Skip to main content

Dell UltraSharp 24 Ultra HD Monitor: The $1300 UP2414Q

Results: Viewing Angles And Uniformity

The more monitors we test, the more we can see that off-axis viewing performance is dependent not only on pixel structure (IPS, PLS, TN, etc.), but also backlight technology as well. The anti-glare layer even makes a difference.

The UP2414Q has a traditional AH-IPS pixel structure like many monitors, but takes the unusual step of incorporating a GB-r-LED backlight, rather than the more common W-LED. The only other monitor we’ve tested like this is Asus' PA279Q. Dell's solution exhibits similar color shifts to that screen, where a red tint can be seen as we move to the sides, and a blue one appears when we go above or below the center. The exotic backlight definitely improves color accuracy and makes the Adobe RGB gamut possible. However, it sacrifices some off-axis viewing performance.

Screen Uniformity: Luminance

To measure screen uniformity, zero- and 100-percent full-field patterns are used, and nine points are sampled. In a change from previous reviews, we’re now comparing the results to other monitors we’ve measured. First, we establish a baseline measurement at the center of each screen. Then the surrounding eight points are measured and their values expressed as a percentage of the baseline, either above or below. This number gets averaged. It is important to remember that we only test the review sample each vendor sends us. Other examples of the same monitor can measure differently in this metric.

First up is black field uniformity:

The numbers are excellent with and without Uniformity Compensation. Since it’s such a small difference, we think it best to leave that feature off, rather than accept lower contrast. Only seven monitors out of the last 25 we tested fare better. We couldn’t see any hotspots on our press sample, but the meter tells us the lower-left corner is a tad brighter than the rest of the screen.

And here’s the white field measurement:

This result isn’t quite as good, but it’s still barely visible to our eyes. The center is the brightest zone, and there is a tiny bit less light on the right side of the screen. Suddenly, Uniformity Compensation makes a marked difference in the measurements. When viewing real-world content, though, you won’t see any issues; we still recommend leaving the feature turned off to maximize contrast.

Screen Uniformity: Color

To measure color uniformity, we display an 80-percent white field and measure the Delta E error of the same nine points on the screen. Then we subtract the lowest value from the highest to arrive at the result. A smaller number means a display is more uniform. Any value below three is a variation invisible to the naked eye.

The Uni-comp makes almost no difference to color uniformity, and a Delta E range of 1.69 is well below the point where anyone will see a problem. I'm happy to report a uniform white field at all brightness levels with no tint of any kind.

  • dweezled
    This is a joke right? Dell making yet another mockery of the monitor market.

    Why oh why when you can get the latest 10-bit AH-IPS technology in the 2560 x 1600 30" Crossover Black Tune 30x for $700?

    Reply
  • s3anister
    13121759 said:
    This is a joke right? Dell making yet another mockery of the monitor market.

    Why oh why when you can get the latest 10-bit AH-IPS technology in the 2560 x 1600 30" Crossover Black Tune 30x for $700?

    You obviously miss the point of this monitor. The whole point of a 24" 4K monitor is the pixel density. The fact that it's 8-bit and not 10-bit probably isn't going to bother a whole ton of people and if 4K and 10-bit is what you need than you'd be looking at the Dell Ultrasharp UP3214Q anyway. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ultrasharp-32-up3214q-review,3744-7.html
    Reply
  • voltagetoe
    Tom's should review Samsung's cheap 4k monitor instead of stuff like this.
    Reply
  • Treynolds416
    I love the super indepth articles you guys do, but it would be nice if you also did more reviews about less expensive things, like cases. I mean, it's interesting to read about a $1k monitor but it would be more helpful to more people if you did a case roundup or a higher volume of reviews about them. You don't have to stop making monitor reviews or anything because it's certainly not hurting anyone, but it seems like there are more articles about expensive monitors that most people can't buy/don't have a use for in lieu of articles about more fundamental pieces of computer hardware.
    Just my two cents
    Reply
  • gadgety
    $1300 for a simple panel is a joke, specially when "From our experience so far, these 4K monitors work well, but still have some maturing to do." Thank you for the straightforward, no nonsense review. I'll wait.
    Reply
  • dstarr3
    Ahh, 24" 4k monitors are a reality now. Antialiasing in games is soon to be a thing of the past. Which is relieving, because that makes the task on graphics cards a lot more manageable.
    Reply
  • xenol
    (quote thing isn't working for me)
    "Ahh, 24" 4k monitors are a reality now. Antialiasing in games is soon to be a thing of the past. Which is relieving, because that makes the task on graphics cards a lot more manageable. "

    It actually makes it worse if not does nothing. 4K is the equivalent, almost, of 1080p using SSAAx4. MSAA is a lot cheaper and most games are resorting to FXAA or MLAA because it's incredibly cheap, works with any rendering method (Deferred rendering doesn't play nice with MSAA), and the quality is almost as good.
    Reply
  • dstarr3
    4K is the equivalent, almost, of 1080p using SSAAx4.

    And modern graphics cards can handle that kind of workload. So, since they're basically equivalent, it isn't a lot more to ask of cards to do 4k without any AA.
    Reply
  • soldier44
    LOL 24" yeh right for that price, make it 30 inches at 4K for that price and i'll bite.
    Reply
  • dark_lord69
    DOES IT SUCK YO' D***?
    ...
    I didn't think so... Not worth the money...
    Reply