HP ZR2740w Versus Asus PB278Q: QHD 27" Monitors, Tested

Status
Not open for further replies.

KOKing

Honorable
May 17, 2013
1
0
10,510
0
I've had one of these HPs at work for a couple of months (replacing an early 24" 1920x1200 IPS), which I've set fairly low), but as this review says, it's not really necessary. I was a little disappointed that, possibly because of the aspect ratio change to 16:9, it doesn't _feel_ like a lot more screen real estate.
 

SIDDHARTH MISHRA

Honorable
May 17, 2013
1
0
10,510
0
Useless review, the uniformity on these screens is pathetic, tried three of each, the color temp difference across the screen is over 1000K. Toms has very poor reviewers, only prad.de and overclockers.ru do reliable screen reviews. And btw the U2713HM is regularly on sale for $500 or so, the ZR2740W is now an overpriced relic lacking even an OSD.
 

cangelini

Contributing Editor
Editor
Jul 4, 2008
1,878
9
19,795
4
[citation][nom]SIDDHARTH MISHRA[/nom]Useless review, the uniformity on these screens is pathetic, tried three of each, the color temp difference across the screen is over 1000K. Toms has very poor reviewers, only prad.de and overclockers.ru do reliable screen reviews. And btw the U2713HM is regularly on sale for $500 or so, the ZR2740W is now an overpriced relic lacking even an OSD.[/citation]
Screen uniformity is covered on page eight, and low points on both screens are discussed.
 

ceberle

Contributing Editor
Editor
Dec 20, 2012
290
0
18,780
0
The Asus certainly calibrates better than the HP; mainly because it can be calibrated. The HP is slightly better out of the box for grayscale and its chromaticity is also a touch better. Both screens have identical color to the eye. Only the instruments can tell the difference.

Christian
 

ceberle

Contributing Editor
Editor
Dec 20, 2012
290
0
18,780
0
Regarding the lag results: It's hard to compare numbers from one review to another when the testing methods are so different. With our high-speed camera procedure, the only fair comparison is between the monitors we've tested. I would defend our response test as definitive though. Actually watching the screen draw in slow motion leaves no room for interpretation. The lag test is also consistent since we use the same signal chain for every screen. There is never a change in video cards, drivers, peripherals or any other device that might affect the result.

Christian
 

dgingeri

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2009
2,123
1
20,460
212
I have the HP ZR2740w, and have for over a year now. It's a great looking monitor, and it performas well by my standards, but suffers from a significant lack of both reliability and support. HP's support is massively fragmented. It took me over three hours on the phone to get to the department that actually handled the support for this monitor. (It is a "Commercial" monitor, not business or personal. It's splitting hairs mighty thin, but that's the way HP's support is separated out.) When I finally got through, they sent a tech with a replacement monitor the next day. However, it also has two major hardware issues that render it useless when they occur. Most of the first run monitors had the power supplies die within months. The second run monitors had a serious issue with the control boards. All of them have issues with the USB hub, but it least the monitor keeps working if you don't have the USB cable plugged in. As an owner of one, I would not, under any circumstances, recommend this monitor to anyone.

HP: the perfect example of a company falling apart because it is both too big and too fragmented.
 

sempifi99

Distinguished
Apr 27, 2010
93
0
18,640
1
I have had this HP monitor for about 2 years now. It is a good and solid monitor. It turns on in a matter of seconds and the 12 ms response time is not a problem at all. Though I do wish it was a bit quicker, but you can not have everything at this price point. Also, there is software calibration to adjust the color output so the lack of monitor adjustment did not bother me at all.


What I don't understand is the difference of input lag compared to other reviews. The Acer has been measured at 16.6 ms while the HP is an amazing 3.6 ms with a CRT being used as the zero set point. I am not sure the exact toms hardware testing methodology but it seems to synthetic, not representing real world performance.
 

ceberle

Contributing Editor
Editor
Dec 20, 2012
290
0
18,780
0
The testing procedure is explained in the review. We shoot video at 1000 fps of a black to white screen draw. Then we simply count the number of frames it takes for the white field to fill the screen. The input lag is measured the same way. The video shows the pattern generator's lights flashing when the signal is sent to the monitor. We count the frames between the flash and the full rendering of the pattern to arrive at the input lag measurement. We do this five times and average the results.
-Christian
 

Nintendo Maniac 64

Distinguished
Jan 24, 2012
73
0
18,630
0
So I guess I'm the only one interested in a monitor's upscaling quality? I mean, we don't always play the latest AAA games - I myself like to play some Touhou from time to time, but it's locked to a 640x480 window which is pretty tiny on a high-res display. That leaves you with fullscreen which puts you at the mercy of your monitor's and/or GPU's upscaling ability.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hp when oh when are you going to make a 30 inch 2560 x 1600 led or oled display or better yet a 4K ready version at 30 inches or better??
 

Spooderman

Honorable
Jan 13, 2013
208
0
10,680
0
Considering the cost of such a panel, probably not for the next 5 or so years.
[citation][nom]soldier2013[/nom]Hp when oh when are you going to make a 30 inch 2560 x 1600 led or oled display or better yet a 4K ready version at 30 inches or better??[/citation]
 

mczak1

Honorable
Jul 23, 2012
11
0
10,510
0
No workaround for other resolutions? Seriously? Last time I checked gpus had output scalers (since about 15 years or so...). Maybe you need to activate it manually if the driver can't figure out the monitor can do scaling on its own but pretty sure it should work...
 

agnickolov

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2006
520
0
18,980
0
With UHD (Ultra HD, 4K, or 2160p) just around the corner, QHD represents the highest pixel count that you can put on your desktop right now.
Technically, there's also 2880x1800, but it's only on iMac-s so far. Still, the panels exist...
 

flong777

Honorable
Mar 7, 2013
185
0
10,690
2


While out out-of-the-box info is great to have. The final comparison should be calibrated results because most monitors require calibration to get their best picture.

While I own a great HP IPS monitor, it appears that the Asus is the better monitor here (after calibration).
 

ceberle

Contributing Editor
Editor
Dec 20, 2012
290
0
18,780
0


Funny you should ask... The next review up will be HP and Double Sight 30-inch monitors, 16:10 at 2560 x 1600 pixels.

-Christian
 

ceberle

Contributing Editor
Editor
Dec 20, 2012
290
0
18,780
0


There is indeed no workaround. The output resolution of the video card doesn't matter if the monitor won't accept it. If you change the output manually, you'll get a blank screen and a headache as you hook up another screen to fix the problem.

-Christian
 

cjmcgee

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2008
28
1
18,530
0
I have had this HP monitor for over a year.

RE: Another issue we ran into is the monitor only accepts three resolutions: 640x480, 1280x720, and its native 2560x1440. Gamers who play at resolutions other than these will see a blank screen instead of an image.

I have never seen this issue. Games play at any resolution I pick just fine. I just tested it again to be sure. It may be due to GPU scaling, but I have never ran into a "monitor won't sync" issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS