LG 34UM67 sRGB Data and Bench Tests

For color accuracy, we test before and after calibration. For calibration, we use SpectraCal CalMAN with our own custom workflow. We target 200 cd/m2 of light output with a gamma of 2.2 and the sRGB color gamut, which corresponds to a general real-world use case. We use an i1 Pro provided by X-Rite. All measurements use APL 50% patterns except for uniformity testing, which uses full field.

LG 34UM67 Pre/Post Calibration
Pre-Calibration,
200 cd/m2
Post-Calibration,
200 cd/m2
Post-Calibration,
80 cd/m2
White Level ( cd/m2) 201 198.7 79.3
Black Level ( cd/m2) 0.2056 .2153 .0977
Contrast Ratio 978:1 923:1 811:1
Gamma (Average) 2.18 2.21 2.21
Color Temperature 6558K 6548K 6482K
Grayscale dE2000 2.94 0.38 0.99
Color Checker dE2000 2.49 1.24 1.39
Saturations dE2000 2.14 1.07 1.17

Before calibration, the LG 34UM67 has a slight blue tint to the grayscale but nothing too noticeable – especially for gaming purposes. Tweaking the OSD settings to 53/50/47 RGB gives a result reasonably close to the ideal 6504K color target. The grayscale errors are all under 4.0 dE2000, which is potentially visible but not overly so, with an average error level of 2.9 dE2000. The gamma curve isn’t great, starting high and ending low but with an average of 2.18 that’s close to our 2.2 target, so things can definitely be improved. Moving to colors, there are a few larger errors of nearly 5.0, mostly in the yellows and oranges. Some of these are due to the gamut falling slightly higher than sRGB, leading to some oversaturation of green and red.

Post-calibration the gamma and RGB balance are almost perfect. The average grayscale dE2000 falls to well below 1.0, which is invisible to the naked eye. Colorchecker and saturation accuracy improves as well, though there are still colors in the 4.0 range. Again, it’s mostly shades of yellows, oranges, and some greens that cause problems, which unfortunately tend to be the worst colors to have wrong for imaging professionals. Overall it’s a good monitor, and the target audience clearly isn’t going to be imaging professionals, so with or without calibration it will do well for gaming, movie watching, and other general tasks.

Changing to 80 cd/m2, the calibration results remain pretty consistent. The dE2000 numbers are slightly higher, but if the small change in accuracy is a concern then potential buyers would have already passed on this display. Only the most finicky of regular consumers might find something to complain about.

It’s also worth quickly discussing some of the other color modes, just because certain ones can be so far off that it’s a wonder anyone would even consider using them. LG offers four picture modes (Photo, Cinema, Reader 1, and Reader 2). Photos has a strong blue tint with average grayscale dE of 6.4 and many values nearing 10.0, though colors aren’t quite so bad averaging closer to 5.0. The Cinema mode is pretty close to the Custom setting, so while it’s tinted blue the grayscale dE is 2.3 while the colors average close to 4.0, with skin tones often falling into the 6.0+ range. Reader 1 and 2 are supposed to be more like print, with the results being heavily red biased with limited blue, and minimum black levels are much higher (2.5 cd/m2). The resulting grayscale dE2000 of 10.8/8.7 and average colors of 7.5/6.0 however are not particularly useful.

And that sums up why NVIDIA didn’t bother with supporting specialized color modes on their G-SYNC module: doing one color mode properly is generally more useful than supporting multiple incorrect color modes. While some people might appreciate the ability to quickly switch between various color modes, most just set up a display for everyday use and leave it be. Most named presets other than “standard” or “custom” end up being bullet points more than anything useful.

LG 34UM67 Brightness and Contrast LG 34UM67 Display Uniformity
Comments Locked

96 Comments

View All Comments

  • mobutu - Wednesday, April 1, 2015 - link

    There's one really good 144Hz IPS panel/monitor: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/acer_xb270hu.h...
  • 3DVagabond - Wednesday, April 1, 2015 - link

    It's not an AMD display. It's LG. AMD only makes the cards that can do dynamic refresh rates with the DP1.2a standard. Whatever the specs or features are for the panel are at the monitor manufacturers discretion.
  • Murloc - Wednesday, April 1, 2015 - link

    that's one advantage of G-Sync: more control on monitor features since they can just refuse to license the board and it protects the brand by giving it a premium feel (putting the horrible RMA rates I heard about the swift aside), and people fall for it.
  • medi01 - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link

    There is no such advantage, 1.2a is a standard, AMD FreeSync is a sticker which they can decide to give or not.
  • Ubercake - Wednesday, April 1, 2015 - link

    I agree. This implementation of adaptive sync is pretty bad. Frame rates in games like Battlefield 4 are often above 90 while playing and then can drop into the 50s at different points. With most games the frame rates are all over the place based on GPU demand and don't fit into this 27Hz/27fps range.
  • dragonsqrrl - Wednesday, April 1, 2015 - link

    As mobutu said Acer currently has a 144Hz IPS G-Sync monitor on the market, and to top it all off it's 27" 1440p. Linus recently did a great video review of the XB270HU:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LTHr96NueA
  • blanarahul - Tuesday, March 31, 2015 - link

    *sniff* *sniff* Nobody cares about the high contrast ratio VA panels.
  • jjj - Tuesday, March 31, 2015 - link

    At just 1080p feels like a waste to go there. Even 1440p doesn't feel like enough if you are gonna invest this much in a new screen.
    Anyway, it might be wise to include screen dimensions and screen area in the specs. With such huge differences in AR, the diagonal is misleading. Hell, i would even chart price per square cm but i don't expect you to do that. A 34 inch 16:10 screen would be almost 25% bigger than this one, or a 30inch 16;10 is almost the same area. In a better world regulators would force retailers to properly display screen dimensions, 99.9% of consumers don't realize the differences in size that come with AR.
  • xthetenth - Tuesday, March 31, 2015 - link

    3440x1440 is really worth it because it's the best resolution you can get for working without messing around with scaling (and frankly it's better than the ones you'd want to use with scaling in most regards for functionality)
  • jjj - Tuesday, March 31, 2015 - link

    At 650$ it's a 5 years or more purchase not 1-2 years. And that's mostly 4k territory.
    Buying a 27inch 1080p IPS at 200$ on an easy to find deal is ok for 1-2 years of usage but this is a lot more. 1440p is much better than 1080p ofc but it also costs a lot more and you end up in a similar situation.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now