Dell S2719DM 27" QHD HDR Monitor Review: Style Meets Performance

By Christian Eberle
published

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Viewing Angles, Uniformity, Response & Lag

Viewing Angles

The S2719DM is no different from any other premium IPS monitor in the viewing angle department. To the sides, color shifts decidedly to green and light falloff is around 40%. Detail retention is good with all dark steps still visible. From the top, things wash out a bit more, but we can still see all brightness levels clearly. Viewing from this angle also cuts output by half and turns the tint blue.

Screen Uniformity

To learn how we measure screen uniformity, click here.

Image 1 of 3

The S2719DM scored extremely well when tested for black field uniformity, also known as light bleed. With a black pattern displayed across the screen, we saw no signs of light bleed or glow. That’s impressive considering the panel’s thin design and tight-fitting components. It helps that there is a glass layer in play; glass is more rigid than plastic and prevents uneven pressure on the TFT layer, the principal cause of artifacts.

Pixel Response & Input Lag

Click here to read up on our pixel response and input lag testing procedures.

Image 1 of 2

The only thing missing from the S2719DM's image quality is a fast refresh rate and adaptive sync.

All other aspects of its image quality make it perfect for casual gaming. Among 60Hz screens, it is one of the more responsive; however, we suspect plenty would be willing to drop an additional $100 for the addition of FreeSync and 120Hz. But for casual play, this monitor does fine if you ignore the occasional frame tear.

MORE: Best Gaming Monitors

MORE: How We Test Monitors

MORE: All Monitor Content

Christian Eberle
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.

11 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Rdslw
    DELL >> anything, AT least in monitors. solid, bright, and just works no matter what and how you connect it. Easily best monitors I had.
    Reply
  • AlistairAB
    I guess I just got unlucky. I ordered it right when it came out, clearly the best looking picture I've seen from a 1440p screen. But my black uniformity was awful with bleed everywhere. I ultimately bought the new Samsung 32" 4k monitor for $400 and am much happier.

    Nice to see though that Tom's got one with fantastic black uniformity, maybe I should have just ordered a second one.....
    Reply
  • AlistairAB
    The monitor is really beautiful and thin. Excellent build quality, much surpassing last year's thin design.
    Reply
  • truerock
    I'm not sure I understand that 60Hz is a "Con"
    You can't get 120Hz in a 4k UHD monitor. That would require HDMI 2.1 which is not something you can buy for a Windows 10 PC at this time.
    Am I missing something?
    Is Tom's saying >>all<< 4k UHD monitors have a con of a maximum 60Hz?
    Reply
  • truerock
    OK... I'm reding the article again. It's just stupid. The subject is 4k UHD monitors. The reviewer is mentally confused and trying to compare 4k UHD monitors to other monitor form factors.

    The author needs to write a different article about the state of 4k UHD monitors in general compared to typical 1080p monitors or something like that.
    Reply
  • 10tacle
    21130801 said:
    I'm not sure I understand that 60Hz is a "Con"
    You can't get 120Hz in a 4k UHD monitor. That would require HDMI 2.1 which is not something you can buy for a Windows 10 PC at this time.
    Am I missing something?
    Is Tom's saying >>all<< 4k UHD monitors have a con of a maximum 60Hz?

    I had the exact same thought. The price point of this monitor and its features are extremely competitive if not class setting. You have to spend over $400 (USD) to get a faster 1440p 27" monitor, and that's not even including one for Freesync or G-Sync. Further, I am one who doesn't see the major performance improvement past a consistent 60Hz/60FPS gameplay experience or a 120Hz/120FPS experience.

    This is why I've always overkilled on GPU power. I want to make sure the minimum frames in games don't dip down to near or below the 60FPS/60Hz sync limit. Also, the GPU doesn't have to work as hard. I've tried a G-sync 144Hz monitor and just didn't appreciate the cost difference vs. performance. I guess my eyes are getting older.

    Anyway I've been very happy with my Dell U2713HM 1440p that is now five years old. It cost over $500 but for the time was top of the line. In fact I have four Dell monitors I've never had problems with any of them dating back to a 2000-built 19" Trinitron G420S CRT built by Sony. If my 1440p monitor dies, I'd snap one of these up in a heartbeat.

    Also, I hope one day we can all have some sort of HDR standard because the different formats of it are not the same kind of tech and really not directly comparable:

    HDR10 Dolby Vision
    HLG
    Advanced HDR

    Off topic: I see my Dell G420S CRT monitor is selling on eBay for $450 plus! A photographer pro friend tells me that these old CRTs are still in high demand for their color reproduction. I think I just found my ticket to my next hardware upgrade.
    Reply
  • JamesSneed
    21130801 said:
    I'm not sure I understand that 60Hz is a "Con"
    You can't get 120Hz in a 4k UHD monitor. That would require HDMI 2.1 which is not something you can buy for a Windows 10 PC at this time.
    Am I missing something?
    Is Tom's saying >>all<< 4k UHD monitors have a con of a maximum 60Hz?

    If only this was a 4k monitor you may have had a point.
    Reply
  • JamesSneed
    21130815 said:
    OK... I'm reding the article again. It's just stupid. The subject is 4k UHD monitors. The reviewer is mentally confused and trying to compare 4k UHD monitors to other monitor form factors.

    The author needs to write a different article about the state of 4k UHD monitors in general compared to typical 1080p monitors or something like that.

    It's a QHD i.e 2K monitor. I don't think the author is the one confused. :pt1cable:
    Reply
  • JamesSneed
    I think the cons should list the lack of VESA, not a conn for everyone but then neither is 60 Hz. Personally on the spec chart I think VESA mountable should be there and if it was show the VESA mount size like 100x100 etc.
    Reply
  • truerock
    21132577 said:
    21130815 said:
    OK... I'm reding the article again. It's just stupid. The subject is 4k UHD monitors. The reviewer is mentally confused and trying to compare 4k UHD monitors to other monitor form factors.

    The author needs to write a different article about the state of 4k UHD monitors in general compared to typical 1080p monitors or something like that.

    It's a QHD i.e 2K monitor. I don't think the author is the one confused. :pt1cable:

    Wow... do I feel stupid. I've been so focused on upgrading to 4k UHD that I forgot what QHD was.
    In my limited brain space there is only 1920x1080p and 3840x2160 UHD. Everything else is just noise that I ignore. If I had noticed the article was about a QHD monitor I wouldn't have even read it.

    Thanks for pointing out my stupidity. I was really confused about 60Hz being a "Con".

    Reply