NEC V801 Review: Benchmarking A Massive 80-Inch Monitor

Results: Grayscale Tracking And Gamma Response

The majority of monitors, especially newer models, display excellent grayscale tracking (even at stock settings). It’s important that the color of white be consistently neutral at all light levels from darkest to brightest. Grayscale performance impacts color accuracy with regard to the secondary colors (cyan, magenta, and yellow). Since computer monitors typically have no color or tint adjustment, accurate grayscale is key.

Out of the box, the V801 is set to a color temperature of 10,000 K. While this is tolerable in a space lit by sunlight, there's plenty of output available to support a proper 6500 K white point. If you plan to use the V801 as an HDTV, you definitely want to calibrate it. Otherwise, the image will have a very obvious blue tint, no matter the light level.

Fortunately, you can calibrate this panel to any standard you wish.

Dropping the color temp slider to 6500K and adjusting the RGB controls produces an excellent grayscale result with flat tracking from bottom to top. Obviously the lack of low range controls is not a problem. Delta E errors range from a high of 2.0 at 70 percent to a low of .16 at 90 percent.

An out of box grayscale error of 7.71 Delta E is pretty high. But it's done intentionally. There are situations where you need the extra perceived brightness of a cool white point. The Pioneer’s number is even higher, reflecting the habit of television designers to make their sets stand out in big box store showrooms. The important thing is that the potential for improvement exists.

The V801 calibrates to a pretty solid average error of only 1.23 Delta E. With the highest error being 2.0, there are no visible issues at any brightness level. If you are setting up a V801 and you don’t have a colorimeter, set the color temp slider to 6500K. This will get you pretty close to the D65 standard.

Gamma Response

Gamma is the measurement of luminance levels at every step in the brightness range from 0 to 100 percent. This is important because poor gamma can either crush detail at various points or wash it out, making the entire picture appear flat and dull. Correct gamma produces a more three-dimensional image, with a greater sense of depth and realism. Incorrect gamma can negatively affect image quality, even in monitors with high contrast ratios.

In the gamma charts below, the yellow line represents 2.2, which is the most widely accepted standard for television, film, and computer graphics production. The closer the white measurement trace comes to 2.2, the better.

The V801’s gamma chart is pretty much flawless. It’s great to see that when you set the preset to 2.2 it actually measures 2.2! The default setting is 2.4 and the image doesn’t really suffer in quality at that number, but it just won’t quite match the content’s gamma setting.

Here’s our test group again for the gamma comparisons.

At a total variation of .12, the V801 is in elite company. It’s almost imperceptibly behind Pioneer's plasma screen and the Planar monitor. Only our meter can tell the difference. You’re looking at tiny degrees of perfection.

We calculate gamma deviation by simply expressing the difference from 2.2 as a percentage.

A .45 percent deviation is also near-perfect. The values range from a low of 2.14 to a high of 2.27. This means the brightness errors are 2 cd/m2 at most. It just doesn’t get any better!

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
33 comments
    Your comment
    Top Comments
  • Someone Somewhere
    Yeah, 1920x1080... those pixels are 0.92mm square. That's pretty easy to see with the naked eye; far bigger than a full stop.

    27.5ppi... *shudders*.

    EDIT:
    Quote:
    the V801’s size is better expressed in feet: 227.6 (69.37 square meters for the rest of the world)


    Ummm... 70 square meters is pretty big. That's about half of the average house. I think you'll find it's ~1.76 m² or 19 ft².
    14
  • Other Comments
  • patrick47018
    Why would you want an 80" monitor that is only 1080P?
    8
  • Someone Somewhere
    Yeah, 1920x1080... those pixels are 0.92mm square. That's pretty easy to see with the naked eye; far bigger than a full stop.

    27.5ppi... *shudders*.

    EDIT:
    Quote:
    the V801’s size is better expressed in feet: 227.6 (69.37 square meters for the rest of the world)


    Ummm... 70 square meters is pretty big. That's about half of the average house. I think you'll find it's ~1.76 m² or 19 ft².
    14
  • patrick47018
    On the other had I wouldn't mind having that Pioneer "God" TV
    0
  • huilun02
    Way to make a home cinema system with an average computer.
    -1
  • 16bit
    I wouldn't get such a big monitor/hdtv unless it has a higher than 1080p resolution.
    6
  • tanjo
    Thank you for buying this excessively massive monitor to save the environment.
    -7
  • cangelini
    @Someone: Thanks--missed the calculation error during my edit. Should be fixed now.
    2
  • virtualban
    For that size I clicked the article in hopes that maybe it was some 8K monitor. Stopped reading after 1080p
    6
  • icemunk
    A wee bit pricey. I'll stick to my six 40" monitors
    0
  • baddad
    I've had a Mits 82" DLP since 2011 I paid $1900.00, that is the heart of my media center, so $9400 for just a monitor is a bit much.
    1
  • baddad
    I've had a Mits 82" DLP since 2011 I paid $1900.00, that is the heart of my media center, so $9400 for just a monitor is a bit much.
    -2
  • siliconvideo
    Be careful with current 4k screens, all of them for 2 reasons.

    1) There is no 4K content available from anywhere. The movie studios are pushing to requiring HDCP 2.2 compliant 4k screens before they will release content and all current 4k are not HDCP 2.2 compliant, only HDCP 1.4.

    2) Current HDMI specifications only allow for 4k@30 transport which is sufficient for movies, however the native glass in these devices generally do 4k@60 which means the screens are doing some format conversion. True 4k@60 requires HDMI 2.0 which has only just been released and no chips support yet. So these screens are generally not good for video games either
    9
  • siliconvideo
    Be careful with current 4k screens, all of them for 2 reasons.

    1) There is no 4K content available from anywhere. The movie studios are pushing to requiring HDCP 2.2 compliant 4k screens before they will release content and all current 4k are not HDCP 2.2 compliant, only HDCP 1.4.

    2) Current HDMI specifications only allow for 4k@30 transport which is sufficient for movies, however the native glass in these devices generally do 4k@60 which means the screens are doing some format conversion. True 4k@60 requires HDMI 2.0 which has only just been released and no chips support yet. So these screens are generally not good for video games either
    -3
  • chumly
    Show me the idiot that spends $10k on a 1080p 80" panel. I bet you can see every single pixel with your naked eye from 6 feet.. What a stupid stupid stupid idea.
    4
  • photonboy
    LG has a 4K HDTV for $7000 that is 65". Not quite as big but a much better choice. You can also move CLOSER anyway. Of course content is still an issue.
    3
  • bystander
    I'm not sure any of you read the first paragraph:
    Quote:
    This 80-inch LED/LCD screen is a commercial-grade model that can be used for just about anything requiring a large display. You would most likely see the V801 in an airport, for example, functioning as a dynamic message board or showing news feeds, for example. Obviously nobody's going to set this beast up on their desktop.


    This is obviously not meant for personal use. This is not meant to be viewed from up close.
    3
  • tential
    I love everyone commenting on "You can see EVERY pixel OMG OMG OMG!" yet you've never owned a large display probably.
    I've seen 80 inch TVs in person and these fears are just pathetically sad. I own a 70 inch HDTV as my primary "monitor" and I never go "I NEED 4k!!!!!!"
    Why would I even NEED 4K at the moment? HDMI doesn't support it yet, and there is ZERO 4K content. If for gaming, the gaming rig necessary to power such a thing is WAY too expensive, and new cards will scale better with resolution than past cards.

    People need to stop commenting (mainly people like chumly), when you've never used such a product before.

    My biggest knock is price. If I can get an HDTV for 1/10 the price on some of these black friday/christmas sales, it really makes no sense to get this. I can get that 70-80 inch HDTV for 700-1000 dollars, then pocket the 6k-7k extra and wait for the 4K versions to come out later. Maybe they'll even have OLED 4K by then.
    But that being said, this monitor did compete and beat MOST displays in MANY specs. It's a GREAT monitor. But I just think that if I'm going to invest 8k into a tech, it shouldn't be at the end of its lifestyle. I hope they put this type of effort/quality where it competes/beats many HDTVs out on the market onto their 4K model when it is ready.

    A monitor this big needs to be reviewed also as an "HDTV" where Movies/TV is watched on it and since that was omitted, I think this is pretty much not too useful to most people who would want a display this big.

    I feel like a lot of people commenting didn't read though, and simply posted.
    1
  • patrick47018
    Anonymous said:
    I love everyone commenting on "You can see EVERY pixel OMG OMG OMG!" yet you've never owned a large display probably.
    I've seen 80 inch TVs in person and these fears are just pathetically sad. I own a 70 inch HDTV as my primary "monitor" and I never go "I NEED 4k!!!!!!"
    Why would I even NEED 4K at the moment? HDMI doesn't support it yet, and there is ZERO 4K content. If for gaming, the gaming rig necessary to power such a thing is WAY too expensive, and new cards will scale better with resolution than past cards.

    People need to stop commenting (mainly people like chumly), when you've never used such a product before.

    My biggest knock is price. If I can get an HDTV for 1/10 the price on some of these black friday/christmas sales, it really makes no sense to get this. I can get that 70-80 inch HDTV for 700-1000 dollars, then pocket the 6k-7k extra and wait for the 4K versions to come out later. Maybe they'll even have OLED 4K by then.
    But that being said, this monitor did compete and beat MOST displays in MANY specs. It's a GREAT monitor. But I just think that if I'm going to invest 8k into a tech, it shouldn't be at the end of its lifestyle. I hope they put this type of effort/quality where it competes/beats many HDTVs out on the market onto their 4K model when it is ready.

    A monitor this big needs to be reviewed also as an "HDTV" where Movies/TV is watched on it and since that was omitted, I think this is pretty much not too useful to most people who would want a display this big.

    I feel like a lot of people commenting didn't read though, and simply posted.


    We haven't owned 1080P TV's that large for the negative reasons we are talking about, my grandpa owns a 65" and it looks fine if you sit way back but anywhere near it very blurred and distorted due to lack of pixel density
    1
  • vmem
    "You would most likely see the V801 in an airport, for example, functioning as a dynamic message board or showing news feeds"

    if my airport is buying $10,000 monitors to show me which gate to go to... I'd rather have a discount on my air fare pls...

    if someone thinks they need a $10,000 monitor to show TEXT on a black background... well, I odn't know what to say
    3
  • vmem
    Anonymous said:
    I love everyone commenting on "You can see EVERY pixel OMG OMG OMG!" yet you've never owned a large display probably.
    I've seen 80 inch TVs in person and these fears are just pathetically sad. I own a 70 inch HDTV as my primary "monitor" and I never go "I NEED 4k!!!!!!"
    Why would I even NEED 4K at the moment? HDMI doesn't support it yet, and there is ZERO 4K content. If for gaming, the gaming rig necessary to power such a thing is WAY too expensive, and new cards will scale better with resolution than past cards.

    People need to stop commenting (mainly people like chumly), when you've never used such a product before.

    My biggest knock is price. If I can get an HDTV for 1/10 the price on some of these black friday/christmas sales, it really makes no sense to get this. I can get that 70-80 inch HDTV for 700-1000 dollars, then pocket the 6k-7k extra and wait for the 4K versions to come out later. Maybe they'll even have OLED 4K by then.
    But that being said, this monitor did compete and beat MOST displays in MANY specs. It's a GREAT monitor. But I just think that if I'm going to invest 8k into a tech, it shouldn't be at the end of its lifestyle. I hope they put this type of effort/quality where it competes/beats many HDTVs out on the market onto their 4K model when it is ready.

    A monitor this big needs to be reviewed also as an "HDTV" where Movies/TV is watched on it and since that was omitted, I think this is pretty much not too useful to most people who would want a display this big.

    I feel like a lot of people commenting didn't read though, and simply posted.


    I love how you go into the cost benefit analysis of the whole 4K vs 1080p and the practicality of it... while ignoring the fact that this thing costs $9,400... that's nearly 10 friggin grand. it's sturdy and built to last... now I'd expect there to be 4K content 5 years down the road from now...
    0