Skip to main content

NEC EA244UHD 24-Inch Ultra HD Monitor Review

Users seeking maximum pixel density need look no further than a 24-inch Ultra HD screen. We recently looked at Dell’s UP2414Q. Today we’re testing NEC’s EA244UHD. It’s part of the company's business-class line but offers much more than its stablemates.

Our Verdict

Color performance is pretty much perfect without calibration. Just unpack, plug in, set brightness to taste and go. In terms of accuracy, it can’t get much better than the EA244UHD.

For

  • Out-of-box performance, bright saturated image, excellent clarity, high pixel density, PA-series features at an EA-series price

Against

  • Pricier than Dell's UP2414Q, could use a little more contrast

NEC EA244UHD 24-Inch Ultra HD Monitor Review

NEC sells seven different monitor lines and we’ve reviewed several examples from two of them – the EA and PA series. PA screens are billed as color-accurate and, in our experience, that is quite true. We found the PA272W to be extremely well-engineered and perfectly suited for color-critical applications. From the EA line, we tested NEC's EA274WMi; it also proved to be a superb performer lacking only a wide gamut.

Today’s subject, the EA244UHD, presents something of a conundrum. While it comes from the EA series of high-end business-class monitors, our testing shows it to be one of the most accurate and consistent performers we’ve ever seen. You'll notice in the benchmarks that its out-of-box performance is pretty much unequaled.

The display also offers features found in the professional PA-series screens like SpectraView calibration and an Adobe RGB gamut option. While it’s definitely not cheap, this monitor definitely gives other professional products a run for their money.

Brand & ModelNEC EA244UHD
Price$1349
Panel Type & BacklightAH-IPSGB-r-LED, edge array
Screen Size & Aspect23.8-inch / 16:9
Max Resolution & Refresh Rate3840x2160 @ 60Hz
Native Color Depth & Gamut10-bit (8-bit w/FRC)
Response Time (GTG)6ms
Brightness350cd/m2
Speakers2 x 1W
Video Inputs2 x DisplayPort, 2 x HDMI (1 x MHL)2 x DVI
Audio1 x 3.5mm stereo in
USBv3.0 - 1 x up, 3 x down
Control1 x ControlSync in/out
Panel DimensionsWxHxD w/base22 x 15.2-20.3 x 8.6in558 x 387-517 x 218mm
Panel Thickness2.9in / 72mm
Bezel Width.7-.7in / 15-18mm
Weight16.3lbs / 7.4kg
WarrantyThree years

In the category of 24-inch Ultra HD monitors, there are only two panel parts to choose from, both manufactured by LG Display. The EA244UHD and Dell’s UP2414Q are both made from the same wide-gamut component. It sports a GB-r-LED backlight and 10-bit color via an 8-bit native depth with frame rate conversion.

To take full advantage of a monitor’s bit depth, the incoming signal must match up. Ten-bit-capable video cards are generally found in the workstation space, including Nvidia's Quadro and AMD's FirePro boards. Even something as advanced as the GeForce GTX Titan only outputs 8-bit color natively. Of course, a true 10-bit panel is even better. But they are less common and more expensive.

When it comes to pixel density, today’s 24-inch Ultra HD monitors are about as high as you can go at 185ppi. Products for the desktop are still lagging behind smartphones and tablets (and even a few laptops). However, the gap is obviously closing.

The EA244UHD is aimed at high-end business users. Still, we think that photo and graphics jockeys will want to take a closer look at this new screen as well. In addition to Ultra HD resolution, it offers a wide-gamut option, calibration with SpectraView and performance to rival any professional-class screen we’ve encountered. Let’s take a look.

  • 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