Still it's great for doing color correction, and at that price, you could afford a 2nd one. I'm hoping Quantum Dot filters down into the 34" Curved IPS monitors with Gsync/Freesync.
Yep, I agree with everyone else. 27" is the cutoff for 1080p. You can get fairly decent 2560x1440 27" monitors for just a bit more. Even HP has a ZR27w that is fairly accurate, IPS and 2560p for $300 refurbished. Anandtech reviewed it years ago. The real problem with it is no OSD, it's 100% software controlled so hope you be running Windows.
Quite happy with my Philips 32 inch FTV 32PFL5605H @1920X1080.
I am not quite sure what the above posters are talking about and who decides where's the "cuftoff", but I'll be damned if I let some nerd decide on the internet what I am going to buy.
They didn't try to personally offend you, so why the harsh reaction? If you are fine with your 32"/1080p monitor, enjoy it. That PPI in normal desktop monitor range would be quite horrendous for me, doing any kind of work on it. If you sit farther away, don't do a lot of work or have bad eye sight, I guess that could work though. If all the above is false, weird. :D
Viewing distance comes into the equation. If you have a deep desk and prefer your monitors at the back of it, large 1080p monitors can be just the ticket. I'm on a 24" 1080p with that setup here and actually had to scale this website up to 120%, probably 27" 1080p would be ideal for my desk.
I'd be happy with an affordable 1080p 24" (my main monitor isn't exactly far away from my chair) Freesync monitor with an excellent gamut like this. The bigger issue is refresh rate. To me there's more to the experience than raw pixel count.
Unfortunately, even if the gamut is good, this monitor has some serious issues (at least if a review I just read (unfortunately I can't find it right now, I'll look for it in the morning) is to be believed). Calibration in the default mode was good for Adobe RGB, but didn't allow for brightness controls(!!!), leaving the monitor stuck at 370 nits - only usable in brightly lit rooms, in other words. The Adobe RGB mode allowed for brightness controls, but had far worse calibration and a clear green tint. Luckily that was relatively easily corrected, but still... And besides, even a $300 monitor without DP? That's dipping pretty far into the cost cutting bin. And of course there's the lack of VESA mounts and tilt-only adjustable stand. Response times and refresh rates were excellent, though, best in class even. I guess this would be a perfect monitor for low budget gamers wanting colours to pop or home users looking to upgrade to something that comes close to their phone's screen.
I'm skeptical of the low pixel density, but I see how some might not care. Having to choose between brightness controls and a clearly visible green tint (before calibration), though, that's a deal breaker for me.
1080p on a 27" screen comes out to 82ppi. That's a pretty bad pitch. At 1440p it's 110ppi. 30% denser. That's highly noticeable unless you are 6' away, and let's face it this is a computer monitor nobody is sitting 6 feet back.
I thought quantum dot displays were supposed to give us near-OLED levels of contrast. I guess I must have misunderstood, because 1000:1 is fairly pedestrian. The extended colour gamut doesn't excite me too much.
They should be brighter, because less light is filtered away, but I suppose contrast wouldn't change much. Either that, or they're using cheaper LEDs because of the benefits of the quantum-dot panel.
It is probably near OLED levels of color saturation.
It is brighter and at the same time, no. It is not bright because the technology is a filter itself. It is bright because the lost light in the "blue" frequencies has been converted to Red and Green.
>I thought quantum dot displays were supposed to give us near-OLED levels of contrast.
They don't change the contrast, they change the color gamut of the backlight. Ideally for wide color gamut and good saturation you'd want separate R, G, and B LEDs, but thats more costly and somewhat power inefficient. With QDs you can take a normal blue LED and then precisely shift some of its emission into the green or red as if you had separate colored diodes but without the cost.
The PPI of this monitor is even worse than my 15" 1366x768 laptop. I do hope the Quantom Dot tech gets more popular and cheap enough for entry level laptop. My current laptop has almost no color and saturation, probably limited by it's blue LED backlight.
$300 for a 27" 1080p screen? For fruck's sake! How about $200 for a 32" 1024x768 one? Now THAT's something I would definitely buy. Are we ever going to move the hell on from 1080p? Hopefully companiessuch as Dell can keep up the good work and release smaller higher-res displays. The best combination I've seen so far is in the U2515H. 1440p on 25"
I guess if you're on a very deep desk or otherwise sit far away from the monitor, the 1080p resolution is okay, but let's be honest, that's not going to be a crisp resolution for most.
2560x1440 (I'd prefer 2560x1600 but that fight is lost) would make this monitor acceptable at 2 foot reading distance. If cost wasn't an issue ... a 4K resolution at 2x scaling would be really crisp, whilst retaining the 1080p scaling. 5K, like Apple use, would be slightly better.
Casting error. Color accuracy is for PRO segment that prefers work space ratios like 16:10 or 3:2. While 16:9 / 1080p is mass consumer space that probably doesn't even know or care what color gamut is.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
40 Comments
Back to Article
Refuge - Friday, March 18, 2016 - link
$300?I won't lie, I want one! :)
Sttm - Friday, March 18, 2016 - link
I used a 1080p 27inch monitor for a couple years, the resolution at that size is lacking.ChefJeff789 - Friday, March 18, 2016 - link
I'll second that. I bought one and sent it back within just a few days. It was a good monitor otherwise, but the screen door effect was really bad.jasonelmore - Friday, March 18, 2016 - link
Still it's great for doing color correction, and at that price, you could afford a 2nd one. I'm hoping Quantum Dot filters down into the 34" Curved IPS monitors with Gsync/Freesync.Does the filter effect refresh rate at all?
saratoga4 - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
Filter is on the LEDs in the backlight, not the panel itself, so it won't affect refresh rate (or anything beyond the backlight).MrSpadge - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
+1(am happy with 2560x1440 on 25")
Samus - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
Yep, I agree with everyone else. 27" is the cutoff for 1080p. You can get fairly decent 2560x1440 27" monitors for just a bit more. Even HP has a ZR27w that is fairly accurate, IPS and 2560p for $300 refurbished. Anandtech reviewed it years ago. The real problem with it is no OSD, it's 100% software controlled so hope you be running Windows.mmrezaie - Sunday, March 20, 2016 - link
What is OSD?magreen - Sunday, March 20, 2016 - link
on screen displayAchaios - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
Quite happy with my Philips 32 inch FTV 32PFL5605H @1920X1080.I am not quite sure what the above posters are talking about and who decides where's the "cuftoff", but I'll be damned if I let some nerd decide on the internet what I am going to buy.
Death666Angel - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
They didn't try to personally offend you, so why the harsh reaction? If you are fine with your 32"/1080p monitor, enjoy it. That PPI in normal desktop monitor range would be quite horrendous for me, doing any kind of work on it. If you sit farther away, don't do a lot of work or have bad eye sight, I guess that could work though. If all the above is false, weird. :Dstephenbrooks - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
Viewing distance comes into the equation. If you have a deep desk and prefer your monitors at the back of it, large 1080p monitors can be just the ticket. I'm on a 24" 1080p with that setup here and actually had to scale this website up to 120%, probably 27" 1080p would be ideal for my desk.Refuge - Wednesday, March 23, 2016 - link
That is a TV, they are built very differently.So you can't really compare the pixel layout between the two when increasing sizes.
it is also why a 60inch 1080p monitor would probably cost more than two 65 inch 4k curved 3D tv's.
euskalzabe - Tuesday, March 29, 2016 - link
Heh, don't come to my house then, I use a 40" 1080p screen :)monstercameron - Friday, March 18, 2016 - link
need freesyncLazn_W - Friday, March 18, 2016 - link
only 1920x1080? boo!chrnochime - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
Yes everyone NEEDS 1440P on a 27" screen /sAlexvrb - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
16K or die! /sarcasmI'd be happy with an affordable 1080p 24" (my main monitor isn't exactly far away from my chair) Freesync monitor with an excellent gamut like this. The bigger issue is refresh rate. To me there's more to the experience than raw pixel count.
Samus - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
I agree. Just don't get the holdup with 144hz IPS panels. My TN gaming monitor makes me cry just trying to surf the web on it, it's just terrible.Valantar - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
Unfortunately, even if the gamut is good, this monitor has some serious issues (at least if a review I just read (unfortunately I can't find it right now, I'll look for it in the morning) is to be believed). Calibration in the default mode was good for Adobe RGB, but didn't allow for brightness controls(!!!), leaving the monitor stuck at 370 nits - only usable in brightly lit rooms, in other words. The Adobe RGB mode allowed for brightness controls, but had far worse calibration and a clear green tint. Luckily that was relatively easily corrected, but still... And besides, even a $300 monitor without DP? That's dipping pretty far into the cost cutting bin. And of course there's the lack of VESA mounts and tilt-only adjustable stand. Response times and refresh rates were excellent, though, best in class even. I guess this would be a perfect monitor for low budget gamers wanting colours to pop or home users looking to upgrade to something that comes close to their phone's screen.Valantar - Sunday, March 20, 2016 - link
The review was at Tom's Hardware: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/philips-276e6-...I'm skeptical of the low pixel density, but I see how some might not care. Having to choose between brightness controls and a clearly visible green tint (before calibration), though, that's a deal breaker for me.
Samus - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
1080p on a 27" screen comes out to 82ppi. That's a pretty bad pitch. At 1440p it's 110ppi. 30% denser. That's highly noticeable unless you are 6' away, and let's face it this is a computer monitor nobody is sitting 6 feet back.scholarly_salamander - Friday, March 18, 2016 - link
I thought quantum dot displays were supposed to give us near-OLED levels of contrast. I guess I must have misunderstood, because 1000:1 is fairly pedestrian. The extended colour gamut doesn't excite me too much.mkozakewich - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
They should be brighter, because less light is filtered away, but I suppose contrast wouldn't change much. Either that, or they're using cheaper LEDs because of the benefits of the quantum-dot panel.zodiacfml - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
It is probably near OLED levels of color saturation.It is brighter and at the same time, no. It is not bright because the technology is a filter itself. It is bright because the lost light in the "blue" frequencies has been converted to Red and Green.
saratoga4 - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
>I thought quantum dot displays were supposed to give us near-OLED levels of contrast.They don't change the contrast, they change the color gamut of the backlight. Ideally for wide color gamut and good saturation you'd want separate R, G, and B LEDs, but thats more costly and somewhat power inefficient. With QDs you can take a normal blue LED and then precisely shift some of its emission into the green or red as if you had separate colored diodes but without the cost.
Yuriman - Friday, March 18, 2016 - link
I think the aesthetics are hideous, but if I were in the market for a monitor right now, I'd probably buy it anyway.jabber - Friday, March 18, 2016 - link
Switch it into Adobe mode and the world looks like its on LSD. I'll stick with sRGB.mkozakewich - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
This is a desktop peripheral. It'll look great with programs and content that support (and need) AdobeRGB.jabber - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
All three of them.StevoLincolnite - Friday, March 18, 2016 - link
"Philips 276E6ADSS". The model name certainly rolls off the tongue.Why don't they make model names interesting?
Murloc - Sunday, March 20, 2016 - link
they make way too many versions with separate upgrade paths and new models sprinkled on the timeline to create names that make sense.Samsung televisions also have horrible naming conventions which also depend on the year of release.
zodiacfml - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
The PPI of this monitor is even worse than my 15" 1366x768 laptop. I do hope the Quantom Dot tech gets more popular and cheap enough for entry level laptop. My current laptop has almost no color and saturation, probably limited by it's blue LED backlight.nerd1 - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
Wide gamut display is mostly a pain unless you use proper color space.3ogdy - Saturday, March 19, 2016 - link
$300 for a 27" 1080p screen? For fruck's sake! How about $200 for a 32" 1024x768 one? Now THAT's something I would definitely buy. Are we ever going to move the hell on from 1080p? Hopefully companiessuch as Dell can keep up the good work and release smaller higher-res displays. The best combination I've seen so far is in the U2515H. 1440p on 25"nagi603 - Sunday, March 20, 2016 - link
So, when will they ship one with 1440p? 1080p on a 27" is quite bad for many of us.psychobriggsy - Monday, March 21, 2016 - link
I guess if you're on a very deep desk or otherwise sit far away from the monitor, the 1080p resolution is okay, but let's be honest, that's not going to be a crisp resolution for most.2560x1440 (I'd prefer 2560x1600 but that fight is lost) would make this monitor acceptable at 2 foot reading distance. If cost wasn't an issue ... a 4K resolution at 2x scaling would be really crisp, whilst retaining the 1080p scaling. 5K, like Apple use, would be slightly better.
medi03 - Monday, March 21, 2016 - link
329€ in DE, with availability from "in 4-5 days" to 'in 4-5 weeks"... =/StrangerGuy - Tuesday, March 22, 2016 - link
1:1000, 60Hz, even worse PPI than my old U2311H for a very questionable real utility of a wide gamut.Sorry, I'm nope-ing out of here.
Starscream--- - Saturday, April 9, 2016 - link
Casting error. Color accuracy is for PRO segment that prefers work space ratios like 16:10 or 3:2. While 16:9 / 1080p is mass consumer space that probably doesn't even know or care what color gamut is.