dedicated Logitech Brio 4K webcam.

Unlike plasma TVs, LCD TVs use a backlight. Initially, LCD TVs used Cold-Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (CCFL) as their backlight. These are long tubes that are placed horizontally across the screen behind the LCD panel. When the light is turned on, it applies a voltage to the pixels, which makes them rotate a certain way to allow light through and produce an image. When it wants to display black, the pixels are rotated to create an opaque screen so that light doesn"t get through. This is what makes them different from plasma TVs because each pixel isn"t self-emitting.

Light-Emitting Diode (LED) TVs are the same as traditional LCD TVs, but instead of using CCFL backlights, they use many smaller LED lights. It produces an image the same way as a regular LCD TV because it still uses an LCD panel, but it has more control over the backlighting. The LEDs can be placed along the edges, which is called edge-lit LED, or all over the back panel, which is either called direct LED or full-array backlighting. You can see the differences between LCD and LED TVs below.

It"s also important to note LED is simply a marketing term used by manufacturers to describe their backlight. They"re still technically LCD TVs, but since calling them LED is so common now, we even label them as LED, and we"ll continue to do so throughout this article.

Plasma and LED TVs each present their own advantages and disadvantages in terms of picture quality, price, build, and availability. It"s generally thought that plasma produces a better picture quality due to their superior contrast ratio, but LED TVs became more popular because of other factors, like a lower cost and greater availability.

Below you can see the differences in picture quality between two older TVs from 2013. It"s clear the plasma was better at the time, but LED TVs have also gotten better since then, so picture quality has greatly improved.

On the other hand, LED TVs can"t achieve a perfect black level because the backlight is always on. However, technology has evolved to greatly improved the contrast of LED TVs, even to the point where it"s also as good as what plasma once was. There are two main types of LCD panels in TVs: Vertical Alignment (VA) and In-Plane Switching (IPS). VA panels produce a better contrast than IPS, and high-end TVs also have local dimming features that turn off certain zones of the LED backlights. Still, you won"t get a perfect black level, but most modern LED TVs produce such deep blacks that even in a dark environment it looks like perfect black levels. For reference, plasma TVs had a max contrast of about 4,000:1, according to DisplayMate.com, but some recent LED TVs can reach a contrast of over 20,000:1 with local dimming enabled, like the Samsung QN90A QLED.

LED TVs are a clear winner here, and it"s one of the reasons why they surpassed plasmas in terms of popularity. LED TVs get significantly brighter, so they can fight glare from light sources easier. Additionally, plasma TVs had to use glass on their front panel, which caused intense glare if you had any lamps or windows around the TV. LED TVs can use a coating on their glass panel to help reflect and diffuse light, making it a better choice for well-lit rooms.

Plasmas were designed for dark-room viewing, but since most people don"t have dedicated home theater setups and often watch with a few light sources around, they weren"t that useful. As you can see below, the plasma TV had pronounced reflections, to the point where it"s even hard to see the image, and instead you"re watching yourself watch TV. Reflections are still noticeable on an LED TV, but at least you can see the image.

Pixels on plasma TVs emitted light in all directions, creating extremely wide viewing angles, much better than most LED TVs. This means that the image remained accurate when viewing from the side, which was great for watching sports or a show with a few people. Out of the two main panel types for LED TVs, IPS has wider viewing angles than VA panels, but it"s still not as good as plasma.

TV manufacturers have tried different technologies to improve viewing angles on VA panels. Samsung has an "Ultra Viewing Angle" layer, and Sony uses their "X-Wide Angle" technology to increase the viewing angles, both at the cost of a lower contrast ratio. It"s still not as good as plasma, but they"re wide enough for watching TV in a fairly large seating area.

Below you can see the differences in viewing angles between a plasma and a VA panel. These TVs were tested on different test benches, so you shouldn"t directly compare the videos, but we included them to give you an idea of how each technology affects the viewing angle.

Plasma TVs were great for motion handling, like with sports and video games due to their quick response time. Since each pixel had to retain a certain charge at any given moment, it was ready to display an image almost instantly. This meant fast-moving scenes looked crisp and smooth, with no motion blur behind them. However, for LED TVs, it can be a toss-up; some lower-end models have a slow response time that causes motion blur, while other high-end TVs have a really fast response time.

Some LED TVs also use Pulse Width Modulation to dim their backlight, and this causes the backlight to flicker, which may create image duplication in fast-moving scenes. This can be particularly annoying, especially if you"re watching sports with fast-moving content.

In terms of refresh rate, plasma TVs had a higher internal refresh rate, up to 600Hz, while LED TVs tend to be 60 or 120Hz. However, the refresh rate depends on the content, and since most content doesn"t go past 120 frames per second, having a higher refresh rate TV isn"t very useful.

Screen uniformity is another area where plasma TVs win. Since they didn"t have a backlight, they could evenly control each pixel. LED TVs can suffer from uniformity issues, like darker edges or Dirty Screen Effect in the center, because the backlight output may not be even across the panel. However, this is only really noticeable when watching content with large areas of uniform color, like a hockey or basketball broadcast, or if you"re going to use the TV as a PC monitor. It shouldn"t be noticeable with other types of content, and since uniformity can vary between units, you shouldn"t worry about it too much.

These problems are particularly annoying, especially if you watch a lot of TV. There was no way to help reduce this issue, and after a few years, depending on how much you used the TV, your plasma would need replacing. LEDs don"t suffer from this same permanent burn-in, so you won"t have to worry about replacing your LED TV down the line because of burn-in.

Due to their different technologies, LED and plasma TVs are built differently. Plasma TVs tended to be heavier and thicker because the panel itself was larger. Although plasmas were the first flat-screen TVs available at a consumer level at the end of the 20th century, LCD TVs quickly became even thinner, easier to package, and lighter to carry from the store to your house. These days, LED TVs are as thin as 1", like the Samsung QN85A QLED.

Plasma TVs also required a lot of power to work and tended to get very hot. With the growth of environment-friendly consumer practices, it became clear LED TVs would win out since they required a lot less electricity, and in a way were better for the environment.

Both plasma and LED TVs were made with larger sizes, but LED had a slight advantage because they were also made in displays smaller than 32 inches, like with monitors. Although small TVs are rare now, you can still find a basic 28 or 32 inch TV for a kitchen or bedroom with an LED panel. Plasma TVs weren"t made that small. LED TVs also cost less to produce and are cheaper on the market, so at the end of the day, the lower cost drove LED sales.

When 4k TVs started to become the norm over 1080p and 720p TVs in the mid-2010s, manufacturers started to produce 4k LED TVs, while plasma TVs were stuck at 1080p. This presented a major advantage for LED TVs, as a higher resolution helps create a crisper image, and this essentially was the nail in the coffin for plasma TVs. Since manufacturers were focused on making 4k LED TVs, plasma TVs became less available, and by 2014, Panasonic, LG, and Samsung all stopped their plasma production. LED TVs surpassed plasma sales in 2007, and they haven"t looked back since.

There were a few other problems that contributed to the decline of plasma TVs. First of all, plasma TVs didn"t work at high altitudes because of the change in air pressure with the gasses inside. They would create a buzzing noise, and the image wouldn"t look the same, so this could have been problematic if you lived at a high altitude. LED TVs can be used at any altitude; you shouldn"t use them in extreme cold or extreme heat, but this is standard practice for any electronic, and temperature is easier to control than your altitude. Also, plasma TVs emitted a radio frequency that could have interfered with other devices around, like if you had a radio in the same room. Each of these issues are simply inconvenient for most people.

There could be other advantages if you upgrade your TV, like technological advancements and a higher 4k resolution. Modern TVs come with a built-in smart system, which isn"t something that most plasmas had, and this allows you to directly stream your favorite content without the need for an external streaming device. As mentioned, LED TVs aren"t very costly, and you can easily find the best 4k TVs for under $500.

At the same time that plasma TVs met their end, OLEDs grew from the ashes of their predecessor. After LG released the first commercially available 55 inch OLED in 2012, it soon competed with LED TVs. OLED, which stands for Organic Light-Emitting Diode, is different from plasma, but shares many of the same characteristics, while also avoiding some of plasma"s downfalls.

OLEDs use self-emissive pixels, but what sets them apart is how the pixels completely shut off, creating an infinite contrast ratio and perfect black uniformity. This is an improvement from plasma because it was never able to reach those perfect blacks. OLEDs also have wide viewing angles and a near-instant response time like plasmas. Sadly, they don"t get extremely bright, but they"re still better for well-lit rooms than plasma because they get a bit brighter and have much better reflection handling. Also, OLEDs have the same burn-in risk as plasma, but this only happens with constant exposure to the same static elements, and we don"t expect it to be a problem for people who watch varied content.

Another advantage for OLED is how thin they are, especially compared to plasma, and they aren"t as heavy. For example, the LG GX OLED is a TV designed to sit flush against the wall and it"s only 0.94" thick!

Compared to LED competitors, OLEDs are much more costly, and even though they offer superior picture quality, LEDs are still the favorite. Also, LED TVs are available in smaller sizes, while the smallest OLED TV we"ve tested is 48 inches. LEDs are generally the better choice for well-lit rooms since they still get much brighter, but OLEDs are a fantastic choice for dark room viewing.

Although plasma TVs once dominated the TV market for a short time at the turn of the 21st century, their disadvantages outweighed their advantages, and LED-backlit LCD TVs soon held the market share of sales. There were a few reasons for this, like burn-in issues, low peak brightness, and a thick and heavy design compared to LED TVs. Despite plasma TVs" superior overall picture quality, improved contrast, and very quick response time, it wasn"t enough to convince consumers to keep buying them once 4k LED TVs became readily available. If you still have a plasma, it"s likely you"ll need to replace it within the next few years, and you"ll probably buy a new LED TV.

After looking at the performance of Apple"s M1 Pro SoC powering the new MacBook Pro 16, and beyond reviewing the laptop itself, there"s another interesting component in this laptop that"s worth looking into, and that"s the mini-LED 120Hz display. So today we"re going to take a closer look at what Apple is doing with their brand new screen.

As you"re fully aware, we have a lot of experience testing and reviewing displays, however we mostly cover gaming monitors not laptop displays, so this is going to be a little different. We"re going to run through some tests and provide our thoughts on how good this display is as someone that looks at lots and lots of displays each year.

There are two versions of the new MacBook Pro and we"ve got the 16-inch version, although the 14-inch model"s display is very similar just smaller and with a different resolution. Apple calls this particular display a "Liquid Retina XDR display" which is typical Apple marketing speak. If I translate this into what Apple actually means, they are giving you a high resolution full array local dimming mini-LED LCD with true HDR functionality.

If we dive deeper into the specs, the 16.2-inch panel has a resolution of 3456 x 2234 which continues Apple"s tradition of using non-standard resolutions across their line-up. Apple doesn"t disclose the exact technology used here, but it"s an LCD panel which appears to be IPS-like in design. The backlight has 10,000 mini-LEDs for impressive zone density at this size, allowing for a contrast ratio of 1,000,000:1 and peak brightness up to 1,600 nits in the HDR mode on paper.

As for refresh rate, Apple are offering up to 120Hz with adaptive sync, which they"ve rebranded into "ProMotion" although this sort of functionality has been available for many years now in other laptops and displays. The combination of everything though is a first, and the only rivals to this sort of panel are the latest wave of 4K OLED panels seen in a few high-end Windows laptops.

Where the MacBook Pro"s display ends up in terms of color gamut is typical for a modern "creator" laptop, the majority of top-end laptop displays have really good coverage of sRGB and P3. Where it falls a little short is in that Adobe RGB coverage, and a competing display like the Samsung OLED you get in devices such as the Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED does offer a wider color gamut with full Adobe RGB coverage. That"s not to say the MacBook Pro"s gamut is bad or anything, it"s just not as wide or as versatile as I"ve seen.

If we look at the options provided in the MacBook Pro"s display settings, you"ll find quite a few options including Apple Display and Apple XDR Display presets, along with a decent array of creator focused modes for gamuts like BT.709, sRGB and P3. Apple also offers True Tone and Night Shift functionality, which some people might find useful but ultimately hurt color accuracy. I"ve disabled True Tone for testing.

In the regular Apple Display mode for viewing SDR content, I measured peak brightness at around 520 nits, with a variable black level. Bizarrely, the MacBook Pro appears to change its black level limit in the SDR mode depending on the ambient light conditions, even with True Tone disabled. In a lit room, the black level was capped to 0.02 nits, delivering around a 26,000:1 contrast ratio.

In any case, the mini-LED backlight is active at all times, even in SDR content, to improve the contrast ratio in SDR scenes. There are so many zones here that it"s unlikely you"ll spot much blooming in practice, I found it negligible for SDR use even in tricky desktop apps with harsh edges between light and dark areas. The dimming algorithm is tweaked nicely to avoid this situation and there are simply more than enough zones to prevent lingering issues. This sort of attention to detail is what I"d love to see more in the standalone monitor space, along with higher zone counts, of course.

Contrast behavior is also different in HDR compared to SDR. When displaying HDR content, the mini-LED backlight will, at times, fully switch off to display black, delivering an effectively infinite contrast ratio. That"s the best case performance you"ll see. In more tricky conditions, such as a checkerboard test or measuring light and dark areas close together, I measured a contrast ratio of slightly over 50,000:1. This is right where you"d want performance to be for HDR content, contrast ratios of 50,000:1 worst case and up to 1,000,000:1 or greater in other situations. Apple are meeting all the recommendations for performance that I"ve heard when speaking to HDR, calibration and mastering experts.

This performance also destroys basically any other LCD based monitor I"ve looked at before. On the standalone monitor side, it"s virtually unheard of right now to see LCD zone counts higher than a couple of thousand. This limits worse case contrast to around 12,000:1 in the case of the 2,000-zone Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 with VA technology, or just 4,000:1 in a checkerboard test.

Apple choosing to use 5-10x the zone count massively improves the achievable contrast ratio in tricky situations and I"d say this amount of zones - and the density of zones - is what is required as a minimum for the best HDR experience with an LCD panel. Even Apple"s own ridiculously overpriced Pro Display XDR doesn"t compare as it has a paltry 576-zone backlight and it was criticized at launch for poor blooming compared to professional level HDR mastering displays. The MacBook Pro"s display will be far better for producing HDR content, aside from the small size.

So from one perspective it"s easily one of the best LCD-based HDR experiences I"ve seen, but on the other hand it isn"t a self-lit panel like an OLED which is completely free of blooming and in some situations OLED still delivers better HDR. Of course, OLEDs have other drawbacks such as lower brightness levels and the risk of burn in so I can understand why Apple would opt for LCD instead. Besides this one complaint though the HDR experience is excellent, especially for a laptop.

Unfortunately there is a major drawback to the Liquid Retina XDR display used on the new MacBook Pros, and that"s the motion performance. While it"s nice to see Apple upgrade the refresh rate to 120Hz compared to the 60Hz they were using previously, the display being used here doesn"t have the appropriate level of response times to keep up with that 120Hz refresh rate. The panel is actually very, very slow, which is a disappointment.

I was hoping to provide a full breakdown of motion performance using the standard graphs we use for monitor reviews... until I realized that my response testing tool doesn"t work on macOS and even creating one graph manually to a decent level of accuracy with all the transitions would have taken an entire day.

This is exacerbated by using a combination of IPS-like LCD technology, and an always-active mini-LED backlight, noting that both the LCD layer and mini-LED need to change to transition fully.

Luckily full transition fall times aren"t as horrific, though still reasonably poor at over 15ms even with our very generous 20% tolerance. The real transition time is more like 35ms, so less than half that of the rise time, but far slower than most other LCDs out there. The best laptop grade OLED panels can perform these transitions in under 2ms with the same test conditions, making them an order of magnitude faster.

I tested a few more transitions of varying degrees and typically the MacBook Pro would fall between 20 and 40ms, though luckily there is no overshoot to speak of. When viewing UFO test results, you can see the product of these horrific response times: a substantial blur trail behind moving objects. Even though the panel can feel somewhat smooth to use because it has a moderate refresh rate of 120Hz, the actual clarity in motion is terrible and this impacts the usefulness of the higher refresh rate.

Right next the MacBook Pro we have the Aero 15 OLED"s panel which has half the refresh rate at just 60Hz, but massively faster response times. You"ll see here that even though the MacBook Pro"s display is twice as fast in refresh rate, the extremely slow response behavior limits motion clarity to more like a 60Hz monitor or worse. The level of smearing is insane and I"m not sure how a modern LCD could end up this slow, Apple really should have experimented with some sort of overdrive.

The Liquid Retina XDR display has impressive HDR specifications and performance. A mini-LED backlight zone count of 10,000 is the star of the show in this respect, significantly reducing blooming compared to other LCD-based HDR monitors, and providing exceptionally high brightness. The level of performance is good enough for both enthusiast level mastering and HDR playback, so the MacBook Pro is a great device for video editing on the go when you also factor in its overall performance.

A few nitpicks aside, the major downside to the display is motion performance. This display is exceptionally slow even for an LCD, despite packing a 120Hz refresh rate. This affects areas including web browsing and any work with text as you scroll through content, and blur trails can be visible across a wide range of use cases, not just gaming. It"s not bad enough to negate the benefits you get elsewhere, but Apple needs to put a lot of work into optimizing how quickly their panels transition. I also feel the lack of HDMI 2.1 on the MacBook Pro is a bit puzzling, going HDMI 2.0 for external monitors (in addition to Thunderbolt) is a bit annoying.

The only real competition right now are OLED panels, which come with their own set of strengths and weaknesses. There are a few other mini-LED laptop options on the Windows side, like the screen you get in the Acer Predator Helios 500, but that display only has 512 zones, not the 10,000 on offer here. So it"s a battle between the MacBook and the OLEDs you see in products like the Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED.

The reasons to get an OLED display over this LCD would be in terms of its self-lit pure HDR experience with zero blooming, significantly faster response times for better motion clarity, and wider color gamut allowing for accurate work in the Adobe RGB color space as well as P3 and Rec.709. However, the drawbacks are also significant, including a 60Hz refresh rate limitation with current 4K offerings, the risk of permanent burn in, and significantly lower brightness. Actual implementations we"ve seen also lack the calibration Apple is offering.

On the balance of things, I"d prefer to get the Liquid Retina XDR in the new MacBook Pro than an OLED, especially for color-accurate content creation, and the HDR experience is close enough to OLED that I can forgive very minor blooming on occasion. I wouldn"t say Apple is miles in front with this screen, but it"s certainly very impressive and calling it the best display for production work is justified.

Like all of our picks in this guide, the PA248CNV is a 24-inch IPS display. We measured a contrast ratio of 1017:1, which makes images with variation between light and dark look realistic and vibrant. The monitor can reach 300 nits of brightness, about the threshold for getting a good-looking picture in a typical office with some sunlight.

Be sure to read the reviews below to familiarize yourself with what panel type, resolution, refresh rate and other features (such as HDR and VRR) best suit your preference, budget and PC rig or console. Also, feel free to leave us a comment below if you’re on the fence between two or more gaming monitors!

The LG 24GN600 is based on an IPS panel that boasts ~99% sRGB gamut for accurate and rich colors and 178° wide viewing angles which ensure that the image remains perfect regardless of the angle you’re looking at it.

The contrast ratio amounts to 1,000:1, which is standard for IPS panel monitors. So, blacks won’t be quite as deep as that of VA panels (with a ~3,000:1 contrast ratio). It’s mainly in dark rooms that blacks appear a bit grayish in comparison to VA panels, but the image is still quite vibrant overall. Besides, VA panels have flaws of their own.

In contrast, VA panel monitors at this price range have significantly slower response time speed, resulting in noticeable smearing in fast-paced games. Moreover, most units are affected by VRR brightness flickering.

Visit our LG 24GN650/600 review for more information. The monitor also supports the 1080p 120Hz mode on both the PS5 and the Xbox One/Series X/S consoles.

HP x24i, x24ih – based on the same panel as the LG 24GN600, offers basically identical image quality and performance with a different design and feature set

We recommend these 24″ 1080p 144Hz IPS monitors if you can find them for ~$180. In the $220 – $250 price range, you can actually find 25″ 1080p 240Hz IPS models, which we’ll get into next.

The Dell S2522HG is one of the best 240Hz gaming monitors with an IPS panel; it offers stunning motion clarity and responsiveness as well as gorgeous colors and wide viewing angles!

Based on an IPS panel with a 400-nit peak brightness, a 1,000:1 static contrast ratio, and ~99% sRGB color gamut, the Dell S2522HG provides you with vivid and striking colors!

If you have a budget of ~$250, want a 240Hz monitor but the S2522HG isn’t available at that price, your only choice is the LG 27GP750 (or the older 27GN750) 27″ 1080p 240Hz 1ms IPS model, which can sometimes be found on sale for $230.

The ViewSonic XG2431 offers similar image quality to that of the Dell S2522HG. It’s based on a 23.8″ panel, so the screen is slightly smaller and you get a bit higher pixel density, though the difference is subtle.

As for the image quality, the monitor is based on a 24.5″ IPS panel with 400-nit peak brightness, a 1,000:1 contrast ratio and ~99% sRGB color gamut, so you’re getting the same viewing experience as with the previously mentioned S2522HG 240Hz IPS model.

Dell AW2521H – a 25″ 1080p 360Hz 1ms IPS gaming monitor based on the same panel, but with a dedicated G-SYNC module. However, it’s not overclockable and its MBR implementation is limited to 240Hz

The BenQ Zowie XL2566K is a 360Hz gaming monitor with a TN panel and impeccable backlight strobing implementation aimed at professional eSports players!

Due to its TN panel, the XL2566K has inferior viewing angles and image quality than the Acer XV252QF, but it has a noticeably faster pixel response time speed, so we only recommend it if you’re willing to sacrifice image quality for performance.

The Gigabyte G27QCA and G32QCA are 1440p 165Hz gaming monitors with curved VA panels for a more immersive gaming experience, but a weaker performance when it comes to fast-paced gaming.

The monitors are equipped with the Aim Stabilizer MBR technology, which can remove ghosting to an extent, but the 1ms (GtG) response time of fast TN and IPS panels still provides better performance in fast-paced games.

In the past, we were much more inclined to recommend 1440p 144Hz VA gaming monitors as budget options. Nowadays, you can find affordable IPS models too, such as the Acer XV272UV – it doesn’t have as high contrast ratio, but you won’t get any dark smearing or VRR brightness flickering.

Buying the Gigabyte G32QCA makes more sense. At ~$300, it’s only slightly more expensive than the 27″ variant – and if you want a 32″ 1440p 144Hz monitor with an IPS panel, you’ll have to invest at least $400. More information about the best 1440p 144Hz IPS monitors and alternatives below.

The Acer XV272UV is the cheapest 1440p 165Hz (170Hz factory OC) IPS gaming monitor with a 1ms GtG response time speed, allowing you to enjoy fast-paced games with zero ghosting and no VRR brightness flickering.

All of the above-mentioned 27″ 1440p 144Hz+ IPS gaming monitors offer similar image quality, performance and features. We find that the XV272UV offers the best value for money though.

If you’re looking for a better 32″ 1440p 165Hz IPS gaming monitor, check out the ASUS PG329Q with a wider 99% Adobe RGB color gamut and DisplayHDR 600, though it goes for $200 – $300 more.

The Samsung Odyssey G7 monitors allow you to enjoy both a high 2,500:1 contrast ratio for deep blacks without IPS glow and a fast response time speed for no ghosting in fast-paced games!

The Samsung Odyssey G7 monitors feature NVIDIA G-SYNC Compatible certification, and they offer smooth VRR performance as long as you have the 1009.3 firmware (or newer) installed.

The mentioned firmware update introduces a new ‘VRR Control’ option that, once enabled, prevents the brightness flickering usually associated with VA panels.

However, some users report that micro-stuttering occurs when VRR Control is enabled. It doesn’t seem to affect all units and its intensity varies across different panels, some users might not even notice it.

The M27Q-X uses an IPS panel with 178° wide viewing angles and consistent colors. It has a wide 97% Adobe RGB color gamut (~140% sRGB) and comes with a ~100% sRGB emulation mode.

The ASUS ROG Swift PG27AQN is based on an IPS panel with a rapid pixel response time speed. It’s noticeably faster than the Acer XV252QF 1080p 360Hz IPS model, and almost as fast as BenQ’s XL2566K 360Hz TN display.

Other features include Night Vision (improves visibility in dark scenes of games), Mystic Light RGB LED at the rear of the monitor, various picture presets, MPRT backlight strobing, a refresh rate tracker, on-screen timers, and crosshair overlays.

Sceptre C305B-200UN – A 30″ 2560×1080 200Hz ultrawide gaming monitor based on a curved VA panel. It has a higher contrast ratio, but a much slower response time speed.

In fact, the G34WQC-A is actually cheaper than any 3440×1440 60Hz-75Hz ultrawide IPS model, yet it offers a more immersive picture quality and a more responsive gaming experience, just not as consistent colors or as fast response time.

Based on a VA panel with a 4,000:1 contrast ratio, a 400-nit peak brightness, 10-bit color depth with 125% sRGB color gamut and 3440×1440 resolution, the monitor delivers a crystal-clear picture quality with deep blacks and vibrant colors.

The main downside of this monitor, as it’s the case with most VA models, is the response time speed. In fast-paced games, there’s noticeable trailing of fast-moving objects, which gets more apparent in darker scenes. To most gamers, it won’t be game-breaking, but if you’re sensitive to ghosting, you’ll prefer an IPS ultrawide monitor.

However, many units of the monitor have brightness flickering issues when FreeSync is enabled. Other units, on the other hand, work without any issues, so your mileage may vary.

Based on LG’s Nano IPS technology, the LG 34GP83A pushes its color gamut to 98% DCI-P3 (135% sRGB native, with an sRGB clamp available) and adds support for entry-level HDR (VESA DisplayHDR 400 standard) with up to 400-nit peak brightness.

The biggest advantage this monitor has over the older IPS ultrawide displays near this price range is the fast 1ms GtG response time speed, which eliminates all prominent ghosting without adding any pixel overshoot.

All in all, if you want a 34″ 3440×1440 144Hz ultrawide gaming monitor below $500, but don’t want to deal with dark level smearing or VRR brightness flickering associated with VA panels, the M34WQ is for you. Check out our M34WQ review for more information.

If you want something similar but cheaper, check out the Sceptre E345W-QUT with a 34″ 3440×1440 flat-screen IPS panel with an sRGB color gamut and 100Hz.

The Dell AW3821DW has a Nano IPS panel with a wide 95% DCI-P3 color gamut and a fast 1ms GtG response time speed. Sadly, it doesn’t have an sRGB emulation mode.

The Samsung Odyssey G9 has a VA panel that boasts a superior contrast ratio of 2,500:1. It also uses the quantum dot technology (QLED) to further increase its color gamut to 125% sRGB (95% DCI-P3).

Unlike most monitors with direct-lit LED backlights, the backlight of the G9 is edge-lit. This allows the monitor to be so slim and light despite its enormous size.

Samsung’s upcoming newer model of this monitor, the S49AG95NC, will have a mini LED backlight and 2048 dimming zones. It will be more expensive but offer a much better HDR image quality.

The IPS panel of the ASUS VG289Q ensures stunning colors and details thanks to its 10-bit color depth, 90% DCI-P3 color gamut and 4K Ultra HD resolution.

Other panel-related specs include a 350-nit peak brightness, 178-degree viewing angles and a 5ms response time speed, all of which are standard for a monitor at this price range.

If you’re looking for a cheaper 4K monitor, check out the Philips 278E1A which goes for ~$250, but it doesn’t support FreeSync nor HDR, and it has a tilt-only stand.

In case you want a 32″ 4K monitor, the LG 32UN650 is the most affordable model with an IPS panel. However, at that price range, we recommend getting a 28″ 4K 144Hz gaming monitor instead, such as the Acer XB283K KV for better performance.

To start with, the IPS panel used in the XB283K offers a wide 90% DCI-P3 color gamut for vibrant and lifelike colors, and there’s a working sRGB mode.

The Aorus FV43U is based on a VA panel, so some ghosting will be noticeable in fast-paced games (mainly in darker scenes), but you get a high 4,000:1 contrast ratio for deep blacks, a stellar 1,000-nit peak brightness for vivid highlights, and a wide 99% Adobe RGB color gamut (~150% sRGB) for vibrant colors (sRGB clamp is available too).

Thanks to its 576-zone mini LED FALD (full-array local dimming) solution and high 1200-nit peak brightness, the Cooler Master GP27Q can simultaneously display deep blacks and bright highlights for the true HDR viewing experience.

You also get a quick 1ms GtG pixel response time speed, smooth VRR performance up to 165FPS (some flickering can be observed in certain games with both HDR and VRR enabled) and MBR support.

Although not a monitor, LG’s OLED TVs deliver an otherworldly gaming experience for both immersion and responsiveness. They’re actually cheaper than some worse big format gaming monitors.

Further, LG’s OLED panels have a WBGR subpixel layout instead of the more common RGB. This results in some color fringing with small text, but it’s mainly noticeable when looking at it from up close. You won’t notice it in games and videos.

When it comes to gaming, the LG C2 boasts instantaneous 1ms pixel response time speed for zero ghosting and low input lag of ~14ms at 60Hz and ~7ms at 120Hz, which makes for imperceptible delay (Game Mode must be enabled).

Alas, the VRR performance is not flawless as there are near-black gamma shifts. When any of the VRR technologies is enabled, gamma gets brightened up a bit.

Now, the main downside of OLED TVs is the risk of permanent image burn-in,but unless you leave a static picture on your TV for hours, you have nothing to worry about.

Just like LED LCDs, OLEDs use the sample-and-hold method to display images, so some motion blur will always be visible with fast-moving objects. To reduce the perceived motion blur, there’s the BFI (Black Frame Insertion) feature called OLED Motion with three different intensity levels, which you can find under the TruMotion settings; BFI and VRR can’t be active at the same time though.

The ASUS PG42UQ monitor is based on the same panel with a 138Hz overclockable refresh rate, DisplayPort input and a matte anti-glare coating instead of a glossy screen surface. It can also get a bit brighter than the 42C2, but lacks Dolby Vision support and it’s usually a lot more expensive.

The screen has a 1800R curvature for added immersion and a semi-glossy finish, so it offers more vivid image quality in comparison to matte anti-glare displays, but it’s not quite as clear (or reflective) as LG’s OLED panels.

The Neo G7 has an 1196-zone mini LED full-array local dimming solution, a 95% DCI-P3 color gamut and a high peak brightness of around 1,200-nits, providing you with amazing HDR image quality with deep blacks, vibrant colors and vivid highlights.

If you want a big 49″ super-ultrawide monitor, the Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 is the best model available. Especially for simulation games, a lot of gamers prefer the bigger and more curved 49″ panel of the G9, even though it doesn’t have as good HDR image quality or as fast response time speed.

Even though the Samsung Neo G9 has one of the best mini LED FALD implementations with 2048 dimming zones, some blooming is still noticeable in certain scenarios, mainly when it comes to demanding scenes such as starfields.

Further, the colors aren’t as vibrant with ~95% DCI-P3 gamut coverage, and while the pixel response time speed is quite fast for a LED-backlit panel, it’s not on par with OLEDs, so some minor ghosting and overshoot is detectable, but most gamers won’t be bothered by it.

The main disadvantage of the Neo G9 is the price. For $2,300, you can actually get the Dell AW3423DWF or the LG OLED42C2 for better HDR image quality andthe previous Samsung Odyssey G9 version.

TCL/CSOT is also working on a 49″ 5120×1440 240Hz panel with a 5000-zone local dimming system, however, there’s no word on its pricing and release date yet.

Flat-panel displays are thin panels of glass or plastic used for electronically displaying text, images, or video. Liquid crystal displays (LCD), OLED (organic light emitting diode) and microLED displays are not quite the same; since LCD uses a liquid crystal that reacts to an electric current blocking light or allowing it to pass through the panel, whereas OLED/microLED displays consist of electroluminescent organic/inorganic materials that generate light when a current is passed through the material. LCD, OLED and microLED displays are driven using LTPS, IGZO, LTPO, and A-Si TFT transistor technologies as their backplane using ITO to supply current to the transistors and in turn to the liquid crystal or electroluminescent material. Segment and passive OLED and LCD displays do not use a backplane but use indium tin oxide (ITO), a transparent conductive material, to pass current to the electroluminescent material or liquid crystal. In LCDs, there is an even layer of liquid crystal throughout the panel whereas an OLED display has the electroluminescent material only where it is meant to light up. OLEDs, LCDs and microLEDs can be made flexible and transparent, but LCDs require a backlight because they cannot emit light on their own like OLEDs and microLEDs.

Liquid-crystal display (or LCD) is a thin, flat panel used for electronically displaying information such as text, images, and moving pictures. They are usually made of glass but they can also be made out of plastic. Some manufacturers make transparent LCD panels and special sequential color segment LCDs that have higher than usual refresh rates and an RGB backlight. The backlight is synchronized with the display so that the colors will show up as needed. The list of LCD manufacturers:

Organic light emitting diode (or OLED displays) is a thin, flat panel made of glass or plastic used for electronically displaying information such as text, images, and moving pictures. OLED panels can also take the shape of a light panel, where red, green and blue light emitting materials are stacked to create a white light panel. OLED displays can also be made transparent and/or flexible and these transparent panels are available on the market and are widely used in smartphones with under-display optical fingerprint sensors. LCD and OLED displays are available in different shapes, the most prominent of which is a circular display, which is used in smartwatches. The list of OLED display manufacturers:

MicroLED displays is an emerging flat-panel display technology consisting of arrays of microscopic LEDs forming the individual pixel elements. Like OLED, microLED offers infinite contrast ratio, but unlike OLED, microLED is immune to screen burn-in, and consumes less power while having higher light output, as it uses LEDs instead of organic electroluminescent materials, The list of MicroLED display manufacturers:

Sony produces and sells commercial MicroLED displays called CLEDIS (Crystal-LED Integrated Displays, also called Canvas-LED) in small quantities.video walls.

LCDs are made in a glass substrate. For OLED, the substrate can also be plastic. The size of the substrates are specified in generations, with each generation using a larger substrate. For example, a 4th generation substrate is larger in size than a 3rd generation substrate. A larger substrate allows for more panels to be cut from a single substrate, or for larger panels to be made, akin to increasing wafer sizes in the semiconductor industry.

"Samsung Display has halted local Gen-8 LCD lines: sources". THE ELEC, Korea Electronics Industry Media. August 16, 2019. Archived from the original on April 3, 2020. Retrieved December 18, 2019.

"TCL to Build World"s Largest Gen 11 LCD Panel Factory". www.businesswire.com. May 19, 2016. Archived from the original on April 2, 2018. Retrieved April 1, 2018.

"Panel Manufacturers Start to Operate Their New 8th Generation LCD Lines". 대한민국 IT포털의 중심! 이티뉴스. June 19, 2017. Archived from the original on June 30, 2019. Retrieved June 30, 2019.

"TCL"s Panel Manufacturer CSOT Commences Production of High Generation Panel Modules". www.businesswire.com. June 14, 2018. Archived from the original on June 30, 2019. Retrieved June 30, 2019.

"Samsung Display Considering Halting Some LCD Production Lines". 비즈니스코리아 - BusinessKorea. August 16, 2019. Archived from the original on April 5, 2020. Retrieved December 19, 2019.

Herald, The Korea (July 6, 2016). "Samsung Display accelerates transition from LCD to OLED". www.koreaherald.com. Archived from the original on April 1, 2018. Retrieved April 1, 2018.

www.etnews.com (30 June 2017). "Samsung Display to Construct World"s Biggest OLED Plant". Archived from the original on 2019-06-09. Retrieved 2019-06-09.

Colantonio, Andrea; Burdett, Richard; Rode, Philipp (2013-08-15). Transforming Urban Economies: Policy Lessons from European and Asian Cities. Routledge. ISBN 9781134622160. Archived from the original on 2019-01-01. Retrieved 2019-06-09.

Shilov, Anton. "LG"s New 55+ inch OLED Plant in China Opens: Over 1m+ per Year". www.anandtech.com. Archived from the original on 2019-09-14. Retrieved 2019-12-18.

"China"s BOE to have world"s largest TFT-LCD+AMOLED capacity in 2019". ihsmarkit.com. 2017-03-22. Archived from the original on 2019-08-16. Retrieved 2019-08-17.

Shilov, Anton. "JOLED Starts Construction of New Printed OLED Facility". www.anandtech.com. Archived from the original on 2019-06-30. Retrieved 2019-06-30.

Between the tests of 30-inch plus monitors, we took the time to review newly added Moda model in Philips’ C line of products. Enter 245C7QJSB (245C later in the article). Behind its cryptic name, there is a Philips’s thinnest monitor yet, with thin bezels surrounding 24-inch 16:9 IPS LCD screen with edge LED backlight. Apart from design, the main selling point of the monitor is the wide color gamut it can display – according to the spec over 100% of NTSC. There is also a flicker-free tech inside together with SmartImage picture presets and HDMI/DisplayPort digital connections. We took it through our line of tests – read on to find out how did it go.

245C monitor comes in the cardboard packaging, securely fixed between two styrofoam profiles and in the soft bag. It requires zero tools for the installation since the metal stand comes pre-assembled. Inside the packaging are also D-Sub and HDMI cables, giving you an option for either analog or digital connection and there is also a power adapter with detachable power cable.

Aesthetically, this is one really nice monitor. The first thing you will notice is how the bezel is thin left, right and above the screen – from the edge to the active part of the screen the distance is only 7 milimeters. Below the screen is a 19 mm thick silver strip that has brushed aluminium texture and discreetly written monitor’s model number on the left hand side. On the opposite side is an energy star sticker. Similar as on many Philips HDTVs, company’s logo is on the separate plastic part which is lit when the monitor is on. You can turn of the light within the user menus.

Despite the monitor itself being very light, Philips has opted for the metal stand that is well made. The footprint is very small so you can put things below the monitor and easily clean the desk. The stand is, however, very limited in terms of ergonomics – you can only tilt the screen and if you want to rotate it – you will have to move the entire monitor to the desired angle. There is no height adjustment so if you plan to work long hours on this monitor, consider placing it on top of a box, a book or something similar.

An ultra-thin design does not end on the front side of the monitor – a look from the side reveals only 5 mm depth except for the area at the bottom where it is increased to the 30 mm. The backside is very clean, with only a Philips logo in the center area, a jog-dial control and connectors at the bottom. There is also a slot for the Kensington lock.

By default Philips 245C comes with a decent picture in terms of color temperature and average deltaE errors, together with average gamma of 2.26 and On/Off contrast of 1164:1. Due to increase of gamma in the area around 10% grey, factory picture makes some of the details in shadows harder to spot. Contrast is good for an IPS screen, with black being 0.22 cd/m2 when peak luminance is 261 cd/m2.

We went through the menus many times searching for an option that would give use accurate sRGB colors but without success. Even inside the [Color] menu the sRGB mode does nothing to improve the result. It seems that Philips wants that people who bought this monitor see the marketed “Ultra Color” feature, no matter which picture mode they choose. We see this as a disadvantage.

As you can see, calibration corrected sRGB color gamut coverage, reduced errors in ColorChecker and Greyscale. Gamma is now flat and there is no crush of details in shadows. Conclusion – Philips 245C is capable of showing very accurate picture, however calibration is necessary for the optimum performance.

Below are listed all conducted tests including On/Off contrast, panel and backlight uniformity, screen reflections, viewing angles, etc. At the end is score average that summarizes the performance of the tested monitor.

We spent a few weeks working on Philips 245C monitor, browsing the web, watching YouTube, editing videos and playing games. First few days we used the monitor without calibration, with only having Brightness control reduced to the more acceptable level for our environment.

Motion resolution is typical for an 60 Hz IPS screen – objects in motion are blurry, but there are not long traces following them and blur barely increases in darker scenes. This is a better result than for example on true 200 Hz AOC gaming monitor AG352QCX that we’ve reviewed a