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 for this review is the last six displays that Tom's Hardware reviewed.

It seems like every new monitor we receive is brighter than the last. When you turn the PXL2790MW’s brightness control to 100, you are rewarded with over 445 cd/m2 of luminance. That's so bright in our test environment as to border on painful. Even with a lot of ambient light, fatigue quickly sets in if you try to use the display dialed all the way up.
It also has a negative impact on the maximum black level.

Considering the extreme output level, .3816 cd/m2 isn’t a bad result, though. If you max out brightness like this, blacks look grayer, even if the overall contrast is decent.
Here’s the final contrast result.

This is decent on/off contrast for such a bright display. One thing that could make the PXL2790MW even more versatile is separate backlight and brightness controls. That way, we could improve contrast by turning down the backlight, but leave the brightness at a level that preserves detail. The monitor has plenty of dynamic range; it’s just concentrated at a brightness level that is too high.
For the next group of measurements, we turn down the brightness control to its minimum setting and leave the contrast unchanged. The PXL2790MW measures 174.7655 cd/m2, which is way above our minimum standard of 50 cd/m2. Below that, you risk fatigue and eyestrain. However, the monitor is too bright for a completely dark room. To reinforce our above comment about dynamic range, there is plenty available. It's just at a higher brightness level than necessary. A backlight control would allow the user to pull that down while retaining (or even improving) the display’s already solid contrast.

A .1480 cd/m2 measurement is respectable, but it could be so much lower if the overall brightness level weren’t so high. We do experience a quality black level, though. Dark areas in movies and games look nice and detailed, mainly due to the PXL2790MW’s excellent gamma performance.
We’ll wrap up this section with the minimum contrast comparison.

The minimum contrast number is only slightly higher than the maximum one, which shows consistency. While our result is very good, there is potential for even better contrast with the addition of a backlight adjustment, or a brightness control with greater range.
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'll look at on the next page.
We start with the calibrated black level. This can sometimes rise a bit from the monitor’s default state. We consider the tradeoff in contrast well worth the gain in color accuracy.

After calibration, the PXL2790MW’s black level is only a little higher than its minimum number, mainly because of the high minimum white level value. With a backlight control, it would be possible to lower the peak white enough to generate much better blacks.
Here are the final calibrated contrast numbers.

While 899.3 to 1 contrast won’t break any records, it still represents a solid performance. Thanks to its unequaled clarity and nearly perfect gamma, the PXL2790MW’s perceived contrast is a good deal higher than the measurements would indicate.
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. Our benchmark is somewhat more real-world than on/off measurements because it tests a display’s ability to simultaneously maintain both low black and full white levels, and factors in screen uniformity. 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.

Although a result of 893.2:1 is pretty good, it could have been much better had there not been hotspots on the left side of the screen. The black squares there are visibly brighter than the rest. The PXL2790MW does suffer from a black uniformity issue, at least in the sample we tested. Had our measurements been a little more consistent, the ANSI contrast would easily have topped 1000:1.
- Planar PXL2790MW: Clarity, Performance, And Accuracy In QHD
- Packaging, Physical Layout, And Accessories
- OSD Setup And Calibration
- Measurement And Calibration Methodology: How We Test
- Results: Brightness And Contrast
- Results: Grayscale Tracking And Gamma Response
- Results: Color Gamut And Performance
- Results: Viewing Angle And Uniformity
- Results: Pixel Response And Input Lag
- Planar's PXL2790MW Gets Top Marks For Clarity And Performance
What do you seriously think that another 27" 2560x1440 60Hz monitor that is already in class with a dozen other models identical to it, deserves an award?
As for those overlord monitors, I wasn't impressed by them, mostly because I had it sitting next to a lightboost 2 120hz TN panel. Yes, the overclocked IPS panel has better colour (though that's largely negated by using it on minimal brightness in a dark room, like we've already been talking about), and it's certainly pretty and gives a lot of screen real estate... but it can't compare to a real 120Hz monitor, especially not one with a strobing backlight.
Now this sort of monitor clarity plus an OS that supports decent enlarged fonts would be really nice. Apps that scale well over a range of sizes would be even nicer. A 1000 pixel wide frame may be good for some people no matter how small it is; others of us would like at least a certain number of inches. Support all of us.
(Yes, I know that this isn't the monitor's fault. It's a poor convention in many parts of the software industry.)
QHD is not ready for gaming prime time yet, sorry folks.
Cheers!
As for those overlord monitors, I wasn't impressed by them, mostly because I had it sitting next to a lightboost 2 120hz TN panel. Yes, the overclocked IPS panel has better colour (though that's largely negated by using it on minimal brightness in a dark room, like we've already been talking about), and it's certainly pretty and gives a lot of screen real estate... but it can't compare to a real 120Hz monitor, especially not one with a strobing backlight.
When you say a real 120Hz - I don't get that. I have both 248s and Tempests and I prefer the Tempest all day every day. Monitors are clearly very subjective. Some people complain about strobing, PWm, etc. but it doesn't affect me at all. I prefer an IPS panel over a TN panel. The Tempest is a real 120hz monitor once OC'd so your comment makes little sense to me. Gaming on an IPS 1440 is much preferred and the added Hz makes the overlord the best gaming display for me.
QHD is not ready for gaming prime time yet, sorry folks.
Cheers!
Herpa Durp? QHD has been ready for "gaming prime time" for years now. Fortunately, panels are coming down in price and adoption is increasing as a result.
Your argument would be totally valid for 4K displays right now...excessively expensive, complicated input requirements, killer HW requirements. Very much a niche market.
1440p is **like** totally the new 1080p. Psshhya
It's not a real 120hz display i.e. designed for it. It has significantly more latency, and serious issues with motion blur... where a monitor designed for high refresh rates has virtually no input lag, and (if using lightboost technology set up to strobe), zero motion blur. An overclocked ips panel is still better than a non-overclocked ips panel, but I'll take a TN panel any day. The very high end TN panels look nearly as good as lower-end IPS panels, yet perform way better... and IPS panels don't handle being set to low brightness very well. I agree that IPS is superior for certain things; most notably tasks that require color accuracy. But for a gaming setup, I disagree. (Though a 1440p monitor, you're right, is a wonderful thing.)
That... is absolutely not true. Have you set your monitor up with lightboost, if you aren't using it? Have you gone into windows and your video drivers and told them to run the monitor at 120hz? Most of the time, when people say they can't see the difference between 120hz and 60hz, it's because they didn't set it up and never actually saw 120hz.
If you have it set up right, there is a VERY noticeable difference between 120hz and 60hz. Yes, 1440p is nice too, but you can't just say that one is worthless and the other isn't; I personally bought and returned a VERY nice iiyama recently, because even though it was basically the best on the market, there were notable issues with it while gaming - if there were a 1440p TN panel that didn't have all the issues that IPS panels have (yes, I know TN panels have issues of their own, but those are unimportant for gaming), then I would buy it on day one, and use it for MMOs and, say, racing games, for which a 120Hz monitor isn't as helpful, but which you still want a decent response and minimal ghosting.
For me, this is just another overpriced piece of equipment. Next.
Your argument would be totally valid for 4K displays right now...excessively expensive, complicated input requirements, killer HW requirements. Very much a niche market.
1440p is **like** totally the new 1080p. Psshhya
Well, I know there have been QHD monitors for quite some time, but they're still expensive as hell and don't offer a better "gaming experience" IMO to justify them over FHD@120/144Hz. Until QHD comes in 120/144 Hz, they won't be on my "must have" list at all. Specially with the crappy as hell colors.
Cheers!
Happy Thanks Giving!