With 32-inch QHD screens becoming more common, I found three other candidates in my test database to compare the 42891’s performance. They are Dell’s S3222DGM, BenQ’s EX3210R and Corsair’s 32QHD165. To fill up the group, I’ve included two 27-inch screens – Dell’s S2722DGM and Viotek’s GFI27DBXA.
Pixel Response and Input Lag
Click here to read up on our pixel response and input lag testing procedures.
While most 165 Hz screens draw a full frame in 6ms; the Zero-G 42891 takes 7ms. What does this mean? I could see a slight bit of extra softness during fast-motion sequences, both in test patterns and in-game. The overdrive helps, but the other monitors are just a tiny bit smoother in normal gameplay.
The Zero-G 42891’s input lag is about average for the category at 33ms. The Viotek is above average, helped by its 180 Hz refresh rate, but Monoprice's screen can compete with the others in responsiveness. For most players, casual to skilled, there will be no perception of lag or stutter. If you can take advantage of a faster monitor, you’ll need 240 Hz to satisfy that need.
The Zero-G 42891 exhibited some unique behavior in the off-axis test regarding viewing angles. While there is only a slight brightness reduction at 45 degrees to the side, the green tint at the 50% step is clear. That it also appears in the vertical photo suggests it is an issue with sub-pixel alignment. It’s not a flaw, just a quirk endemic to this particular panel part. Obviously, there is no problem when sitting in the center seat and the monitor’s curve doesn’t cause any color or brightness shift.
To learn how we measure screen uniformity, click here.
Though this test is sample-specific, a 4.88% score bodes well for the Zero-G 42891’s quality control. It’s doubtful that any example of this monitor will have a visible problem. I certainly didn’t see any bleed or glow in any full-screen gray patterns. Color uniformity is also perfect as long as your eyepoint is at the screen center, which is exceptional performance.