Dell P2714T 27-Inch Touchscreen Monitor, Reviewed

Results: Pixel Response And Input Lag

To perform these tests, we use a high-speed camera that shoots at 1000 frames per second. Analyzing the video frame-by-frame allows us to observe the exact time it takes to go from a zero-percent signal to a 100% white field.

The pattern generator is placed at the base of the monitor so our camera can capture the precise moment its front-panel LED lights up, indicating that a video signal is being received by the monitor. With this camera placement, we can easily see how long it takes to fully display a pattern after pressing the button on the generator’s remote. This testing methodology allows for accurate and repeatable results when comparing panels.

Here’s a shot of our test setup. Click on the photo to enlarge.Here’s a shot of our test setup. Click on the photo to enlarge.

The brighter section of the camera’s screen is what actually appears in the video. You can see the lights of the pattern generator in the bottom of the viewfinder. We flash the pattern on and off five times and average the results.

Here’s the screen draw result.

Aside from ViewSonic’s VP2770-LED, this is the snappiest IPS screen we’ve ever tested. Of course, Asus' VG248Q is another league altogether. This will have a positive impact on perceived motion blur in fast-moving images.

Here are the lag results.

Input lag is quite low as well. IPS isn’t known for great performance in this area, but Dell has a pretty responsive panel on its hands nonetheless. In fact, only five other screens tested faster in 2013. While a 1920x1080 display selling for $700 probably won't be a gamer's first choice, the P2714T acquits itself well in fast-paced shooters for all but the super-elite player.

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
24 comments
    Your comment
  • killerclick
    Lol touchscreens on the desktop, it was a crappy idea 2 years ago and it's a crappy idea now.
    5
  • damianrobertjones
    @killerclick: That, of course, is YOUR opinion. I'd rather have the option than not have the option. Maybe we should just stop providing options... ."Having to lift your hand from the keyboard to reach out and touch your monitor definitely takes more time."So does moving your hand from the mouse back to the keyboard. As it stands I do actually prefer having touch.
    -2
  • damianrobertjones
    @killerclick: That, of course, is YOUR opinion. I'd rather have the option than not have the option. Maybe we should just stop providing options... ."Having to lift your hand from the keyboard to reach out and touch your monitor definitely takes more time."So does moving your hand from the mouse back to the keyboard. As it stands I do actually prefer having touch.
    -6
  • vaughn2k
    good to have this on kiosk, than have it used by designers like me.. ;)
    1
  • therogerwilco
    Don't talk to me about desktop monitors unless they have better resolutions than 1600p.
    1
  • InvalidError
    @damian: having options may be nice but touch-screen on the desktop for everyday computing and productivity with touch as the primary input sounds like a horrible ergonomic disaster: to use a large touch screen, you need to bring it close to your waist to avoid excessive strain on your arms but putting the display there means having to hold your head at ridiculous angles to look at the screen which is going to strain your neck.So, touch on a large screen only makes sense for occasional/intermittent use.
    1
  • killerclick
    Anonymous said:
    @killerclick: That, of course, is YOUR opinion. I'd rather have the option than not have the option. Maybe we should just stop providing options...


    I said it's a crappy idea that's not going to catch on, and I'd prefer not to have to pay extra for it or sacrifice other aspects of the display, like resolution in this case. That said, the companies can put their R&D and marketing $ wherever they want, not my money, but it's still dumb.
    1
  • Patrick Tobin
    After having used touch extensively on desktop, laptop and tablet form factors I have to say it works really well for a desktop system for quick hits and the such and getting in and out of stuff quickly in Windows 8, on a laptop it makes very little sense though. I would rather have it than not, but not at 1920x1080.
    1
  • hannibal
    The childrens that are now using iDevices and similar can not live with traditional display if there are these in the market. In the long run non touchable monitors are gonna die out. Sooner or later there are more of those touch orientated customer than we old fossilised normal screen users... Eventually we die out and so will normal monitors. For me touch based pad with screen would be ideal for controlling win8 in my desktop. It would be on the table just like my mouse, so I don't have ro rise my hand to do something...In few years there will be a lot of 4K monitors with touch interface, because big audience have to have them...
    1
  • Patrick Tobin
    After having used touch extensively on desktop, laptop and tablet form factors I have to say it works really well for a desktop system for quick hits and the such and getting in and out of stuff quickly in Windows 8, on a laptop it makes very little sense though. I would rather have it than not, but not at 1920x1080.
    -1
  • InvalidError
    Anonymous said:
    It would be on the tabel just like my mouse, so I don't have ro rise my hand to do something...

    So instead of injuring your arms from repetitive stress holding them up in front to touch the screen, you are going to get RSI, cramps or other problems in your neck for staring at a steeper down-angle for too many hours a day... or get both problems, albeit over a longer term than either extreme, if you put the touch-screen somewhere in-between.

    This is going to be 'fun' 10-20 years down the road. (As in lawsuits due to not being warned by device manufacturers that extended use of their device in a typical setup may lead to injuries.)
    1
  • red77star
    What a bunch crap they are releasing now days just to justify existence of Windows 8 which clearly is not good enough for anything. Who needs this big touch screen...nobody.
    1
  • Stevemeister
    Just what we need - kids with sticky fingers smudging up the screen
    1
  • InvalidError
    Anonymous said:
    Just what we need - kids with sticky fingers smudging up the screen

    On the plus side, as long as it is only the glass cover getting dirty, it is much easier to clean than a keyboard or mouse.
    2
  • rantoc
    27" Touchscreen for desktops with a crappy 1080p resolution... no thx! Heck making a picture of Lego would provide smaller "pixels" =P
    2
  • rantoc
    Quote:
    The childrens that are now using iDevices and similar can not live with traditional display if there are these in the market. In the long run non touchable monitors are gonna die out. Sooner or later there are more of those touch orientated customer than we old fossilised normal screen users... Eventually we die out and so wll normal monitors.For me touch based pad with screen would be ideal for controlling win8 with my desctop. It would be on the tabel just like my mouse, so I don't have ro rise my hand to do something...In few years there will be a lot of 4K monitors with touch interface, because bid audience have to have them...
    Yeah and there will be a line to the clinic with people who have shoulder problems due to the extra stress lifting an entire arm several hrs a day rather than just a hand, i doubt the touchscreens in big format will take off without the company's making them getting sued by people who will have their life destroyed due to a poor ergonomic design!
    1
  • Anonymous
    Is this the Dell "NSA edition"? WOW, this thing will be as popular as the OS it comes with.
    0
  • game junky
    Though I don't think everyone desires a touch-screen desktop monitor, I can see good applications for a touch screen - for companies using computer-based payroll platforms, a flat-panel all-in-one makes for a great kiosk. I saw one being used as a catalog browsing solution at a retailer as well and that made a lot of sense to me.Not everyone wants one, but there are places where these make sense
    0
  • InvalidError
    Anonymous said:
    a flat-panel all-in-one makes for a great kiosk.

    Kiosks is a nice use of touch since it is pretty easy to "secure" those by simply omitting unwanted access in the UI design with the rest of the system physically locked out - touch-based kiosks have been around for a long time: the first time I have seen a touch-based terminal was in a video rental store about 15 years ago and the menu was in good old 80x25 text mode.

    Industrial touch applications are nice too since you can seal the display on the "dirty" hot side of the application and lock the rest on the "clean" cooled weatherproof side.

    For everyday computing, touch may also have its uses such as when demonstrating stuff: instead of demonstrating software or page layouts by pointing things out on the screen with fingers and then using a keyboard/mouse to activate the object or navigate pages, clickable things can be demonstrated on-screen - you already have your fingers in there to point things out anyway.
    1
  • WyomingKnott
    One of the most awesomely useful devices I ever saw was a pen-input version of this. It was used for teaching in a software testing class. It had the slides on it, and the instructor could annotate the slides in real-time and, if she wished, save the annotations for the next class. It was, of course, repeated on a projector.It inspired my lifelong desire (well, all my life since them) for the ultimate smartboard. Full-color e-paper, markers, erasers, and the ability to save the screen to a thumb drive and bring the same one (or a copy) up later, halfway across the country, and continue working on it. I've seen school smartboards, but the closest that I've seen to my perfect device requires a spare room next to the conference room for the rear-projector. A front projector would have peoples' shadows.
    1