I'm not too surprised, but the U3014 sure does calibrate quite well. Using CalMAN 5.1 and targeting the sRGB gamut, 200 cd/m2 of light output, and a 2.2 Power Gamma Curve, we obtained some mighty fine results.

Grayscale performance went from fine to superb. We see almost no colorshift at all in the RGB balance, even down at 0%, and an average CCT of 6551. The Gamma is close to ruler flat with a small bump at 5%, but an overall average of 2.22, and our average grayscale dE2000 is just 0.64. Our contrast dropped slightly to 863:1, but that’s a small sacrifice for this grayscale performance.

Colors were already good, but with the improved grayscale we dropped the average dE2000 down to 0.90. Color primary and secondary performance is pretty close to perfect here.

The Gretag chart saw a serious performance increase as well. Our average dE2000 is now 0.73, which means you can’t see any issues with the naked eye at this point. The tiny luminance errors are also totally gone, and if you’re looking for something to complain about on this chart, you’re going to have to keep looking. No error even gets close to 2.0, so this color is practically perfect.

Saturations are just as perfect. Some numbers creep over a dE2000 of 1.0 but very few, and you can’t notice an error that small anyway. Unless you’re measuring with an instrument, it’s going to look perfect.

We also target print and photo applications, and for those we use the sRGB standards: 80 cd/m2 of light, and the sRGB gamma curve. Most of the numbers are directly comparable to the 200 cd/m2 numbers, so I’m going to focus on those that actually changed. First, the U3014 does a very good job of tracking the sRGB gamma curve. We can ignore the number, as unlike power the number varies across the curve, but we want to see how it lines up. The little bit from 0-5% where it doesn’t line up is likely because CalMAN can only measure those 2 points and would need to measure 1%, 2%, 3%, and 4% as well to track the curve better. Overall it tracks amazingly well, so it can do sRGB very easily.

Our color errors are slightly larger, with Red and Blue both being slightly unsaturated in comparison to 200 cd/m2 though the error levels are still very low on average. They just aren’t as exceptional as they were at 200 cd/m2.

Finally we see that the saturations chart shows slightly more error as well, with some numbers creeping over 2.0 here. Even now they will still only be visible when directly next to the correct color sample, and even then it will be almost impossible to tell. For print and photo work, the U3014 will still work very well; it just seems to perform slightly better at high backlight levels.

Pre-Calibration Accuracy, sRGB Pre-Calibration, AdobeRGB
Comments Locked

84 Comments

View All Comments

  • JDG1980 - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    It was just reported today that a no-name vendor is releasing a 50" 4K TV for $1500 (the same price as this Dell monitor). I hadn't expected prices to drop that quickly. Although this particular 4K TV probably isn't suitable for monitor use (too big, not clear if it supports 60 Hz, probably has a crappy TN panel) it would be great if it was the leading edge of a new wave of inexpensive 4K TV sets. If there was a 32" 4K TV that supported 60 Hz input (HDMI only goes up to 24 Hz at that resolution, you need DisplayPort for 60) and was reasonably priced, it would make an awesome computer monitor with better DPI than pretty much any existing desktop solution. Hopefully we won't have to wait too much longer for this.
  • cheinonen - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    Sharp has a 32", 4K display but I believe the MSRP on it is around $6,000. I also believe that it has issues running at 60Hz over a single DisplayLink, but the person I know with one was still working on this issue. So one exists, but it costs a fortune right now. For that $1,500, 50" 4K, I really can't imagine how they're getting there with any sort of quality right now, but we will see.
  • Andrea deluxe - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    ok... year 2013 and 33ms of input lag?

    dell and company... are you kidding people?
  • DanNeely - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    They're not kidding anyone; they're targeting people for whom the perfect color balance that requires two frames of processing to achieve is more important than getting a latency score that doesn't matter outside of gaming.
  • hackztor - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    Low input lag can be had in the 3007wfp-hc (I still use this as my main gaming monitor, and 3011 as my secondary). This monitor did not include a scaler so input lag was low, now all monitors want to put hdmi and display port on so they can be used with consoles hence higher input lag.
  • kasakka - Wednesday, April 17, 2013 - link

    But the scaler has long been one of the best parts of the high res Dells. I've been using a Dell 3008WFP for years now and due to the high res, many new games just aren't playable at native resolution without multiple GPUs. Thanks to the scaler, I'm happily playing at 1920x1200 which runs well at full detail. Compared to leaving scaling to the GPU, the scaler on the Dell does a far better job resulting in much less blurry picture.

    For the record I have not been bothered by the input lag either, which I think was reported being somewhere between 20-30ms on the 3008WFP.
  • mike55 - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    As Chris mentioned, TFT Central found that there was very little input lag in game mode. ~3.2 ms for pixel response time, and virtually no signal processing time. I'm confused as to why the results are different. Why would using an oscilloscope produce different results?
  • bebimbap - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    If you are even thinking about gaming on a 60hz monitor you shouldn't be complaining about 33ms input lag coming out of this one. If a frame is 16.7ms @60hz 33ms is 2 frames, compared to using a 144hz of only 6.9ms per frame, or ~5 frames in 33ms. So even though you are missing only every other frame in reactivity compared to a quicker 60hz monitor, you are missing 4 out of 5 frames compared to a 144hz.

    if you need something faster you could always go for a TN based benq or asus 144hz 24"/27" gaming monitor they have 1-2ms input lag and lightboost but only up to 120hz.
    I have both a u3011 and a vg248qe and I cannot game on my u3011 anymore after gaming on a vg248qe @120hz with lightboost. But I do everything else on the u3011, photoshop, movies, browsing, etc, again everything other than gaming. when i'm not gaming the vg248qe acts as a nice blank screen or pallet space for photoshop.

    again if input lag is important to you, get a TN based 144hz asus or benq you will be VERY happy. do not look at PLS/PVA/IPS it's just a waste of time.
  • mayankleoboy1 - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    Remember, they are the same people who put extreme crappy 1366x768 panels on notebooks.
    So shittyness is synonymous with Dell.
  • cheinonen - Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - link

    Everyone still puts 1366x768 panels in laptops, as I noticed my Dad's Sony and sister's Acer both rocking those on vacation a couple weeks ago. I wouldn't say that's a Dell problem, but an industry problem.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now