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.

This is an average out-of-box result. The Delta E error becomes visible at 40 percent brightness and increases to a maximum of 5.97. The overall tint is slightly green, which is a more visible error than blue or red. If you don’t calibrate, you can improve on this by simply setting the Color Temp preset to User rather than the default of 6500K.
The calibrated result is much better.

All we did was set Color Temp to User and reduce blue and green by one click each. This is as close to perfection as it gets. Of the monitors we tested this year, only ViewSonic's VP2770-LED posted a better average Delta E value. We especially enjoyed the 60 percent brightness level, which has an error of only .15!
Let’s bring our comparison group back into the mix.

A stock error of 3.27 Delta E is barely visible to the eye. It’s also below many other screens. If you set Color Temp to User and leave the RGB sliders alone, the error drops to 1.56.
The calibrated result is nothing short of excellent.

Only one other screen we’ve seen tests better than the PXL2790MW, and that was ViewSonic’s VP2770-LED, which measures .60 Delta E for calibrated grayscale. A difference of .07 is pretty much a wash, and you won’t see a difference between the two.
Gamma Response
Gamma is the measurement of luminance levels at every step in the brightness range from 0 to 100 percent. It's 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. Meanwhile, 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.

This is an ideal gamma result. To achieve it, we set the gamma to 2.4, which is the highest available option. If you leave it at 2.2, the tracking is equally good, but the average value is closer to 2.0, making the image a little flat-looking. Because the PXL2790MW’s gamma is so accurate, it reduces the visible effects of its average contrast results.
Here’s our test group again for the gamma comparisons.

This is the flattest gamma tracking we’ve measured, aside from Samsung’s S27B970D (not on the chart), which displays the same .10 variation. Gamma this good means you’ll see maximum detail and maximum contrast no matter what the content. The PXL2790MW tracks the incoming signal perfectly at all brightness levels.
We calculate gamma deviation by simply expressing the difference from 2.2 as a percentage.

The Planar’s 1.36 percent variation from the 2.2 gamma standard represents a maximum brightness error of only 2.58 cd/m2. The values range from a low of 2.12 to a high of 2.22.
The PXL2790MW aces our grayscale and gamma tests, and equals the best displays we’ve seen this year. Luckily, its color performance is equally impressive. Let’s take a look.
- 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!