BenQ PG2401PT, 24-inch Color Accurate Monitor Review

BenQ PG2401PT 24-inch IPS Color-Accurate Display Review

With LCD monitor prices seemingly at a standstill, it’s common for manufacturers to call their high-end products “professional” when they really mean “expensive.” This is especially true of 27-inch QHD screens currently selling for around $600. A real professional-grade display doesn’t necessarily need a high pixel count or a large panel. What it should offer is an Adobe RGB color gamut and perfect color accuracy.

BenQ carries 23 different monitors in its portfolio. But only one comes with a certification for color accuracy. It’s a 24-inch 16:10-aspect IPS-based screen with 1920x1200 resolution and a pixel density of 94 PPI. That product is subject of today’s review, and it's called the PG2401PT.

We’ve seen many readers lament the apparent death of 16:10, and we agree wholeheartedly. Almost all computer displays now match the 16:9 aspect ratio of HD televisions, which is certainly great for games and entertainment. But when it's time to edit a document in Word, read email, or browse the Web, the extra screen height of 16:10 really comes in handy.

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Street Price$1000
Panel TypeAH-IPS
BacklightGB-r-LED, edge array
Screen Size24.1-inch
Max Resolution1920x1200
Max Refresh Rate60 Hz
Aspect Ratio16:10
Native Color Depth10-bit (8-bit w/FRC)14-bit 3D LUT
Native GamutAdobe RGB
Response Time (GTG)5 ms
Brightness350 cd/m2
DisplayPort v1.21 standard, 1 mini
HDMI v1.41
Audio Invia HDMI or DP
USBv3.0 - 1 up, 2 down
Media Card Reader1 SD
Panel DimensionsW x H x D w/base22 x 21.5 x 10 in555 x 543 x 254 mm
Panel Thickness2.7 in / 69 mm
Bezel Width.7-.9 in / 18-22 mm
Weight15.4 lbs / 7 kg
WarrantyOne year

Our eyebrows rose a bit when we first saw the PG2401PT’s specs. The 16:10 aspect ratio is great, but what's up with the 1920x1200 resolution? We still don't have an answer to that. However, once we started working with this screen, its purpose became crystal clear.

I just mentioned that any screen purporting to be professional-class has to offer supreme accuracy. And once I started pulling measurements from BenQ's PG2401PT, I was frankly astonished at just how good it is. If you read our review of the NEC PA272W, you know we were impressed by the accuracy of that display after calibrating it. The PG2401PT nearly matches NEC’s numbers before calibration.

To achieve a wide color gamut, BenQ uses a GB-r-LED backlight instead of the more common W-LED. As you may know, white LEDs aren’t actually white. They shine blue light through a yellow phosphor. As such, their spectral properties are more skewed towards blue and require extra processing to make them color-accurate. GB-r uses green and blue LEDs that shine through a red phosphor. The resulting spectra peak more evenly for red, green, and blue. Not only is accuracy improved without extra processing, but it makes the larger Adobe RGB gamut possible.

We’ve applauded BenQ’s efforts to shed traditional pulse-width modulation backlights in favor of the constant-current type. Flicker can be an issue for some sensitive users, and it contributes to eye fatigue during extended work sessions. Unfortunately, the PG2401PT is one of only four remaining models in BenQ’s line-up that still uses PWM. On the upside, its frequency is extremely high at 16,500 Hz. We doubt anyone will actually see flicker at lower backlight settings. The fatigue factor should not be a problem; it certainly wasn’t for us.

You'll see us revisit the subject of accuracy over and over in this review. The out-of-box numbers we generated were better than many monitors’ calibrated results. As such, we’ve created a special comparison group consisting of high-end wide-gamut displays that all come with individual factory calibrations. Let’s take a closer look.

Christian Eberle
Contributing Editor

Christian Eberle is a Contributing Editor for Tom's Hardware US. He's a veteran reviewer of A/V equipment, specializing in monitors. Christian began his obsession with tech when he built his first PC in 1991, a 286 running DOS 3.0 at a blazing 12MHz. In 2006, he undertook training from the Imaging Science Foundation in video calibration and testing and thus started a passion for precise imaging that persists to this day. He is also a professional musician with a degree from the New England Conservatory as a classical bassoonist which he used to good effect as a performer with the West Point Army Band from 1987 to 2013. He enjoys watching movies and listening to high-end audio in his custom-built home theater and can be seen riding trails near his home on a race-ready ICE VTX recumbent trike. Christian enjoys the endless summer in Florida where he lives with his wife and Chihuahua and plays with orchestras around the state.

  • blackmagnum
    Most accurate computer display tested on Tom's is a BenQ. Say what!?
  • Xan13x
    So, maybe it's because I've sort of been out of the game for a while, but back when I got my current monitor, Samsung 27" something or other, 1920x1200 was kind of the standard for a decent monitor. I suppose that's changed? I've had no desire to get a new one since, so again I don't keep up with them, but it seems strange that four years later that resolution/aspect is no more.
  • mapesdhs
    Xan13x, alas it's the result of general consumer supply & demand,
    mixed with the convenience for manufacturers of making mostly
    1080 screens. When I hunted for a 2560x1600 screen last year,
    I was shocked at the prices, because the same thing has happened
    at 2560, ie. the market has narrowed in on 1440 height instead of 1600,
    so the latter are now expensive (assuming one can find them at all),
    eg. the Iiyama XB3070WQS-B1 is about 700 UKP, and the HP Z30i
    is more than 1000 UKP.

    At the least one positive from all this is that good 1200-height IPS
    panels are now much more affordable. My first 1920x1200 IPS was
    an HP LP2475W which cost about 450 UKP, but today the Dell U2412M
    costs less than half that much (is the Dell better? Well, yes & no,
    different feature set, etc., but the screen is nice).

    I gave up on finding an affordable IPS 2560x1600, and meanwhile it
    was obvious review sites had settled on 1440 height anyway (a few
    years ago many sites were still testing wtih 1600 screens, but not
    now), so I bought a Dell U2713HM instead which works pretty well,
    except for its irritating resolution limitation over HDMI (watchout for
    that if you buy a new screen, some models only support their max
    res via DVI or DP - the Dell I bought can't do more than 1080 via HDMI).


  • martel80
    Most accurate computer display tested on Tom's is a BenQ. Say what!?
    In case you didn't know, BenQ is the parent company of AU Optronics, which is one of the largest panel manufactures in the world. Other companies (Samsung, Dell, Apple, etc.) use AUO panels in some of their products.
  • knowom
    16:10>16:9 for anything other than movies that extra pixel height for gaming is a major difference maker in a competitive MOBA game like LoL among other games. It's too bad cheap 1920x1200 displays got phased out for 1080p same with some of the other now odd ball display resolutions that were once much more common.