BenQ XL2720T Gaming Monitor Reviewed
by Chris Heinonen on June 17, 2013 4:35 PM ESTLooking back at the data, the BenQ XL2720T actually scores pretty well. The pre-calibration numbers are decent, and post calibration they come out far better, though not as good as some recent IPS panels. The design is nice and ergonomic, and the OSD has been radically improved to be one of the best on the market. It also has the quick access buttons to change modes which could appeal to many if you want to easily switch between settings for gaming and work, or even different settings for a console.
However, when it comes down to my subjective impressions, I’m just not a huge fan of the BenQ XL2720T. The 1080p TN panel just has a washed out, slightly soft look to it. After spending years with IPS displays most of the time, going back to TN was much harder than I expected it to be. The only other 120 Hz display I reviewed previously, the S23A750D from Samsung, had a really bad ergonomic design, a poor OSD, and a really glossy finish, but it also had a screen that I enjoyed looking at more than I do the BenQ. I don’t think TN panels should really get up to 27” as the color and contrast shifts are easy to see at that point, and are distracting.
From a gamer point of view, I can somewhat see the value in having a 120 Hz display, but at the cost of $480, I am really not sure. The LG 29EA93 I reviewed previously lists for $600 right now, which is only $120 more than the BenQ. It offers an IPS panel instead of TN, higher resolution, a wider field of view, internal calibration with an optional meter, and lower measured input lag. I find the wider field-of-view to be a bigger advantage than the higher refresh rate for gaming, and the LG is much easier to look at on a day-to-day basis.
It is entirely possible I’m just not in touch enough with the hardcore gamer to see the benefits of the BenQ, but to me those benefits don’t outweigh the negatives that are offered up by using a lower resolution, TN panel in the display. If it was more affordable, perhaps in the $350-400 range, I can see recommending it more easily. As it is, I’d be far more likely to say make the jump up to the LG monitor, or drop back down to the 24” model that comes in at $90 less but still has the same resolution and won’t have as many TN related issues since the viewing angle will be smaller.
It’s unfortunate that BenQ seems to get so much right aside from the TN panel itself, but hopefully they can either find an IPS panel that can work at 120 Hz in the future, or perhaps switch to a glossy finish next time if it helps to improve the overall look of the display. As it is now, I looked forward to finishing this review so I could get back to my IPS display, and I can’t really recommend the XL2720T based on my experience with it.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
79 Comments
View All Comments
althaz - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link
What an absurd thing to say - the vast majority of people have 1080p monitors and it's not just because they represent good value for money.As a gamer and a worker I have a trio of 1080p monitors for several reasons:
@ 1080p I'll be able to run games at maxed settings for a while (and I haven't upgraded for over a year).
Dual monitor > than one big monitor (by a very long way). Triple monitor is of varying degrees of usefulness to most people, but I find two landscape and one portrait monitor is basically perfect for all tasks (some people find three monitors overwhelming however).
mutantmagnet - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link
We can downsample a lot of games these days. Until strobe backlighting is possible on the IPS panels settling for TN is fine since they are already cheaper and achieving 100+ FPS consistently isn't easy above 1080.tackle70 - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link
Yeah I could never go back to TN panels after making the jump to IPS, and I play tons of games. I am guessing that 99.9% of gamers are not good enough for the 120 Hz to make any real difference other than as a placebo effect, and so I don't see the point.I wish we could get some new technologies out there other than this TN garbage :\
TesseractOrion - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link
I have a Yamasaki Catleap (IPS) and a Qnix Q2710 (PLS) , the latter at 120Hz, the former @ 60Hz (only due to DVI restriction on the 7950 GPU, had it up to 116Hz on the DL-DVI port). Hard to go back to TN and 1920x1080 now... very stripped down monitors, no scaler, OSD or multiple inputs, resulting in low input lag as compensation...Jedi2155 - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link
Thanks Chris for your review. I believe it would be a better format in future reviews to add a table of specifications describing the important aspects of the product during the introduction. It took me multiple pages of skimming in order to find the information that this was in fact a standard TN panel at 1920x1080 resolution (I was hoping for a 27" IPS 120 Hz, or at least 2560x1440).While this information could be found with some googling, I've always come to expect AnandTech to provide very poignant and useful information very quickly and easily. Good review and I hope you will continue to refine your skills in the future!
chizow - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link
Questionable results and questionable competency with this review. Main concerns below:1) Was this monitor tested with LightBoost always enabled? Main benefit of these 3D Vision Ready panels is their ability to always be in LightBoost mode if you trick the Nvidia driver to set the 3D Vision mode to "Always On".
2) Input lag results are questionable given this is a 120Hz input panel and the results indicate 3 frames worth of input lag. Highly doubtful on a 120Hz TN. Did you set the panel to gaming mode to see if there is a difference?
3) I'd like to see comparisons against the Asus VG278H or even VG278HE, which have become the standard for 120Hz TN LightBoost panels.
mdrejhon - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link
The input lag is because the Leo Bodnar input lag tester is limited to 60Hz and HDMI. So it's not an accurate measurement of input lag.chizow - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link
Wow, nice catch. I didn't even bother reading the testing methodology, but if true that's a pretty epic fail on reviewer's part. Not only is it probably going through the built-in video scaler/processor at that point and introducing additional latency, but it also effectively cuts refresh rate in half while doubling response times.Really needs to be re-done over DVI and at 120Hz with and without LightBoost.
Samus - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link
My last (and only) two BenQ monitors broke. I should have learned for first time after the second one caught fire.jigglywiggly - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link
Why did you pick the worst 120hz display? Pick the vg278 or vg248qeboth are 144hz and much better