BenQ XL2720T Gaming Monitor Reviewed
by Chris Heinonen on June 17, 2013 4:35 PM ESTBenQ says that the maximum light output of the XL2720T is 300 nits, but the most I could record is 252 nits while not totally crushing whites. It might be possible to set the contrast to 100 and record a higher number, but with that setting the top white shades, from around 230 until 255, all blend into a single shade. No one would ever use a display this way, so it’s a bit impractical for me to measure them this way. The lowest white level I could get was 93 nits, which helps to explain the contrast ratio issue on the sRGB test. If we are targeting 80 nits, and the lowest level the display can natively do is 93 nits, then the video card LUT has to be lowered to bring that brightness down. Anytime you lower the peak of the LUT, you then start losing contrast range, which is why we try to get the monitor set as close as possible before calibration, or use DDC to have it automatically do it correctly.
The black level was fine on the XL2720T, though not exceptional as TN isn’t known for being great at blocking out light. It isn’t a bad number, but black level is really all about contrast ratio and on its own doesn’t mean much unless we also know the white value.
The contrast ratio on the BenQ comes out at right around 820:1 at maximum or minimum light level. The lower number we saw on the sRGB calibration was due to targeting a light output level below what the monitor can do natively. If you aren’t trying to go below the 95 nits light level that I saw on the white testing, you will get a contrast ratio right around 820:1 from the XL2720T.
The BenQ XL2720T also does well on power usage, consuming very little at maximum or minimum backlight levels. Other than the Acer touchscreen model, the BenQ is the most efficient monitor for which I have calculated the Candelas per Watt number, which takes into account screen size, power use, and light output to normalize the data. I have a feeling the BenQ benefits by having a lower resolution 27” panel than most of the 27” monitors I’ve tested, but with the small number of data points I have so far that is all conjecture at the moment. Whatever the cause of it, the power use of the BenQ is very low.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
79 Comments
View All Comments
chizow - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link
Glad to see you are revisiting the review of this monitor with a fresh outlook. Honestly, after you have your new results with LightBoost, you may consider just re-writing the entire review. It's a completely different market for this type of monitor that gets away from the muddy mosaics of finely pixeled high-res monitors.qiplayer - Saturday, November 9, 2013 - link
The today's problem is comunication. Companies want to throw stuff on the market and us to buy. Actually they have no idea what is our need expectations and so on. They lack on ability to observe. ...Today I saw the graps of gtx 780 gtx780ti gtx titan clock behaviour during heavy load/gameplay. Clock is high and every 45 seconds it drops by 40% =every 40 second you get fps drops. Is it possible that they sell a card for 1000$ and haven't found a better solution? YES, they (nvidia) probably even didn't notice it. It would have been enough to let the max clock be 3-5% lower to avoid the needing to downcloack.So yes they produce and hope to sell, they found out the solution that many gamers aspire to have in a monitor by case, by looking for a better 3D.
And if we look cell phones, I'm since years looking for something that is not an iphone, but I always felt I can't type half that fast with samsung htc and so on because the keys had a lag lighting up when pressed. For years this aspect hasn't been seen in reviews, then, one day "tadaaahhh" revelation: a test of touchscreen responsetime. Iphone was far better than the best samsung. So is it possible that no one of the thousands worldwide reviewers noticed it? No one engineer?
cheinonen - Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - link
I've added charts and data on Lightboost to the review, as well as commentary on the image quality of it. They can all be found on the gaming use and lag page.chizow - Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - link
"One thing this does do it lock out all the picture controls except color and brightness."It only locks you out once you enable LightBoost, prior to that you can make any adjustments to presets, color, temperature, sharpness etc. At least that is how it worked on my 2 previous 3D Vision monitors.
Also, you shouldn't lose any brightness, if anything, the image is usually too bright for those who are not accustomed to it as brightness is maxed out and locked and strobing at 2x brightness.
Anyone interested in the truly important vitals of this monitor should follow mdrejhon's links as they give a much more accurate picture of this monitor's strengths.
cheinonen - Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - link
You're going to lose brightness because it's working with black frame insertion basically to mimic the performance of a CRT in that way. The lack of object permanence on-screen causes the eye to see motion as being more fluid when tracking something. This same behavior also means that instead of the backlight being on all the time, it's shut down every so often and that causes a measurable drop in light output. With the monitor at factory settings, other than Lightboost, and contrast set to the maximum level before clipping, I got under 130 cd/m2. Going higher requires clipping.As far as the user controls being locked out, at least on the BenQ when it went into Lightboost mode my previously set user color temperature settings were removed, leading to the blue image. Different monitors could easily have different settings, but on the BenQ they were all locked out.
I've read all of mdrejhon's links, and he's providing his perspective. He, and many others, are after the least amount of blur no matter what, and that's fine. To me, the trade-off in brightness, color quality, and noticeable flicker are not worth it to me. But that's my opinion. However I think comments that color quality is unimportant compared to the 120Hz mode is giving BenQ a free pass. They could easily provide both, but choose not to due to cost or another reason. If color accuracy isn't important to you at all, that's fine, but it shouldn't be dismissed outright.
sweenish - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link
180-220 is a 10% range, is it not?brucek2 - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link
Thanks Chris. I really appreciate direct, straight forward conclusions like yours. The most important part of most reviews to me is the part that says this product is either the winner for some specific use case, or if not here are the likely better options to consider. Far too many reviewers are afraid to be so blunt so I always appreciate it when I see it.mdrejhon - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link
To be fair, SkyViper (a former CRT user) thought a 120Hz monitor was disappointing until he enabled LightBoost:http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1039591537#p...
"I felt like I may have wasted $300 bucks on a monitor that is full of compromises. The next thing I tried of course was using the Lightboost hack."
[...Enables LightBoost....]
“SWEET MOTHER OF GOD!
Am I seeing this correctly? The last time I gamed on a CRT monitor was back in 2006 before I got my first LCD and this ASUS monitor is EXACTLY like how I remembered gaming on a CRT monitor. I was absolutely shocked and amazed at how clear everything was when moving around. After seeing Lightboost in action, I would have gladly paid twice the amount for something that can reproduce the feeling I got when playing on a CRT. Now I really can’t see myself going back to my 30″ 2560×1600 IPS monitor when gaming. Everything looks so much clearer on the ASUS with Lightboost turned on.”
Panzerknacker - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link
Agree with your conclusion Chris, TN monitors are just completely worthless for anything, looking at them makes me puke. Many years ago I used to be a hardcore gamer, but when my CRT died and I was forced to purchase a LCD monitor, that completely spoiled the fun I had in gaming. Everything suddenly looked like complete crap, especially the dark atmospheric games I used to enjoy like Doom 3 and Splinter Cell. Displays like this are maybe only good for one thing, and that is proffesional gaming tournaments where nothing matters but respons. Even while practicing at home though I would prefer the better looks of a IPS over the faster respons of the TN.offtopic:
How do modern IPS screens do in terms of allround gaming vs CRT's? I still use to think all LCD's just suck, I just bought a phone with the best display on the planet and everybody and every review says it has the most awesome black levels ever in a LCD, but imo it still sucks compared to CRT.
Insomniator - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link
TN panels ruined gaming for you? Give me a break.