HP ZR2740w - High Resolution IPS that Doesn't Break the Bank
by Chris Heinonen on March 16, 2012 1:15 AM ESTInput Lag and Power Use
Since the HP automatically scales the image if it is not sent at 2560x1440 and I don’t have a CRT that can produce that resolution, the HP had to run at 1920x1080 resolution for the lag tests. This is our second review using the SMTT program to test lag, but this lets us separate the input lag from the pixel response time, so we can hopefully figure out the effect of scaling the image. There is a chance that the performance with a native 2560x1440 signal could be better on the input lag, so these measurements again represent the worst case scenario.
Despite this, the lag on the HP is very low overall, with 14.55ms being the worst case scenario. This breaks down at 2.6ms of input lag, and then 11.95ms of pixel response time. This is less than a frame of lag at the 60Hz refresh rate the display supports, so it should be fast enough for your gaming use, though hopefully your video card can keep up with it at 2560x1440. The effective lag, which is a more subjective measurement, came in at right around 10ms in my estimation. At that point you can clearly see what color a pixel was changing to, even if it hasn’t reached peak brightness yet. I really don’t think anyone will have issues gaming on the HP, which is very nice.
With the size of the ZR2740w, and the amount of light that if can put out, you can imagine that even with an LED lighting system it is going to use a lot of power. At minimum brightness the HP consumed 26 watts, and at maximum brightness it consumed 96 watts. With my usual settings (closer to 150-160 nits of brightness) I was seeing closer to 45 watts of power use on it. This isn’t the most efficient display you can get, but when you consider that it is likely to replace dual 24” monitors for a lot of users, the power use is better in perspective. Compared to the 30” monitors we have reviewed it is very good, and about equal to the 27” Apple Cinema Display.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
119 Comments
View All Comments
Makaveli - Friday, March 16, 2012 - link
I agree bro,$300 was alot for me when I was 12 too.
dcollins - Friday, March 16, 2012 - link
I am 25, employed in IT and $300 is still a lot of money. Don't be a snob. $700 is hard to justify for a monitor if you're not in a profession that demands color accuracy.Snowshredder102 - Friday, March 16, 2012 - link
The prices are certainly steep; however, my mindset on this is if I'm going to stare at the damn thing for 8+ hours a day it better look nice.cheinonen - Friday, March 16, 2012 - link
It also depends on what you are working on. If I'm dealing with massive Excel spreadsheets all day, for example, being able to see everything on screen at once, at a reasonable size, might mean that I cut out 10-15 minutes a day of scrolling back and forth to see my data. Add that up over a year or two, and it can be quite easy to justify the price of a high resolution monitor over even a pair of lower resolution ones.I don't own a 27" monitor at this time, I usually use a 20" in portrait mode and a 24" CRT that sit on my desk, but I have to say that after having a 27" monitor around for a while, it did help with productivity and I would love to keep one around. Figuring out if its worth the cost is up to you, though I wouldn't say its limited to color accuracy at all. People that needs lots of space - working with Excel, programming, anything really could benefit.
tumbleweed - Friday, March 16, 2012 - link
There is a lot more to these kind of monitors than color accuracy. My big problem with non-IPS panels are the limited viewing angles. Unless I hold my head in just the right spot, readability goes out the window. It's possible to make TN monitors with wide viewing angles, but hardly anyone does it.You can find some 24" IPS monitors for #300-400 these days, and they're well worth it to me. I have the HP zr24W at home (the 24" version of this monitor's previous generation). It's one of the best computer equipment purchases I've ever made. One of the things you use 100% of the time on your computer is your screen. Don't skimp on this! You may not need a 27" monitor, but the 24" version of this is much more affordable, and still worth it.
dcollins - Friday, March 16, 2012 - link
I stare at a computer screen all day every day for work. For my job as a programmer there is simply no way I could justify the 2-3x purchase price of IPS panel displays over TN. I fail to see how viewing angles matters at all since I am sitting directly in front of my screens, not more than 60 degrees off center.I hate having a crappy TN panel on my laptop, but for my desktop, two Asus's like these get the job just fine for under $170 each: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8... .
AnnonymousCoward - Friday, March 16, 2012 - link
It's your choice: drive a car that costs $400 less and get a quality monitor, or drive that +$400 premium car. The monitor might last you 10,000hr, which is a 4 cent/hr premium. That's easily worth it to me.whitehat2k9 - Friday, March 16, 2012 - link
I guess you and I have different definitions of "breaking the bank."colonelclaw - Friday, March 16, 2012 - link
I don't know anything about this HP, but with regards to your suggestion about using 2 Dell U2412Ms I can definitely give that idea the thumbs up. Having read your recent review of the Dell I bought 4 for my office. Now that they have been all calibrated I can say that they are spectacular, and for what I do (3D artist) working on 2 monitors is preferable to one single large one.Adul - Friday, March 16, 2012 - link
I have 2 of the ZR24w monitors on my desk now and my GF had to out do me and got two of these HP Z2740w on her desk. I love both monitors and both look great. I am going to have to borrow hers for some gaming this weekend :)