Dell UltraSharp 24 Ultra HD Monitor: The $1300 UP2414Q

Results: Brightness And Contrast

Uncalibrated

Before calibrating any panel, we measure zero- and 100-percent signals at both ends of the brightness control range. This shows us how contrast is affected at the extremes of a monitor's luminance capability. We do not increase the contrast control past the clipping point. While doing this would increase a monitor’s light output, the brightest signal levels would not be visible, resulting in crushed highlight detail. Our numbers show the maximum light level possible with no clipping of the signal.

Our comparison group includes the last six monitors reviewed at Tom’s Hardware, including Asus' PQ321Q and Dell’s UP3214Q Ultra HD screens. Before we move on, all of the luminance measurements are taken with Uniformity Compensation turned off, except where noted otherwise. When it’s turned on, the monitor’s dynamic range is reduced by about 16 percent, mainly due to a higher black level. We used the fixed Adobe RGB picture mode for these tests.

Despite their significantly different panel technologies, the UP2414Q and UP3214Q post nearly-identical max brightness numbers. This looks to us like a decision on Dell’s part to keep its products consistent across the same model line. A result of 326 cd/m2 is more than enough light output for any conceivable room environment or computing task.

Let’s see where that high backlight setting puts the black level.

Unfortunately, .4287 cd/m2 is fairly high. You’ll see as we go on that the UP2414Q’s contrast performance isn’t quite up to the levels posted by its larger brother.

We measure 762.5 to 1, which is an average contrast ratio result. There are plenty of screens on both sides of that level. While the image has reasonable depth and pop, the larger Asus and Dell monitors deliver a bit more dynamic range.

Somewhere around 50 cd/m2 is a practical minimum standard for screen brightness. Any lower and you risk eyestrain and fatigue. Some monitors, such as Dell's UP2414Q, measure under that level. We recorded a minimum white level of 38.9765 cd/m2 with the backlight turned all the way down. That's a bit too dim for practical use. Raising the brightness to six gets you 50 cd/m2.

The minimum black level, however, is pretty good.

When the black level is this low, you can’t tell that the monitor is even turned on; only our i1Pro knows the truth. If you turn up the backlight to six, the black level is a still-low .0652 cd/m2. Like the UP3214Q, the UP2414Q demonstrates very consistent contrast performance.

And here are the contrast values:

No matter where you set its backlight, the UP2414Q’s contrast falls between 760 and 780 to 1. That’s the kind of consistency we like to see in any monitor. Of course, more contrast is preferable. Dell's screen doesn’t score as high as many other less expensive displays. But maintaining the same dynamic range at all brightness levels is a sign of a well-engineered product. No matter what the viewing environment, you’ll always see the same picture.

After Calibration

Since we consider 200 cd/m2 to be an ideal point for peak output, we calibrate all of our test monitors to that value. In a room with some ambient light (like an office), this brightness level provides a sharp, punchy image with maximum detail and minimum eye fatigue. It's also the sweet spot for gamma and grayscale tracking, which we look at on the next page. In a dark room, many professionals prefer a 120 cd/m2 calibration. Realistically, there's little to no difference in the calibrated black level and contrast measurements, though.

Here is where the different backlight and pixel structure used in Dell's UP2414Q starts to exhibit a disadvantage. We’ve already established that this screen has lower native contrast than its big brother. Even after calibration, it doesn’t improve. And if you use the Uniformity Compensation feature, there is a hit to the black level.

Here are the final calibrated contrast numbers:

The calibrated contrast ratio is about the same as the uncalibrated one at 763.8 to 1. That puts it near the bottom in our comparison group, but right around the middle of all the displays we’ve tested in the last year. I'm additionally including a measurement showing the result of turning on Uniformity Compensation. It does improve screen uniformity by a measurable amount, though at a cost to contrast performance.

ANSI Contrast Ratio

Another important measure of contrast is ANSI. To perform this test, a checkerboard pattern of sixteen zero- and 100-percent squares is measured, giving us a more real-world result than on/off measurements because it tests a display’s ability to simultaneously maintain both low black and full white levels, factoring in screen uniformity as well. The average of the eight full-white measurements is divided by the average of the eight full-black measurements to arrive at the ANSI result.

The outcome lands close to the on/off number, at 710.4 to 1. This time, the reduction in contrast is only eight percent (compared to the 16-percent drop from the previous tests). Demonstrable consistency shows that high-quality components are used in the UP2414Q’s construction, particularly the grid polarizer. Consequently, there is minimal light leakage between the darkest and brightest areas of the image.

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
22 comments
    Your comment
  • This is a joke right? Dell making yet another mockery of the monitor market.

    Why oh why when you can get the latest 10-bit AH-IPS technology in the 2560 x 1600 30" Crossover Black Tune 30x for $700?
    -8
  • dweezled said:
    This is a joke right? Dell making yet another mockery of the monitor market. Why oh why when you can get the latest 10-bit AH-IPS technology in the 2560 x 1600 30" Crossover Black Tune 30x for $700?


    You obviously miss the point of this monitor. The whole point of a 24" 4K monitor is the pixel density. The fact that it's 8-bit and not 10-bit probably isn't going to bother a whole ton of people and if 4K and 10-bit is what you need than you'd be looking at the Dell Ultrasharp UP3214Q anyway. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ultrasharp-32-up3214q-review,3744-7.html
    4
  • Tom's should review Samsung's cheap 4k monitor instead of stuff like this.
    -8
  • I love the super indepth articles you guys do, but it would be nice if you also did more reviews about less expensive things, like cases. I mean, it's interesting to read about a $1k monitor but it would be more helpful to more people if you did a case roundup or a higher volume of reviews about them. You don't have to stop making monitor reviews or anything because it's certainly not hurting anyone, but it seems like there are more articles about expensive monitors that most people can't buy/don't have a use for in lieu of articles about more fundamental pieces of computer hardware.
    Just my two cents
    -5
  • $1300 for a simple panel is a joke, specially when "From our experience so far, these 4K monitors work well, but still have some maturing to do." Thank you for the straightforward, no nonsense review. I'll wait.
    -3
  • Ahh, 24" 4k monitors are a reality now. Antialiasing in games is soon to be a thing of the past. Which is relieving, because that makes the task on graphics cards a lot more manageable.
    0
  • (quote thing isn't working for me)
    "Ahh, 24" 4k monitors are a reality now. Antialiasing in games is soon to be a thing of the past. Which is relieving, because that makes the task on graphics cards a lot more manageable. "

    It actually makes it worse if not does nothing. 4K is the equivalent, almost, of 1080p using SSAAx4. MSAA is a lot cheaper and most games are resorting to FXAA or MLAA because it's incredibly cheap, works with any rendering method (Deferred rendering doesn't play nice with MSAA), and the quality is almost as good.
    -3
  • Quote:
    4K is the equivalent, almost, of 1080p using SSAAx4.


    And modern graphics cards can handle that kind of workload. So, since they're basically equivalent, it isn't a lot more to ask of cards to do 4k without any AA.
    1
  • LOL 24" yeh right for that price, make it 30 inches at 4K for that price and i'll bite.
    1
  • DOES IT SUCK YO' D***?
    ...
    I didn't think so... Not worth the money...
    -1
  • To S3amister: First of all I didn't miss the point of this article. I get monitor resolutions. The point is that 4k is the next gimmick made up by the big TV and monitor manufacturers as the "next big thing" to try to get suckers like you to buy into resolutions that the human eye can't even distinguish. You're going to tell me that you can tell a difference between WQHD and 4K? Nonsense. Maybe if you have a 60" screen but with a 24" screen? No way. Get real pal.
    -1
  • I lust for a 4k monitor in 24 inch, but it must be a 16:10. I currently use the Dell U2412M in vertical mode for word processing, searching eBay, a LOT of searching eBay, etc. I love its 16:10. I previously had a 16:9 and used it in vertical viewing, but it was too narrow. The first 4k 24 inch in 16:10, which pivots to vertical, I will buy in a heartbeat.
    1
  • http://www.benq.com/product/LCD/GL2023A very very cheap 20" led monitor 5ms response time ( not 8ms like this dell 24" ).i am buy 2 units for gaming . no lag or any problem. 7770 graphics card .
    0
  • I'm tired of the 4k Hype! I want mainstream affordable 1440p monitors!
    1
  • Quote:
    I'm tired of the 4k Hype! I want mainstream affordable 1440p monitors!


    Why limit yourself to that poor mans 2560 x 1600 res? After using a 30 inch for over 3 years im ready to jump to 4K and quarter of an inch sized icons on my display..More real estate.
    -3
  • Quote:
    I'm tired of the 4k Hype! I want mainstream affordable 1440p monitors!


    Why limit yourself to that poor mans 2560 x 1600 res? After using a 30 inch for over 3 years im ready to jump to 4K and quarter of an inch sized icons on my display..More real estate.
    -3
  • It probably will look like Iphones "Retina" display, I just like clear and crisp image on the monitors :)
    -1
  • I don't know what all the moaning is about reviewing a monitor that is $1K plus. For those that want cheaper monitors reviewed did you ever stop to think that a review like this will persuade people with the funds to buy one which in turn will make them cheaper. I for one would love to own a 4k monitor however I wont pay 1K for one so keep the reviews coming so we can get mass production up on these over the next year or two.
    2
  • The future will be full of details
    0
  • I understand that the whole point of this review is for 4k monitors. But since it was equally pointed out in the beginning of the review that this is squarely aimed at photographers and other imaging professionals, why not do a shootout with these Dells against some non 4k competition from NEC or Eizo for that matter. Now there is a review I would love to see.
    0