To read about our monitor tests in-depth, please check out Display Testing Explained: How We Test PC Monitors. We cover brightness and contrast testing on page two.
Uncalibrated – Maximum Backlight Level
The U27M90 is a very bright monitor for both SDR and HDR material. In SDR mode, the max output is over 437 nits which is enough for outdoor use. In my sunlit office, 200 nits is plenty.
The panel’s native contrast is around 1,030:1, which is typical IPS performance. Local Dimming set on High ups that number to just over 6,000:1. I used the feature for all my hands-on SDR tests as it enhanced contrast and depth with no downsides like crushed detail or image pumping. Sony has engineered its dynamic contrast feature very well here. The U27M90 can easily match up to a good VA monitor with Local Dimming engaged.
After Calibration to 200 nits
I calibrated the Game 1 mode and got the same contrast results with brightness set to 200 nits. Again, this is the panel’s native state without Local Dimming turned on.
The ANSI number is only 0.5 off the static one, which indicates the best possible quality of components and manufacturing. This is literally as consistent as a display can be. Though the U27M90 is a premium purchase at $899, it outperforms monitors costing much more like the Acer X27.
I also had several Sony CRTs...great monitors--remember my last--a 20" "flat-screened" Trinitron that supported my Voodoo3's 1600x1200 res ROOB....;) As an aside, the ATi fury I bought at the time to test--(the original ATi Fury, not AMD's) would not do 1600x1200 stock! I had call ATi and ask them about it and one of the driver programmers I spoke with (in those days you could dial up practically anyone and actually talk to them!) asked me why I wanted to run at 1600x1200...;) I had to actually add the simple instructions into their driver structure at the time to enable 1600x1200--'cause my Trinitron supported it and I wanted to use it!...;)
Sony made great monitors in those days--they were good enough for me and x86 in those years. The Trinitron brand is well known even today, as you mentioned. Originally, it was the Trinitron TV brand. I'm sure this monitor is a good one, I'm just not enamored of the specs. Those high nits make all the difference, in the display, imo.
For gaming it's fine. Productivity not so much.
It really is personal preference. I've been using a Samsung U24E590D 23.6" 4K display for a few years now.
Personally I wanted maximum pixel density, good power usage, not too bulky.
Now I think my eyes aren't as good as they once were, I might get a 27" 4K in the future, maybe something like the one reviewed.
27" could be the "sweet spot" for 4K. And greater than 60HZ refresh is a plus.
Also your distance from the screen and usage style play a big role in the decision.
I lean forward and have my face 1' from the screen to read things for example.
waste of energy to power(which costs more in pwoer bill), generates more heat (not what msot ppl want outside of the winter), and lowers frame rate for a near non discernible image quality.
1440p @ 240+ refresh rate would of been a MUCH more interesting product.