ASUS VG236H 23-inch 3D Display Review: 120Hz is the Future
by Brian Klug on August 7, 2010 2:48 AM ESTColor Quality
Now let’s get to the meat of the display characteristics. As usual, we report two main quality metrics: color accuracy (Delta-E) and color gamut. Color gamut refers to the range of colors the display is able to represent with respect to some color space. In this case, our reference is the AdobeRGB 1998 color space, which is larger than the sRGB color space. So our percentages are reported with respect to this number, and larger is generally better.
Color accuracy (Delta E) refers to the display’s ability to display the correct color requested by the GPU and OS. The difference between the color represented by the display, and the color requested by the GPU is our Delta-E, and lower is better here. In practice, a Delta E under 1.0 is perfect - the chromatic sensitivity of the human eye is not great enough to distinguish a difference. Moving up, a Delta E of 2.0 or less is generally considered fit for use in a professional imaging environment - it isn’t perfect, but it’s hard to gauge the difference. Finally, Delta E of 4.0 and above is considered visible with the human eye. Of course, the big consideration here is frame of reference; unless you have another monitor or some print samples (color checker card) to compare your display with, you probably won’t notice. That is, until you print or view media on another monitor. Then the difference will no doubt be apparent.
As I mentioned in our earlier reviews, we’ve updated our display test bench. We’ve deprecated the Monaco Optix XR Pro colorimeter in favor of an Xrite i1D2 since there are no longer up-to-date drivers for modern platforms.
For these tests, we calibrate the display and try to obtain the best Delta-E we can get at both 200 nits of brightness for normal use, and 100 nits for print brightness. We target 6500K and a gamma of 2.2, but sometimes the best performance lies at native temperature and another gamma, so we try to find what the absolute best performance could be. We also take an uncalibrated measurement to show performance out of the box using either the manufacturer supplied color profile, or a generic one with no LUT data. For all of these, dynamic contrast is disabled.
Performance uncalibrated, entirely out of the box is actually very good, at a respectable 3.64. When I first started working on the VG236H I didn’t notice any color tints or weird hues, and upon measuring the display, found the white temperature to be almost exactly 6600K, very close to our 6500K target for calibration. This is nice to see out of the box. For gamers interested in ballpark color reproduction but not professonal level absolute colormetric reproduction, this is adequate.
Moving on, at 200 nits the VG236H gets a bit more accurate, down to 1.66, but still isn’t quite as good as an IPS panel. Still, not bad for a TN. Going down to 100 nits, we get a bit better, moving down to 1.61, but still not that elusive sub 1.0 the highest quality displays can deliver. What about gamut?
As expected, gamut is right around where we’d expect it to be for the TN, sRGB display. Interestingly enough, the OSD controls do have an sRGB mode, though I don’t think it’s as necessary as it would be on say a wide gamut display. But it’s there for certain.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
121 Comments
View All Comments
ganeshts - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
Is there any monitor that supports HDMI 1.4a (and thus, 3D over HDMI)?With the upcoming HDMI 1.4 GPUs, I just wish we had a monitor capable of acting as a sink for those signals instead of having to hunt down a 3D TV to test it out!
softdrinkviking - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
two other 120hz computer monitors i can find online...http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Displa...
i can't, for the life of me, figure out what revision of the HDMI standard it uses. alienware does not report those details, and dell offers no manual for this monitor in their support page. someone would have to call them and ask, but i live outside the US.
and an acer model...
http://us.acer.com/acer/product.do?link=oln85e.red...
this product sheet has a maximum reported 75hz over HDMI, so I am going to say "NO," not 1.4a, but it doesn't actually say that.
therealnickdanger - Sunday, August 8, 2010 - link
If 3-D game technology works the same as 3-D Blu-Ray, then it's really only 60Hz x2 (alternating per eye). It may be capable of 120Hz natively, it may display 120Hz from 2-D, but for 3-D I'm pretty sure you're still only getting 60Hz per eye.What strikes me most about this whole 120Hz topic is that I had a Sony CRT that could handle 1280x1024 @ 240Hz about 10 years ago. And yes, VSYNC @ 240Hz is why the LCD boom disappointed me so much. LCDs, while thin and light, were a horrible step backward for gaming - at least for those of us who were used to high framerates and refresh rates.
LCDs still have such catching up to do...
softdrinkviking - Tuesday, August 10, 2010 - link
you'll get no argument from me about lcds vs crts.but that's the way the industry has gone, oh well.
in any case, the acer monitor specs the HDMI 70Hz, and a different refresh rate of 120Hz for using DVI.
I believe that HDMI 1.4a is capable of delivering more than 70Hz, so I was attempting to answer that question, not to determine whether or not it is capable of playing 3D over HDMI. However, ganesh seems to think so, and I was giving him the benefit of the doubt there.
As to the second question, is there a someone who can say with authority that 3D can (or cannot) play over HDMI with a limit of a 70Hz refresh rate?
softdrinkviking - Wednesday, August 11, 2010 - link
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision-requirement...this nvidia 3d vision compatibility chart is interesting.
looks like 120Hz refresh is definitely a necessity for 3D.
Sabresiberian - Friday, August 13, 2010 - link
It clearly states in the article that the 3D effect is 60Hz each eye. Brian's comments lead me to believe it is a true 120Hz display in 2D, but I can't say that's a fact.I have to agree about the refresh rate - and it's one reason why I run a Sony FW900 CRT. I run it @ 85Hz, 1920x1200. 60 Hz is a poor standard to settle for, in my opinion. I know we all live with 60Hz flashes in our modern lives and think nothing of it, we are conditioned to our lighting doing that, but it makes a difference. 100 Hz should be the standard we build to, not 60.
I was excited about this monitor at first, but .265 dot pitch and 1920x1080 aren't what I want. .265 is better than the LCD I have, but not much, and I prefer the 16:10 over 16:9 ratio.
;)
xef6 - Wednesday, October 19, 2011 - link
I know this is an old comment, but I can confirm that it is indeed a 120hz 2D display. I haven't used it for 3D stuff yet. I just use it as a 120hz display and enjoy a much smoother interface. ATI config reports its maximum refresh rate as 120.Luke212 - Sunday, August 22, 2010 - link
hate to tell you but the highest ever Sony at that 1024 would have been 126HzCushgod - Wednesday, December 8, 2010 - link
I 240% agree with you!! :P LCD's do have catching up to do ... its sad we are coming back to the Hz I used to enjoy. I am currently on an asus-vg236h, and I am thrilled to play all my games with better framerate, and clear and smotth scrolling left and right turning, awesome BF BC2, Warhammer, and Global Agenda look beautiful. Its night and day to me. Night and Day.Fleeb - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
Why HDMI for monitors when DisplayPort can do the job?