HP's Cruelest Cut: DreamColor in 1080p

I'm not usually one to complain about the difference between 1080p and 1200p in a notebook screen, but the shift to a 16:9 aspect from the HP EliteBook 8740w to the 8760w just rubs me the wrong way. It's true that 1920x1200 screens are going the way of the dodo (which is why I'll run my three into the ground), but I don't know who else is even using HP's DreamColor IPS panel to begin with.

Desktop users have already had to make the uneasy compromise of having 27-inch IPS monitors with a higher resolution than their predecessors (2560x1440) in exchange for losing 30-inch monitors almost entirely, but you can at least argue there's some kind of win there since previous generation 27-inchers were 1920x1200 affairs. But in the case of the HP EliteBook 8760w, this is strictly a loss and it sours what's otherwise an absolutely stellar screen.

At least we can take comfort in knowing the 1080p DreamColor IPS display is a slight upgrade to its predecessor. Once again, the screen's Delta E doesn't peak and valley anywhere near as much as many cheaper TN panels do, and the color gamut offered is frankly outstanding. Contrast is also excellent, though the 8760w's panel does suffer from ever so slightly higher black levels than its predecessor.

As befitting an IPS panel, viewing angles on the 8760w are fantastic. Honestly, the screen really needs to be seen in person to be believed. Colors pop beautifully (and may actually feel oversaturated thanks to the high color gamut), and at least our gaming tests never looked more vibrant and alive...except on the 8740w. That's why it stings so much to have lost the 120 pixels of vertical real estate; DreamColor is a costly $650 upgrade ($100 more than last generation!) as it is.

Battery, Noise, and Heat Conclusion: But You'll Pay for the Privilege
Comments Locked

83 Comments

View All Comments

  • aranyagag - Thursday, August 25, 2011 - link

    yeah I was planning to get a 17" DTR with sandybridge-- all was fine and dandy till I Got to the specifications for the screen. Sorry, but I want a 1200p screen. even when I watch videos-- which is rare because I prefer to watch on home theater and use my laptop for work-- I PREFER to have space above/below the screen for the menu bar.
    Well, I am waiting for the 1200p screens to return and if they don't -- I will eventually settle for a 15.6" 1080p screen. I just am not buying a 17" or larger laptop with only 1080p screen.
  • oshogg - Thursday, August 25, 2011 - link

    17" is a little too big for my taste - I would appreciate a similar in-depth review (great job on this one by the way!) for HP 8560w. Specifically, I am interested in knowing that Quadro 1000M is any less taxing on battery than the one in 8760w.

    Thanks,
    Osho
  • teng029 - Thursday, August 25, 2011 - link

    certainly a much better design than Dell's current Latitude line. i've tried carrying a 17.3 inch notebook before and didn't particularly care for it. and like so many other posters have mentioned, i still prefer 16x10 panels.
  • Spazweasel - Thursday, August 25, 2011 - link

    As always, computers of this class are something your employer buys you. Individuals are not likely to pay for items like this, but organizations whose cost-accounting recognizes that the hardware is a small fraction of the cost of maintaining an employee are not going to be put off by a thousand dollar premium. Compared to the software packages that enterprises use, the amortized cost of support and infrastructure, and the salaries of the people that use them, six thousand in hardware is chump change.

    Buy this one with someone else's money, not your own, and you (and they) get the value expected for something this expensive.
  • jecs - Friday, August 26, 2011 - link

    Thank you, That was what I had in mind for years, but still something I wanted to check over time. I worked for BP years ago and sure they provided fancy hardware and software even for contractors. I remember a Silicon Graphics computer on a corner and it was only used for an advanced student on one study. Today this HP laptop is way too superior but computing requirements may also increase with time.
  • Death666Angel - Thursday, August 25, 2011 - link

    I really don't see how the desktop space has somehow "lost" 30" monitors almost entirely. From my experience over the past years, the 30" crowd has been very stable. The 27" high-res didn't destroy anything and gave people a cheap middle ground between cheap 24" 1200p and overpriced 1600p 30" monitors. I think 27" 2560x1440 has been about the only positive development in the desktop monitor market for a long time, partially making up for the move to 1080p in the 21"-27" market.

    I personally hope the tablet/smartphone display development with high densities will transfer to the desktop market soon.
  • Dustin Sklavos - Thursday, August 25, 2011 - link

    From a conversation with my associate, Brian Klug (who handles our monitor reviews), 30" screens are being phased out of production entirely.
  • zaccun - Thursday, August 25, 2011 - link

    Thank god I've already got one then- That almost makes me want to save up and buy a couple more to hoard :<
  • DanNeely - Friday, August 26, 2011 - link

    Gah!!! Like zaccun I'm tempted to go after a spare. If the replacement was 2844x1600 I could probably live with the aspect ratio reduction, but for anything resembling work vertical size is more important than width.
  • Death666Angel - Friday, August 26, 2011 - link

    Ah, haven't heard anything like that on my regular computer news sites. And I haven't noticed any increase in prices with 30" screens. But I'll keep an eye out for that now. :-)

    Still, even with them being phased out, I will not pay 1000-1100€ for a 30" 2560x1600 screen when I get a 27" 2560x1440 for 600-650€. The added value for me just isn't there.

    Unless I will have a lot of spare money soon I'll try and wait until the pixel density goes to tablet/smartphone levels or at least gets closer to them. :-)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now