Dell UP2718Q, 4K, HDR10, FALD, hardware calibration.

S

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,765
No one is interested in the Dell UP2718Q?

1.jpg


It's 4K, HDR10, 384 dimming zones FALD, premium uniformity correction,
pratically every color gamut you can imagine, factory calibrated and it support the best in class hardware calibration to have perfect calibration even outside color managed applications like games.

Why no one bought it yet?
 
Probably because it's 27" 4k phone PPI bullshit again. No sync etc. Otherwise a great screen spec wise.
Wake me up when they ship 4k TVs with active sync and Ngreedia supports it or AMD makes a decent 4k card.

Until then I've had enough being excited about the same old screen tech.
 
60hz HDR LCD monitors are pointless imo. The main uses of HDR are gaming and video watching, and you get a way better experience video watching on LG OLED TVs than on a shitty FALD LCD, and I'm not interested in going back to 60hz for gaming, certainly not at the ridiculous price of $1400.
 
27", 60hz, no sync tech, high input lag (25ms ) : it's pretty bad since it's also really expensive, even after Dell (rapidly) dropped the price from 2k to about $1500 (wonder if this has anything to do with its very limited success...). This monitor also seems to have issues with the FALD implementation. Extremely heavy blooming as reported by some people on overclock.net (with videos), mentioned by tftcentral too. If you're a professional who needs extreme colour accuracy and hardware calibration there are plenty of alternatives without the badly implemented FALD/HDR.

The market for this specific monitor is tiny if it exists at all. For the majority of people it will make much more sense to pay a little extra and get a nice OLED TV or something
 
Last edited:
kalston said:
27", 60hz, no sync tech, high input lag (25ms ) : it's pretty bad since it's also really expensive, even after Dell (rapidly) dropped the price from 2k to about $1500 (wonder if this has anything to do with its very limited success...). This monitor also seems to have issues with the FALD implementation. Extremely heavy blooming as reported by some people on overclock.net (with videos), mentioned by tftcentral too. If you're a professional who needs extreme colour accuracy and hardware calibration there are plenty of alternatives without the badly implemented FALD/HDR.

The market for this specific monitor is tiny if it exists at all. For the majority of people it will make much more sense to pay a little extra and get a nice OLED TV or something
Click to expand...

OLED TVs are TVs, no where near to monitors quality.
 
sblantipodi said:
OLED TVs are TVs, no where near to monitors quality.
Click to expand...

What does 'quality' even mean here? There is no difference in consumer-level TV and monitor "quality". This dell isn't a true professional-quality grading display or anything, and if anything the quality of the HDR is worse than the average HDR TV as you can see from reviews of it that identify major haloing issues and a bunch of other things.

The only monitors that have "better quality" than TVs are true professional displays like the Eizo CG3145 or Sony BVM-X300, but those are in a completely different price range($20-50K).
 
Just bought one and returned it after 1 day.

The factory color calibration is a joke. Not to mention there is a awfully bad color uniformity issue. Half side green tint, the other side yellow tint.
Read couple reviews, and I am not the only one who have such issue apparently.

Bought a LG UltraFine 5K and happy with it.
 
Sancus said:
What does 'quality' even mean here? There is no difference in consumer-level TV and monitor "quality". This dell isn't a true professional-quality grading display or anything, and if anything the quality of the HDR is worse than the average HDR TV as you can see from reviews of it that identify major haloing issues and a bunch of other things.

The only monitors that have "better quality" than TVs are true professional displays like the Eizo CG3145 or Sony BVM-X300, but those are in a completely different price range($20-50K).
Click to expand...

if you don't know the difference between a TV and a Monitor, simply try to learn before giving judgment :)
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=linux+monitor+vs+tv

 
sblantipodi said:
if you don't know the difference between a TV and a Monitor, simply try to learn before giving judgment :)
Click to expand...

I don't get why you linked a generic video about input lag and chroma subsampling, neither of which are issues that apply to TVs in general. LG OLED TVs have neither of these issues. Neither do many other good 4K TVs. Your apparent understanding that TVs and monitors are qualitatively different is an error. There are issues with some TVs, like the one mentioned in the video, but you can't simply apply that to all TVs without doing any research or reading any reviews. There are tons of issues with many LCD monitors as well, such as the one in this thread, which is full of problems.

I dunno what it is with the trend of people who get their information from youtube videos always being full of misinformation. Read reviews from respected tech publications. Random videos are typically misinformed clickbait and most youtubers have no clue what they are talking about.
 
Sancus said:
I don't get why you linked a generic video about input lag and chroma subsampling, neither of which are issues that apply to TVs in general. LG OLED TVs have neither of these issues. Neither do many other good 4K TVs. Your apparent understanding that TVs and monitors are qualitatively different is an error. There are issues with some TVs, like the one mentioned in the video, but you can't simply apply that to all TVs without doing any research or reading any reviews. There are tons of issues with many LCD monitors as well, such as the one in this thread, which is full of problems.

I dunno what it is with the trend of people who get their information from youtube videos always being full of misinformation. Read reviews from respected tech publications. Random videos are typically misinformed clickbait and most youtubers have no clue what they are talking about.
Click to expand...

Can you tell where are the TVs that have comparable input lag of a monitor?
Can you tell me a TV that have a natural color saturation or something near to a color space standard?
A monitor that have a panel under 6ms gtg?

Those are the difference between a TV and a Monitor.
Leave it alone the fact that a monitor should be used on a desk and not on a sofa, so it should be under 32 inch because of obvious neck problems.
 
sblantipodi said:
Can you tell where are the TVs that have comparable input lag of a monitor?
Can you tell me a TV that have a natural color saturation or something near to a color space standard?
A monitor that have a panel under 6ms gtg?

Those are the difference between a TV and a Monitor.
Leave it alone the fact that a monitor should be used on a desk and not on a sofa, so it should be under 32 inch because of obvious neck problems.
Click to expand...
The 2017 LCD models from LG provide input lag similar to the fastest IPS G-Sync monitors.
upload_2017-10-19_14-34-15.png

https://displaylag.com/display-database/

Taking from the shot above, the LG 55UJ7700 achieves close to 90% coverage of the DCI P3 color space and 100% of sRBG once calibrated. Green saturation does take a hit in the wide gamut due to the RGBW subpixel layout like most televisions (admittedly, this is the biggest feature disparity holding back televisions when compared to most monitors).
upload_2017-10-19_14-38-12.png


upload_2017-10-19_14-39-13.png

http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/lg/uj7700#comparison_681

The higher range S-models have better color reproduction, but worse input lag as shown in the table above.

I cannot find testing for the response time, but several reviews mention 5ms GTG and 14-18ms 0-255-0, which is pretty average for an IPS panel.

I sometimes use my 49" 4K TV with my PC on a desk that places it about 3 feet from my face. If I didn't like G-Sync so much I would probably use it all the time for gaming.
 
Armenius said:
The 2017 LCD models from LG provide input lag similar to the fastest IPS G-Sync monitors.
View attachment 40290
https://displaylag.com/display-database/

Taking from the shot above, the LG 55UJ7700 achieves close to 90% coverage of the DCI P3 color space and 100% of sRBG once calibrated. Green saturation does take a hit in the wide gamut due to the RGBW subpixel layout like most televisions (admittedly, this is the biggest feature disparity holding back televisions when compared to most monitors).
View attachment 40291

View attachment 40292
http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/lg/uj7700#comparison_681

The higher range S-models have better color reproduction, but worse input lag as shown in the table above.

I cannot find testing for the response time, but several reviews mention 5ms GTG and 14-18ms 0-255-0, which is pretty average for an IPS panel.

I sometimes use my 49" 4K TV with my PC on a desk that places it about 3 feet from my face. If I didn't like G-Sync so much I would probably use it all the time for gaming.
Click to expand...

you didn't convinced me.
achieving 100% of a color space coverage does not mean that the color is in the range.
as I repeat every TVs have a really bad color calibration because they are meant for videos, not for PC use and generally response time and input lag are way worse than a monitor.
 
sblantipodi said:
you didn't convinced me.
achieving 100% of a color space coverage does not mean that the color is in the range.
as I repeat every TVs have a really bad color calibration because they are meant for videos, not for PC use and generally response time and input lag are way worse than a monitor.
Click to expand...
A dE average of 1.46 is pretty damn good for a screen that size regardless if it's a TV or not.

But please, go ahead and move the goal posts after I give you the examples you asked for.
 
Armenius said:
A dE average of 1.46 is pretty damn good for a screen that size regardless if it's a TV or not.

But please, go ahead and move the goal posts after I give you the examples you asked for.
Click to expand...

Probably you don't read the link you posted.
Without calibration you have a delta e of more than 4, uniformity issues, response time from 12 to 18 ms,
Rgbw with blurry text, image retention.
The examples you gived me confirms my thesis, a good TV can't be nk where near to a good monitor.
 
sblantipodi said:
The examples you gived me confirms my thesis, a good TV can't be nk where near to a good monitor.
Click to expand...

"Good TV"

"Good monitor"

A good monitor will cost significantly more than a very nice TV- the five to ten grand USD range.

A very good TV can still be as good as good monitors, at least in terms of input lag and color range and accuracy. Adaptive sync and high refresh rates are forthcoming.

Biggest problem with nice TVs is that they simply don't come small enough yet :D.
 
sblantipodi said:
Probably you don't read the link you posted.
Without calibration you have a delta e of more than 4, uniformity issues, response time from 12 to 18 ms,
Click to expand...

I dunno why I'm typing this post because you are absolutely obsessed with moving the goalposts around to validate yourself. There are tons of monitors with delta e above 4 without calibration, the literal monitor in this thread that you posted has uniformity issues and input lag of 20ms.

No one ever said that TVs are better than monitors in every single category. What we said was that TVs do HDR better than this shitty 60hz Dell HDR monitor for comparable prices, and they do. If you want a good HDR display, short of spending >$10K USD on a professional display, your only option is a TV. Perhaps in 2018 good HDR LCD monitors will come out, but it's October 2017 and there aren't any and right now the best HDR display is a television and no goalpost moving will change that objective fact.
 
Sancus said:
the literal monitor in this thread that you posted has uniformity issues and input lag of 20ms.
Click to expand...

That's it right there. LG OLED TVs beat it in both, cleanly. It's best to avoid conversing with argumentative derail machines.

Too bad LG don't make them monitor size. And as long as they avoid that barbaric POLED on the V30 and Pixel 2 XL.
 
insoc123 said:
Can you use that LG 5K monitor with a PC or only with a mac?
Click to expand...

I have been using on both PC and Mac.

To run on PC is actually pretty easy. All you need is to have a thunderbolt header on your mobo, which mostly do these days, and a Thunderbolt 3 AIC.
Connect 2 DP from GPU to Thunderbolt 3AIC and connect it to monitor through AIC using Thunderbolt 3 cable. Everything works out of box.
 
Krisium said:
That's it right there. LG OLED TVs beat it in both, cleanly. It's best to avoid conversing with argumentative derail machines.

Too bad LG don't make them monitor size. And as long as they avoid that barbaric POLED on the V30 and Pixel 2 XL.
Click to expand...

OLED are simply not ready for PC use.
They have burn in problems and they degrade too fast.
 
shansoft said:
I have been using on both PC and Mac.

To run on PC is actually pretty easy. All you need is to have a thunderbolt header on your mobo, which mostly do these days, and a Thunderbolt 3 AIC.
Connect 2 DP from GPU to Thunderbolt 3AIC and connect it to monitor through AIC using Thunderbolt 3 cable. Everything works out of box.
Click to expand...

Thank you!! Is the screen glossy? Do you think this is the best 4k 27" one can buy for the PC if you are not into gaming?
 
So I just calibrated my exposure as best I could to match what I am seeing in real life. This is a black image with the Dell FALD:

3188859


And a stuck red pixel on an Ultrasharp too. :rolleyes:
 
insoc123 said:
Thank you!! Is the screen glossy? Do you think this is the best 4k 27" one can buy for the PC if you are not into gaming?
Click to expand...

It is a glossy panel, which is identical to the one Apple used in retina iMac.

I have tried other 5K monitor, nothing can compare to this one. It's a joy to use so far for day to day usage.

If you are considering, try go to Apple store and see it yourself.
 
Vega said:
So I just calibrated my exposure as best I could to match what I am seeing in real life. This is a black image with the Dell FALD:

3188859


And a stuck red pixel on an Ultrasharp too. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Man, that looks pretty bad. It's like artificial backlight bleed.

Supposedly Samsung has "Micro Full Array" (MFA) FALD in the works that has 10,000 LED backlighting zones, that might actually make into their flagship TV model later this year. Probably won't be close to cost-competitive with OLED, at least initially, but, along with QDCF, it seems LCD still has some fight in it. If those techs come down in cost, they may actually end up being the preferred choice over OLED for PC use, assuming no major improvement in the image retention/burn weakness of the latter. Especially if they can leverage existing LCD fabs, which seems to be the case. Might be a decent stopgap until MicroLED becomes viable in a few more years.
 
Vega said:
So I just calibrated my exposure as best I could to match what I am seeing in real life. This is a black image with the Dell FALD:

3188859


And a stuck red pixel on an Ultrasharp too. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

pretty unuseful if this is the result.
 
LCD never had any fight in it at being a quality image. Only emmisive displays can so that. It will be OLED until mLED.
 
Vega said:
LCD never had any fight in it at being a quality image. Only emmisive displays can so that. It will be OLED until mLED.
Click to expand...

OLED are simply not ready for PC use, they suffer from burn in and they degrade too fast.
 
sblantipodi said:
OLED are simply not ready for PC use, they suffer from burn in and they degrade too fast.
Click to expand...

Honestly I don't think the burn in can ever truly be solved. Pretty sure we all know self emmisive micro LED is really the way to go since there is no burn in and it can reach higher peak brightness than OLED. The problem is we are waaaay further from a micro LED monitor than an OLED monitor. Some of us would rather buy an OLED monitor now and use it till a mLED monitor arrives.
 
sblantipodi said:
OLED are simply not ready for PC use, they suffer from burn in and they degrade too fast.
Click to expand...

Only under abuse scenarios. If you are going to have a CNN logo up for 10 hours every day or working on a spreadsheet, don't get an OLED. Neither of those things gets any benefit from OLED image quality anyways. I've used an LG OLED for two years including desktop use and games, zero issues. Just because there are a few reports, doesn't mean it's a massive problem.

Considering Sony has master monitors, Dell an OLED and now Asus has an OLED monitor coming out, saying "OLED are simply not ready for PC use" doesn't mean anything.
 
sblantipodi said:
OLED are simply not ready for PC use, they suffer from burn in and they degrade too fast.
Click to expand...

I would be willing to accept "Disposable" Oled Displays.... if I could get 2-3 years of use out of it I would be good to go....heck I barely keep any display longer than 6 months these days.

None the less I used a C6 & C7 OLED 55" for my primary PC display for months and months on end and had zero burn in issues. However, I used my displays with burn in prevention in mind, hide task bar, hide icons, don't leave my PC unattended with the same picture on screen longer than ten minutes, etc, etc.
 
Vega said:
LCD never had any fight in it at being a quality image. Only emmisive displays can so that. It will be OLED until mLED.
Click to expand...
Up until a couple weeks ago I would've agreed with you. But there were some interesting developments at CES that has given me reason to be cautiously optimistic about LCD's future in the near- to mid-term.

QDCF may be coming to market sooner than we might've expected. Watch this interview with the Nanosys CEO, where he talks about the improvements QDCF (or QD Color Converters/QDCC, if you prefer) brings to the table, and how demos were being shown in private suites at CES. Then read this Forbes article on Samsung's upcoming flagship displays they were showing behind closed doors, which might well be using QDCF. It details much improved black levels, contrast, and viewing angles. Only the last one is directly attributable to QDCF (with some black/contrast improvement from structural changes to the LC layer), though.

Mini LED FALD is the other part of the equation, what Samsung are calling Micro Full Array. In essence, this is increasing the number of discrete zones in a FALD backlight by an order of magnitude or more. More zones = smaller zones = less noticeable haloing, and the more "OLED-like" appearance to blacks reported from the Samsung CES private demo. Both AUO and Innolux are rumored to have invested in mini LED production, so it's not too much of a stretch to think this could filter down to monitors in a couple of years.

All of which to say that the game isn't over yet, and LCD may still have some tricks up its sleeve. There are still some areas/applications where it's better suited than OLED, and desktop PC use is one of those.
 
LCD has literally two advantages remaining:

  1. It can get brighter
  2. Image retention is no longer a real issue
If OLED panels catch up here, I feel that LCD is dead; not so much that LCD would be inferior, but that the effort necessary to produce competitive LCDs may simply be too much to bother versus standing up additional and more advanced OLED production lines.
 
Vega said:
Only under abuse scenarios. If you are going to have a CNN logo up for 10 hours every day or working on a spreadsheet, don't get an OLED. Neither of those things gets any benefit from OLED image quality anyways. I've used an LG OLED for two years including desktop use and games, zero issues. Just because there are a few reports, doesn't mean it's a massive problem.

Considering Sony has master monitors, Dell an OLED and now Asus has an OLED monitor coming out, saying "OLED are simply not ready for PC use" doesn't mean anything.
Click to expand...

nonsense.
the windows taskbar is enough to create huge burn in
 
Necere said:
Up until a couple weeks ago I would've agreed with you. But there were some interesting developments at CES that has given me reason to be cautiously optimistic about LCD's future in the near- to mid-term.

QDCF may be coming to market sooner than we might've expected. Watch this interview with the Nanosys CEO, where he talks about the improvements QDCF (or QD Color Converters/QDCC, if you prefer) brings to the table, and how demos were being shown in private suites at CES. Then read this Forbes article on Samsung's upcoming flagship displays they were showing behind closed doors, which might well be using QDCF. It details much improved black levels, contrast, and viewing angles. Only the last one is directly attributable to QDCF (with some black/contrast improvement from structural changes to the LC layer), though.

Mini LED FALD is the other part of the equation, what Samsung are calling Micro Full Array. In essence, this is increasing the number of discrete zones in a FALD backlight by an order of magnitude or more. More zones = smaller zones = less noticeable haloing, and the more "OLED-like" appearance to blacks reported from the Samsung CES private demo. Both AUO and Innolux are rumored to have invested in mini LED production, so it's not too much of a stretch to think this could filter down to monitors in a couple of years.

All of which to say that the game isn't over yet, and LCD may still have some tricks up its sleeve. There are still some areas/applications where it's better suited than OLED, and desktop PC use is one of those.
Click to expand...

How many layers of band-aids are we going to put on this crap technology? 1st generation OLED has better image quality than all of this stuff, what, after a dozen generations of LCD? The only thing that could displace OLED in the image quality department is mLED.

sblantipodi said:
nonsense.
the windows taskbar is enough to create huge burn in
Click to expand...

Said from probably someone who has exactly zero experience with the topic. There are a few reports from abuse use scenarios, but is certainly not a widespread issue. Nobody is forcing someone who wants to keep a task bar up for 12 hours to buy an OLED monitor. Doesn't mean there aren't people that want one and will have many years of normal use.
 
Last edited:
Vega said:
How many layers of band-aids are we going to put on this crap technology? 1st generation OLED has better image quality than all of this stuff, what, after a dozen generations of LCD? The only thing that could displace OLED in the image quality department is mLED.



Said from probably someone who has exactly zero experience with the topic. There are a few reports from abuse use scenarios, but is certainly not a widespread issue. Nobody is forcing someone who wants to keep a task bar up for 12 hours to buy an OLED monitor. Doesn't mean there aren't people that want one and will have many years of normal use.
Click to expand...

LOL, if you buy OLED, don't forget to enable the hide feature on windows taskbar :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top