Skip to main content

Monoprice UHD Matte 28-inch Monitor Review

Monoprice's new 28-inch Ultra HD monitor features an anti-glare layer, which offers great viewing angles. But can the new UHD match the performance to the company's CrystalPro 4k display?

Viewing Angles, Uniformity, Response & Lag

To learn how we measure screen uniformity, please click here.

Regular readers of our monitor reviews will recognize this as a typical photo of a TN panel. The UHD Matte is a little better than most because it retains shadow detail in the horizontal plane. Many other screens clip the bottom two black steps. The red and green tint is quite apparent as well as a roughly 50 percent light fall-off. From the top down you can still see all the steps but highlight detail is hard to make out thanks to a significant change in gamma. Head on, this display is virtually indistinguishable from an IPS model.

Screen Uniformity: Luminance

We were impressed to see a Uniformity Compensation option in the OSD. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to make a difference in the black field test. Luckily, our sample showed no light bleed or hotspots so it's of little matter. If you recall in the contrast test, black levels are not affected when you turn UC on.

Here's the white field measurement.

White field uniformity is slightly improved by UC but the difference is nearly invisible. What is more obvious is the reduction in contrast. In our opinion, it's not worth using the compensation, the panel looks just fine without it.

Screen Uniformity: Color

UC actually increased the color shift across our 80 percent field pattern. The errors are not visible to the eye but the i1 Pro can see the difference. Our final recommendation is to simply leave UC off and enjoy the UHD Matte as is.

Pixel Response And Input Lag

Please click here to read up on our pixel response and input lag testing procedures.

16ms is a very good response result for a 60Hz panel. The overdrive feature works extremely well and eliminates a lot of motion blur without ghosting. Quick mouse movements in a game are about as fluid as is possible from an LCD panel. You can see the TN monitors' clear advantage over the IPS-based ViewSonic in last place.

Here are the lag results.

Unfortunately the UHD Matte's quick panel response is offset by a mediocre lag result. If you have quick reflexes, the CrystalPro would be a better choice for first-person gaming. Of course if you want the best possible Ultra HD experience, the G-Sync equipped Acer trumps the group with very low lag and no frame tears.

  • alidan
    i wish the display was bigger, 40-50 inch, at 28 i find it useless.
    Reply
  • jragonsoul
    i wish the display was bigger, 40-50 inch, at 28 i find it useless.
    Then you should get a television unless you want to pay 2000+ USD for the monitor.
    Reply
  • g-unit1111
    What's the cost? For someone who is in the market for a new monitor this is an interesting option.
    Reply
  • none12345
    yuck 60hz.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    17501375 said:
    i wish the display was bigger, 40-50 inch, at 28 i find it useless.
    I don't know about 50" (unless you're sitting like 5 feet away), but 4k resolution at 28" seems a waste, to me. My 27" is 2560x1440 and I think I'd probably have to go up to at least 32" for my eyes to make out much more detail.

    But I'm waiting for the next generation of GPUs, before I even start thinking about 4k monitors. Ideally, I'd wait until I can get a 14/16 nm GPU with HBM2 for <= $250.
    Reply
  • Nintendork
    The monitor is pretty <removed>, when smartphone screens are reaching 2000:1 using the IPS panels with "quantum dot" you ask yourself why should you buy a crappy pc monitor.

    Watch the language. - G
    Reply
  • jragonsoul
    17503284 said:
    17501375 said:
    i wish the display was bigger, 40-50 inch, at 28 i find it useless.
    I don't know about 50" (unless you're sitting like 5 feet away), but 4k resolution at 28" seems a waste, to me. My 27" is 2560x1440 and I think I'd probably have to go up to at least 32" for my eyes to make out much more detail.

    But I'm waiting for the next generation of GPUs, before I even start thinking about 4k monitors. Ideally, I'd wait until I can get a 14/16 nm GPU with HBM2 for <= $250.
    Honestly I think HBM2 is going to be reserved for higher tier GPUS (I HOPE I AM WRONG!) so I'm thinking bare minimum would be 300-350 for one. Would be glad to be proven wrong though.
    Reply
  • hannibal
    I also have 27" 2560x1440, and also think that the sweet spot for 4K is near 32". But hard to say without testing it personally.
    But in reality 4K needs G-sync or Freesync IMHO, because how much it needs horsepower to run in. Frame rates are not going to be great with these for many years.
    Reply
  • sc14s
    The monitor is pretty <removed>, when smartphone screens are reaching 2000:1 using the IPS panels with "quantum dot" you ask yourself why should you buy a crappy pc monitor.

    Watch the language. - G
    You are comparing the monitor to something that probably costs somewhere around double if you are going high end phone (which you would have to have for high end screens). This isn't even mentioning the fact that you are getting a fraction of the viewing size on the phone. Apples to oranges really.

    Reply
  • picture_perfect
    yuck 60hz.

    I wonder why you get so many thumbs down all the time.
    Reply