NEC EA244UHD 24-Inch Ultra HD Monitor Review

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.

NEC's EA244UHD Offers Incredible Out-Of-Box Performance

In evaluating the EA244UHD, it’s easy to forget about its tremendous pixel density once the color tests begin. Even though we’re not big fans of 24-inch Ultra HD monitors, the accuracy enabled by NEC makes this a compelling choice. We would be willing to live with Windows' less-than-ideal display scaling to have this kind of precision on our desktops.

Of course, that begs the question: what could NEC do with the 32-inch IGZO panel? We’ve tested three products based on that part and we know that the wide-gamut version used in Dell’s UP3214Q is capable of professional-grade performance. Yes, the price is dear. Still, we’re already talking about $1300 for a 24-inch screen. Perhaps NEC will add the jumbo monitor to its PA series.

NEC’s EA line has always been about luxury-grade business-class displays. The EA274WMi proved itself to be a capable screen that came very close to our current 27-inch QHD picks from Planar (PXL2790MW) and HP (E271i). But this new Ultra HD monitor takes EA performance well into the realm of a professional’s tool.

With benchmark-setting accuracy, SpectraView capability and high pixel density, we’re surprised the EA244UHD isn’t part of the PA series. We saw great things from the PA272W and this monitor is even better in some ways.

Its principal competitor is Dell’s UP2414Q. That screen also has a wide-gamut option with software adjustment features and factory-certified calibration. It’s currently selling for under $1000, presenting a solid alternative to the EA244UHD. But if you’re looking for absolute precision without calibration, NEC wins the contest hands-down.

To find fault with it, you really have to nit-pick. Yes the price is high. But unless you’re willing to settle for one of the new 28-inch TN-based screens, a 4K display is going to necessitate a generous budget. Priced against monitors of similar accuracy, it’s a wash. The NEC PA272W or HP Z27x cost as much or more, and they top out at 2560x1440 pixels. If you want the maximum possible pixel density from a desktop monitor, it’s either the EA244UHD or Dell’s UP2414Q.

If you take away one point from our considerable suite of benchmarks, it should be that we didn’t have to change a single image parameter to ace almost every metric. We would like to see a bit more contrast, and the gamma wasn’t perfect. However, in the color and grayscale tests, we found a new definition of accuracy. We know that only a small percentage of users have the means or desire to calibrate their displays. That’s why we measure un-calibrated performance. The EA244UHD beats the calibrated results of nearly every display we’ve ever tested.

For its incredible out-of-box performance and stunning image quality, we’re giving the NEC EA244UHD Tom's Hardware's coveted Elite award.

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.

  • alidan
    48 inch, i can't imagine using a 4k at any less than 48 inches.
    Reply
  • LiquidAMD
    SST or MST please for 60Hz??
    Reply
  • LiquidAMD
    SST or MST please for 60Hz??
    Reply
  • milkod2001
    @alidan

    That's no telly, it's professional desktop monitor, could be 27 or 30'' but would probably cost another 1000 or more extra.
    Reply
  • vincent67
    Agree with alidan, at this density, pixels are wasted: you don't see more as you need to scale everything up.
    And, knowing the hardware you need to drive this resolution,, I don't see any interest except for some niches.
    You need at least 44'' to exploit 4K.
    Reply
  • ribald86
    @vincent67

    UHD is 2560x1440/2560x1600 - not 4k. Even if it was 4k, I don't see how you can say it is wasted.
    Reply
  • ribald86
    @myself - I was incorrect - I am a dumb ass.

    QHD = 2560x1440/2560x1600
    UHD = 4k
    Reply
  • ribald86
    @myself - I was incorrect - I am a dumb ass.

    QHD = 2560x1440/2560x1600
    UHD = 4k
    Reply
  • atwspoon
    @ribald86
    UHD = 3840x2160
    4k = 4096x2160
    Reply
  • Textfield
    The problem with these high-DPI screens is that support for these displays is lacking in many modern OS's. Yes, support is getting better, as with Windows 8.1 and its better UI scaling, but even with good support in the OS's UI, you're still at the mercy of the apps you use, and many are terrible when it comes to high DPI, with some even failing to work properly.

    Retina is only useful when your programs provide good support for it. Otherwise it's just an annoyance. As an owner of a Yoga 2 Pro (13" 3200x1800), I can speak to this. I normally run my laptop in an upscaled 1920x1080 just to keep compatability.
    Reply