Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Results: Pixel Response And Input Lag

Dell UltraSharp 32 Ultra HD Monitor Review: UP3214Q At $3500
By

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.

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.

A 25-millisecond result is just what we’d expect from an IPS screen. Even though IGZO technology has the potential to improve on this aspect of performance, we believe the display’s electronics are the limiting factor. Moving almost 8.3 million pixels requires a lot of bandwidth and it’s going to take time for all the different components to catch up.

Here are the lag results.

If high-speed gaming is your primary reason for buying a 4K screen, Asus' PQ321Q is the better choice right now. For those with super-fast reaction times, you would be better served by a TN-based display equipped with G-Sync, or some other display with a 120 or 144 Hz refresh. Asus and Dell are marketing these as professional-, rather than enthusiast-oriented products. Dell takes that a step further with its selectable color gamuts and precise accuracy. As we’ve stated before, 4K gaming requires two things right now: big compromises and a pile of cash.

Display all 42 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 10 Hide
    0217422356 , March 7, 2014 3:11 AM
    It's so expensive that I could buy more than twenty 1080p monitors.
  • 10 Hide
    ubercake , March 7, 2014 3:50 AM
    What I always find entertaining is how these monitor manufacturers will only back their $500+ (in this case $2000+) products for a maximum of 3 years, but my $250 power supply has a 7-year warranty and my $200 SSD has a 5-year warranty.
Other Comments
  • 10 Hide
    0217422356 , March 7, 2014 3:11 AM
    It's so expensive that I could buy more than twenty 1080p monitors.
  • -6 Hide
    0217422356 , March 7, 2014 3:14 AM
    It's so expensive that I could buy more than twenty 1080p monitors.
  • 0 Hide
    0217422356 , March 7, 2014 3:24 AM
    I wish in 3 years the price of 4k monitors would come to $300.
  • 10 Hide
    ubercake , March 7, 2014 3:50 AM
    What I always find entertaining is how these monitor manufacturers will only back their $500+ (in this case $2000+) products for a maximum of 3 years, but my $250 power supply has a 7-year warranty and my $200 SSD has a 5-year warranty.
  • -3 Hide
    panzerknacker , March 7, 2014 5:07 AM
    Unacceptible input lag, display not suitable for gaming.
  • 4 Hide
    s3anister , March 7, 2014 5:41 AM
    Quote:
    It's so expensive that I could buy more than twenty 1080p monitors.

    Yes, but you miss the point.
    Quote:
    I wish in 3 years the price of 4k monitors would come to $300.

    This is a reasonable expectation, with economies of scale the average consumer will eventually be able to buy a 4K display for $300-$500 USD.
    Quote:
    What I always find entertaining is how these monitor manufacturers will only back their $500+ (in this case $2000+) products for a maximum of 3 years, but my $250 power supply has a 7-year warranty and my $200 SSD has a 5-year warranty.

    Agreed. I've owned a few Dell Ultrasharp monitors and have always been surprised at the short length of warranty compared to what I get from other premium components. Sadly the entire display industry is like this in terms of warranty coverage.
    Quote:
    Unacceptible input lag, display not suitable for gaming.

    You also miss the point. I assume you didn't even read the article.

    Anyway, great article. I was hoping TH would get around do doing a proper review of this monitor as I'm expecting it to be the benchmark for future 4K panels.
  • 1 Hide
    tttttc , March 7, 2014 9:15 AM
    "The company also introduced a budget-oriented 28-inch model as well, the P2815Q. Gamers might favor it more, since it's a $700 screen with a faster-responding TN panel."P2815Q has only a refresh rate of 30Hz... gamers might not favor it more...
  • 0 Hide
    ceberle , March 7, 2014 10:29 AM
    Quote:
    "The company also introduced a budget-oriented 28-inch model as well, the P2815Q. Gamers might favor it more, since it's a $700 screen with a faster-responding TN panel."P2815Q has only a refresh rate of 30Hz... gamers might not favor it more...


    We hope to test the P2815Q very soon. In the meantime, we have the UP2414Q in the lab now. This is a 24-inch IPS screen for around $1200.

    -Christian-
  • 1 Hide
    Tanquen , March 7, 2014 10:59 AM
    Why is the bezel so F-ing big? When are desktop monitors (that weight less than a TV and people actually put two or more next to each other) going to have slim or nonexistent bezels?

    $3500 16:9?????? Good grief!
  • 0 Hide
    burmese_dude , March 7, 2014 11:12 AM
    "There’s no question that 4K is here."Good. Cuz I was questioning before I read that. Now I won't question anymore.
  • -2 Hide
    bak0n , March 7, 2014 1:06 PM
    Or you can go buy a 4k Samsung TV that's 55" for the same price and get a TV tuner and a bigger screen with it.
  • 1 Hide
    soldier44 , March 7, 2014 1:43 PM
    You get what you pay for people. Ive been gaming on a 30 inch 2506 x 1600 display for over 3 years now paid $1200 and been worth every cent. Will wait till next year to see more brands come out and prices drop to a better level like under $1500.
  • 0 Hide
    ahnilated , March 7, 2014 1:52 PM
    Hah! Look at the reviews on Newegg. This monitor has 2 stars and from what I read they have some serious issues with this thing.
  • 1 Hide
    milkod2001 , March 7, 2014 2:02 PM
    very expensive screen that's for sure. it'll take at least 3 years till price will drop into $1000. Even for $1000 it'll be unreachable for most users.I'd rather see SAMSUNG, DELL, LG pushing 27'' 1440p monitors into mainstream with price something like $300-350. At the moment for that price one can only get poxy Korean screens. I'm sure this would make more sales than 4k $3500 madness.
  • 2 Hide
    Bondfc11 , March 7, 2014 2:13 PM
    First this isn't a true 4K panel although everyone seems to accept 3 different resolution numbers and call them all 4K. Silly. Second, 4K is not here. It is being pushed on consumers by companies still pissed we didn't all drink the 3D Koolaid and rush out and by those crappy sets and monitors. Third, there are some great 1440 1600 options out there that rock (Overlord IPS, ASUS although it is not a great panel - TN - which I hate, etc.) 4K is not going to be a realistic investment for MOST gamers in 2014 due to the tech being way too pricey. One day, sure, but definitely not this year.
  • 0 Hide
    milkod2001 , March 7, 2014 2:14 PM
    very expensive screen that's for sure. it'll take at least 3 years till price will drop into $1000. Even for $1000 it'll be unreachable for most users.I'd rather see SAMSUNG, DELL, LG pushing 27'' 1440p monitors into mainstream with price something like $300-350. At the moment for that price one can only get poxy Korean screens. I'm sure this would make more sales than 4k $3500 madness.
  • 0 Hide
    milkod2001 , March 7, 2014 2:15 PM
    very expensive screen that's for sure. it'll take at least 3 years till price will drop into $1000. Even for $1000 it'll be unreachable for most users.I'd rather see SAMSUNG, DELL, LG pushing 27'' 1440p monitors into mainstream with price something like $300-350. At the moment for that price one can only get poxy Korean screens. I'm sure this would make more sales than 4k $3500 madness.
  • 2 Hide
    DisplayJunkie , March 7, 2014 8:48 PM
    This is very clearly primarily a display for graphics professionals (good Adobe RGB mode, factory calibrated, uniformity compensation). Because for raw eye-popping image quality - which is what your average consumer is looking to improve - 1000:1 contrast ratio is pathetic. That's why display tech such as Plasma TVs and high-end Projectors with 10,000:1, 20,000:1 and even higher contrast ratio are truly stunning. The high pixel density here makes for nice sharpness but it doesn't really compensate for the lack of contrast, and I haven't even mentioned motion clarity...
  • 0 Hide
    eriko , March 7, 2014 9:24 PM
    I've added it to my Flea-Bay alerts, so as soon as someone is bored of one of these.... :) But to you all I have a simple question - is the latency too much for gaming, I mean really? I don't go around measuring latency, so you real-world opinions, I seek.Thanks.
  • 0 Hide
    wiinippongamer , March 8, 2014 12:18 AM
    Overpriced garbage with shit contrast and input lag. Wake me up when we wave 20"+ OLED in the 1k range.
Display more comments