Twitter: Stay up to date: @TFTCentral |    Forum: Discuss this review  | RSS Feed: Review Alerts


Introduction

The 27" monitor market has become quite crowded over the last few years, but there's still a real interest in finding a good all-round display in this sector. BenQ have recently introduced their new GW2765HT screen which is based around a 2560 x 1440 resolution QHD panel. As with most of the 27" 1440p models, the panel is an IPS-type, actually using an AU Optronics AHVA (Advanced Hyper Viewing Angle) module which is their equivalent to the more well-known LG.Display IPS brand. The screen is designed for home entertainment and office work according to the BenQ website, with a focus on user comfort and eye health which has become a hallmark for BenQ screens in recent times. When the screen was first announced there was a focus in their marketing content on the screens gaming performance as well, although this seems to have been changed on the product webpage now. We are keen to see what this new screen can deliver and whether it offers a good all-round performance in this size range.


If you appreciate the review and enjoy reading and like our work, we would welcome a
donation to the site to help us continue to make quality and detailed reviews for you.



Support TFTCentral, buy the BenQ GW2765HT using our affiliate link
 


Specifications and Features

The following table gives detailed information about the specs of the screen:

Monitor Specifications

Size

27"WS

Panel Coating

Light semi-glossy AG coating

Aspect Ratio

16:9

Interfaces

D-sub, DL-DVI, HDMI 1.4, DisplayPort

Resolution

2560 x 1440

Pixel Pitch

0.2331 mm

Design colour

Glossy black bezel, matte black base to stand

Response Time

4ms G2G
12ms ISO

Ergonomics

Tilt, height, swivel and rotate

Static Contrast Ratio

1000:1

Dynamic Contrast Ratio

20 million:1

VESA Compatible

Yes 100mm

Brightness

350 cd/m2

Accessories

Power cable, VGA, HDMI, DisplayPort

Viewing Angles

178/178

Panel Technology

AU Optronics AHVA (IPS-type)

Weight

Net weight: 6.9Kg

Backlight Technology

W-LED

Physical Dimensions

(WxHxD) with stand max height
641 x 555 x 244 mm

Colour Depth

1.07b (8-bit + FRC)

Refresh Rate

60Hz

Special Features

Audio input, headphone output, 2x 1W stereo speakers, Low Blue Light Mode

Colour Gamut

Standard gamut 100% sRGB, 80% NTSC, 79.1% Adobe RGB

The GW2765HT offers a good range of connectivity options. There are D-sub, Dual-link DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort interfaces provided for video connections. Cables are provided in the box for only VGA, HDMI and DisplayPort, but not for DVI for some reason.

The screen has an internal power supply so there is only the need for a kettle lead power cable (provided). There are several additional features as well for this screen. These include 2x 1W stereo speakers, an audio input, headphone output and BenQ's Low Blue Light Mode technology. There are unfortunately no USB ports provided on this model which is a bit of a shame as we feel they can be very useful and are pretty standard on most monitors now.

Below is a summary of the features and connections of the screen:

Feature

Yes / No

Feature

Yes / No

Tilt adjust

DVI

Height adjust

HDMI

Swivel adjust

D-sub

Rotate adjust

DisplayPort

VESA compliant

Component

USB 2.0 Ports

Composite

USB 3.0 Ports

Audio connection

Card Reader

HDCP Support

Ambient Light Sensor

MHL Support

Human Motion Sensor

Integrated Speakers

Touch Screen

PiP / PbP

Hardware calibration

Blur Reduction Mode

Uniformity correction

G-Sync



Design and Ergonomics


Above: front view of the screen. Click for larger version

The GW2765HT comes in an all-black design. Glossy black plastics are used for the bezel around the panel. This measures ~20mm around all sides so is reasonably thin. Not ultra-thin like a lot of the recent screens seem to be offering. There are logos on the bottom left hand edge for HDMI, Senseye and LED. In the middle of the lower bezel is a BenQ logo as well, and in the top right hand corner a small "GW2765" model label. Along the lower right hand edge are 5 small grey circles marking the location of the OSD control buttons, and a power logo also. The actual buttons are located on the back right hand edge of the screen (as viewed from the front), so these circles just mark where the buttons are for easier use.


Above: view of the base of the stand. Click for larger version

The stand and base are a matte black plastic. The base is circular and provides a sturdy support for the pretty larger screen.


Above: rear view of the screen, click for larger version

The back of the screen is finished in a matte black plastic. There is a large BenQ logo etched in to the top portion and the back section is squared off as shown above. On the back of the stand is a detachable cable tidy clip which is useful.


Above: side views of the screen, click for larger versions

From the side the screen offers a pretty thin profile thanks to the LED backlight. The stand is a bit more chunky as you can see, but provides a sturdy and well adjustable base for the screen.


Above: full tilt range shown, click for larger versions

The tilt adjustment is smooth and easy to use, offering a wide range of adjustment angles for your comfort.


Above: full height adjustment range shown. Click for larger versions

The height adjustment offers a total 130mm adjustment range. It is smooth and very easy to move. At the lowest height, the bottom edge of the screen is ~50mm from the top of the desk, and at the maximum height it is ~180mm.

Side to side swivel is a bit stiff to use. The bottom of the base has a rotating section to it which helps you move the screen side to side, but it isn't the easiest to use. Rotation into portrait mode is available but also quite stiff to operate.

A summary of the screens ergonomic adjustments is shown below:

Function

Range

Smoothness

Ease of Use

Tilt

Yes

Smooth

Easy

Height

130mm

Smooth

Very easy

Swivel

Yes

Smooth

Stiff

Rotate

Yes

Quite Smooth

Quite stiff

Overall

Good range of adjustments but movements are a little stiffer than hoped, especially swivel

The materials were of a good standard and the build quality felt good as well. There was no audible noise from the screen, even when conducting specific tests which can often identify buzzing issues. The whole screen remained very cool even during prolonged use as well which was pleasing.

 
Above: input connections shown. Click for larger version

The back of the screen has the various connection options available. These are DVI, HDMI, DisplayPort, D-sub VGA, audio input and audio output.



OSD Menu

     
Above: OSD control buttons front view (left) and rear view (right)

The OSD menu is controlled through a series of 5 pressable buttons located on the rear right hand edge of the screen. There is also a pressable power on/off button. You have to feel behind the screen to use these buttons but there is a little ridge on each so you know where you are, and on the front of the bezel is a small grey circle so you know which button you are pressing. When pressing any of the buttons a guide appears on the screen (as shown in the Low Blue Light Mode photo example below) telling you what each of the buttons will then do, whether that's scroll up or down, select, exit etc. The power LED is located on the right hand side of the screen and you can't really see this during use of the screen. It glows green during normal operation and amber in standby.

    

Pressing any of the buttons first of all pops up the quick launch menu as shown above (left). By default there are the options shown, but you can actually customise these in the main OSD to something you use more regularly if you want. You can launch into these quick access menus by pressing the corresponding button. Above (right) is the Low Blue Light Mode menu with 4 options available with different levels of blue light reduction.

   

The quick access menus for volume control and input selection are shown above as well.

The main OSD menu is split in to 6 sections shown down the left hand side. As you scroll down these sections, the options available in each are shown in the right. In these photos, quite a few of the options listed are a very light grey, which hasn't been picked out very well by the camera. As a result there are quite a lot of "hidden" options in each section but we will try and explain anything useful in the text here.

The first 'Display' menu allows you to choose the input. If you are using D-sub VGA then a few other options related to the signal and image are shown as you would normally see from a VGA input.

The 'Picture' menu contains a lot of options. There are settings here for things like brightness and contrast, as well as the range of preset gamma and color temperature modes. If you scroll down past the bottom of the options shown there is also the AMA (Advanced Motion Accelerator = response time) control.

The 'Picture Advanced' menu has a few more advanced features. Shown here is the 'picture mode' option with a range of preset modes available to try. Greyed out here are options for Senseye Demo, Dynamic contrast, overscan, colour format and HDMI RGB PC range which appear depending on the connection used or mode you are in.

The 'Audio' menu allows you to control the speakers or audio output if you're sending sound to the screen over HDMI or via the audio input.

The 'System' menu allows you to control various aspects of the OSD menu itself, including changing the quick access options which is useful.

Finally the 'Ergonomics' section has a 'smart reminder' feature where you can set the time interval as well.

All in all we felt the OSD menu offered a good range of options. There were plenty of preset modes, and having control over things like the overdrive impulse are always welcome. The navigation was sometimes a little tricky because of the placement of the buttons, and it was not always immediately obvious which button you were lined up with. Once you had that figured out, the movement around the menus was quick and simple. The menu doesn't remember where you last were either, so if you exit the menu, you have to start all over again from the beginning when you next go in to it.

 


Power Consumption

In terms of power consumption the manufacturer lists an "on mode" consumption of 55W and less than 0.5W in standby. We carried out our normal tests to establish its power consumption ourselves.

State and Brightness Setting

Manufacturer Spec (W)

Measured Power Usage (W)

Default (100%)

55.0

44.6

Calibrated (18%)

-

21.5

Maximum Brightness (100%)

-

44.6

Minimum Brightness (0%)

-

17.0

Standby

<0.5

0.6

We tested this ourselves and found that out of the box the screen used 44.6W at the default 100% brightness setting. Once calibrated the screen reached 21.5W consumption, and in standby it used only 0.6W. We have plotted these results below compared with other screens we have tested. The consumption is comparable actually to the other W-LED backlit displays we have tested, with GB-r-LED backlit displays (Dell U2713H, ViewSonic VP2772 as examples) using a bit more than most W-LED backlights.



Panel and Backlighting

Panel Manufacturer

AU Optronics

Colour Palette

1.07 billion

Panel Technology

AHVA (IPS-type)

Colour Depth

8-bit + FRC

Panel Module

M270DAN01.0

Colour space

Standard gamut

Backlighting Type

W-LED

Colour space coverage (%)

80.0% NTSC, 100.0% sRGB, 79.1% Adobe RGB

Panel Part and Colour Depth

The BenQ GW2765HT utilises an AU Optronics M270DAN01.0 AHVA (Advanced Hyper Viewing Angle) panel. This is an IPS-type technology, not to be confused with AUO's AMVA (Vertical Alignment / VA type) technology. The panel is capable of producing 1.07 billion colours through an 8-bit colour depth and additional Frame Rate Control (FRC) stage. This "10-bit" support is available when using the DisplayPort interface only according to the spec sheet. Keep in mind whether this is practically useable and whether you're ever going to truly use that colour depth. You need to have a full 10-bit end to end workflow to take advantage of it which is still quite expensive to achieve and rare in the market, certainly for your average user. This includes relevant applications and graphics cards as well, so to many people this 10-bit support might be irrelevant.

The panel is confirmed when accessing the factory OSD menu as shown below:

Screen Coating

The screen coating on the GW2765HT is a light, semi-glossy anti-glare (AG) offering. Thankfully it isn't a heavily grainy coating like some old IPS panels feature. It retains its anti-glare properties to avoid too many unwanted reflections of a full glossy coating, but does not produce an too grainy or dirty an image that some thicker AG coatings can. There were no cross-hatching patterns visible on the coating.


Backlight Type and Colour Gamut

The screen uses a White-LED (W-LED) backlight unit which has become very popular in today's market. This helps reduce power consumption compared with older CCFL backlight units and brings about some environmental benefits as well. The W-LED unit offers a standard colour gamut which is equal to the sRGB colour space (100% sRGB quoted). Anyone wanting to work with wider colour spaces would need to consider wide gamut CCFL screens or the newer range of GB-r-LED type displays available now. If you want to read more about colour spaces and gamut then please have a read of our detailed article.


Backlight Dimming and Flicker

We tested the screen to establish the methods used to control backlight dimming. Our in depth article talks in more details about a common method used for this which is called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM). This in itself gives cause for concern to some users who have experienced eye strain, headaches and other symptoms as a result of the flickering backlight caused by this technology. We use a photosensor + oscilloscope system to measure backlight dimming control with a high level of accuracy and ease. These tests allow us to establish

1) Whether PWM is being used to control the backlight
2) The frequency and other characteristics at which this operates, if it is used
3) Whether a flicker may be introduced or potentially noticeable at certain settings

If PWM is used for backlight dimming, the higher the frequency, the less likely you are to see artefacts and flicker. The duty cycle (the time for which the backlight is on) is also important and the shorter the duty cycle, the more potential there is that you may see flicker. The other factor which can influence flicker is the amplitude of the PWM, measuring the difference in brightness output between the 'on' and 'off' states. Please remember that not every user would notice a flicker from a backlight using PWM, but it is something to be wary of. It is also a hard thing to quantify as it is very subjective when talking about whether a user may or may not experience the side effects.


100%                                                  50%                                                  0%


Above scale = 1 horizontal grid = 5ms

At all brightness settings a constant voltage is applied to the backlight and there is no sign of Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) being used. Instead, a direct current (DC) method is used and the screen is certified and confirmed as being flicker free. Good news.

Pulse Width Modulation Used

No

Cycling Frequency

n/a

Possible Flicker at

 

100% Brightness

No

50% Brightness

No

0% Brightness

No

For an up to date list of all flicker-free (PWM free) monitors please see our Flicker Free Monitor Database.

 


Contrast Stability and Brightness

We wanted to see how much variance there was in the screens contrast as we adjusted the monitor setting for brightness. In theory, brightness and contrast are two independent parameters, and good contrast is a requirement regardless of the brightness adjustment. Unfortunately, such is not always the case in practice. We recorded the screens luminance and black depth at various OSD brightness settings, and calculated the contrast ratio from there. Graphics card settings were left at default with no ICC profile or calibration active. Tests were made using an X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter. It should be noted that we used the BasICColor calibration software here to record these, and so luminance at default settings may vary a little from the LaCie Blue Eye Pro report.

OSD Brightness

Luminance
(cd/m2)

Black Point (cd/m2)

Contrast Ratio
( x:1)

100

367.24

0.37

993

90

340.27

0.34

1001

80

311.80

0.31

1006

70

282.66

0.28

1010

60

252.27

0.25

1009

50

221.00

0.22

1005

40

190.90

0.19

1005

30

161.15

0.16

1007

20

128.86

0.13

991

10

95.87

0.10

959

0

62.15

0.06

1036

 

Total Luminance Adjustment Range (cd/m2)

305.09

Brightness OSD setting controls backlight?

Total Black Point Adjustment Range (cd/m2)

0.31

Average Static Contrast Ratio

1002:1

PWM Free? 

Recommended OSD setting for 120 cd/m2

17

The brightness control gave us a very good range of adjustment. At the top end the maximum luminance reached 367 cd/m2 which was high, and even a bit higher than the specified maximum brightness of 350 cd/m2 from the manufacturer. There was a decent 305 cd/m2 adjustment range in total, and so at the minimum setting you could reach down to a low luminance of 62 cd/m2. This should be adequate for those wanting to work in darkened room conditions with low ambient light. A setting of 17 in the OSD menu should return you a luminance of around 120 cd/m2 at default settings. It should be noted that the brightness regulation is controlled without the need for Pulse Width Modulation, using a Direct Current (DC) method for all brightness settings between 100 and 0% and so the screen is flicker free.

We have plotted the luminance trend on the graph above. The screen behaves as it should in this regard, with a reduction in the luminance output of the screen controlled by the reduction in the OSD brightness setting. This is a linear relationship.

The average contrast ratio of the screen was very good for an IPS panel with an average of 1002:1. This was very stable across the brightness adjustment range as shown above although at the lowest brightness settings it did fluctuate a little.



Testing Methodology

An important thing to consider for most users is how a screen will perform out of the box and with some basic manual adjustments. Since most users won't have access to hardware colorimeter tools, it is important to understand how the screen is going to perform in terms of colour accuracy for the average user.

We restored our graphics card to default settings and disabled any previously active ICC profiles and gamma corrections. The screen was tested at default factory settings using the DVI interface, and analysed using an X-rite i1 Pro Spectrophotometer (not to be confused with the i1 Display Pro colorimeter) combined with LaCie's Blue Eye Pro software suite. An X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter was also used to verify the black point and contrast ratio since the i1 Pro spectrophotometer is less reliable at the darker end.


Targets for these tests are as follows:

  • CIE Diagram - validates the colour space covered by the monitors backlighting in a 2D view, with the black triangle representing the displays gamut, and other reference colour spaces shown for comparison

  • Gamma - we aim for 2.2 which is the default for computer monitors

  • Colour temperature / white point - we aim for 6500k which is the temperature of daylight

  • Luminance - we aim for 120 cd/m2, which is the recommended luminance for LCD monitors in normal lighting conditions

  • Black depth - we aim for as low as possible to maximise shadow detail and to offer us the best contrast ratio

  • Contrast ratio - we aim for as high as possible. Any dynamic contrast ratio controls are turned off here if present

  • dE average / maximum - as low as possible. If DeltaE >3, the color displayed is significantly different from the theoretical one, meaning that the difference will be perceptible to the viewer. If DeltaE <2, LaCie considers the calibration a success; there remains a slight difference, but it is barely undetectable. If DeltaE < 1, the color fidelity is excellent.



Default Performance and Setup

Default settings of the screen were as follows:

Monitor OSD Option

Default Settings

Brightness

100

Contrast

50

Picture Mode

Standard

Gamma

3

Color Temperature

Normal


BenQ GW2765HT - Default Settings

  

 

Default Settings

luminance (cd/m2)

385

Black Point (cd/m2)

0.39

Contrast Ratio

998:1

 

Initially out of the box the screen was set in the default 'standard' picture mode. We left the gamma and color temperature settings at their defaults as well as shown in the table above. The screen was very bright as it was set at a default 100% brightness setting. Colour balance felt good, and you could tell it was a standard gamut screen. We went ahead and measured the default state with the i1 Pro.

 

The CIE diagram on the left of the image confirms that the monitors colour gamut (black triangle) is roughly equal to the sRGB colour space. There is some minor over-coverage in quite a few areas, but not by anything significant. Default gamma was recorded at 2.1 average, leaving it with a small 3% deviance from the target of 2.2 which was reasonable. White point was measured at 5983k being a little too warm compared with the target of 6500k which was a bit of a shame, showing an 8% deviance.

 

 

Luminance was recorded at an overly bright 385 cd/m2 which is far too high for prolonged general use. The screen was set at a default 100% brightness in the OSD menu but that is easy to change of course to reach a more comfortable setting without impacting any other aspect of the setup. The black depth was 0.39 cd/m2 at this default brightness setting, giving us a very good (for a IPS-type panel) static contrast ratio of 998:1. Colour accuracy was very good out of the box with a default dE average of only 1.9, and maximum of 2.8. Testing the screen with various gradients showed smooth transitions with no sign of any banding thankfully. There was some slight gradation evident as you will see from most monitors in darker tones. Overall the default setup was good, with the gamma, contrast and colour accuracy being good. The colour temperature was the only area which really let it down, being a little too warm out of the box.

 

 


Colour Temperatures and Gamma

 

The GW2765HT features a range of 3 'color temperature' modes along with a user configurable mode within the OSD menu as shown in the below screen shots. There are also 5 pre-defined gamma modes available to choose from. We measured the screen with the X-rite i1 Pro spectrophotometer in each of these modes to establish their colour temperature / white point. We also tested the average gamma in each mode, while color temperature was left at the default 'normal' setting. All other settings were left at factory defaults and no ICC profile was active. The results are recorded below:

 

 

Gamma

Gamma Mode

Average Gamma

Deviance from 2.2 Gamma

1

1.9

15%

2

2.1

5%

3

2.1

3%

4

2.5

12%

5

2.7

22%

 

 

Colour Temperature

Color Temp Mode

Measured White point (k)

Normal

5983

Bluish

8586

Reddish

5462

 

The default gamma mode of 3 delivered us an average gamma closest to the 2.2 target, with only a minor 3% deviance. With the color temperature setting, the bluish and reddish modes behaved as they should, making the image cooler or warmer as expected. Unfortunately the normal mode was not very close to our 6500k target, so you would have to enter the user define mode and play around with the RGB channels to get a white point closer to this target. The RGB settings listed in the following section should help return a white point closer to 6500k.

 

 

 

Calibration

 

We used the X-rite i1 Pro spectrophotometer combined with the LaCie Blue Eye Pro software package to achieve these results and reports. An X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter was used to validate the black depth and contrast ratios due to lower end limitations of the i1 Pro device.

 

Monitor OSD Option

Calibrated Settings

Brightness

18

Contrast

50

Picture Mode

User

Gamma

3

Color Temperature

User Define

RGB

92, 92, 100


BenQ GW2765HT - Calibrated Settings

  
 

 

Calibrated Settings

luminance (cd/m2)

117

Black Point (cd/m2)

0.12

Contrast Ratio

944:1

 

We changed to the 'user' preset mode first of all which would give us access to the 'user define' color temperature mode, and therefore control over the RGB channels. We also had access to make changes to the brightness and contrast settings which are available in all the modes. All these OSD changes allowed us to obtain an optimum hardware starting point and setup before software level changes would be made at the graphics card level. We left the  LaCie software to calibrate to "max" brightness which would just retain the luminance of whatever brightness we'd set the screen to, and would not in any way try and alter the luminance at the graphics card level, which can reduce contrast ratio. These adjustments before profiling the screen would help preserve tonal values and limit banding issues. After this we let the software carry out the LUT adjustments and create an ICC profile.

 

 

Average gamma was now corrected to 2.2 average, correcting the 3% deviance we'd seen out of the box. The white point was also corrected to the target, now measured at 6512k, correcting the fairly large 8% deviance out of the box. Luminance had been improved thanks to the adjustment to the brightness control and was now being measured at 117 cd/m2. The next step up for the brightness control bumped luminance up to 122 cd/m2, so we left it here at a setting of 18. This left us a black depth of 0.12 cd/m2 and maintained a good static contrast ratio (for an IPS-type panel) of 944:1. This had dropped slightly once calibrated because of the adjustments to the RGB channels. Colour accuracy of the resulting profile was very good, with dE average of 0.2 and maximum of 0.8. LaCie would consider colour fidelity to be very good overall. Testing the screen with various colour gradients showed mostly smooth transitions. There was some slight gradation in darker tones but no banding introduced due to the adjustments to the graphics card LUT from the profilation of the screen which was pleasing. You can use our settings and try our calibrated ICC profile if you wish, which are available in our ICC profile database. Keep in mind that results will vary from one screen to another and from one computer / graphics card to another.

 

 

 

 

Calibration Performance Comparisons


 

 

The comparisons made in this section try to give you a better view of how each screen performs, particularly out of the box which is what is going to matter to most consumers. When comparing the default factory settings for each monitor it is important to take into account several measurement areas - gamma, white point and colour accuracy. There's no point having a low dE colour accuracy figure if the gamma curve is way off for instance. A good factory calibration requires all 3 to be well set up. We have deliberately not included luminance in this comparison since this is normally far too high by default on every screen. However, that is very easily controlled through the brightness setting (on most screens) and should not impact the other areas being measured anyway. It is easy enough to obtain a suitable luminance for your working conditions and individual preferences, but a reliable factory setup in gamma, white point and colour accuracy is important and not as easy to change accurately without a calibration tool.

 

From these comparisons we can also compare the calibrated colour accuracy, black depth and contrast ratio. After a calibration the gamma, white point and luminance should all be at their desired targets.

 

 

Default setup of the screen out of the box was good with a gamma being very close to the target, contrast ratio being strong (for an IPS-type panel) and dE colour accuracy being excellent. The only area which was a little off was the colour temperature, being too warm by 8% compared with the target.

 

 

 

The display was strong when it came to black depth and contrast ratio for an IPS-type panel. With a calibrated contrast ratio of 944:1 we were pleased with the result for this technology. It can't compete with VA panel types which can reach over 2000:1 easily, and commonly up to 3000:1.

 


Viewing Angles


Above: Viewing angles shown from front and side, and  from above and below. Click for larger image

Viewing angles of the GW2765HT were very good as you would expect from an IPS-type panel (AHVA used here). Horizontally there was very little colour tone shift until wide angles past about 45. A slight darkening of the image occurred horizontally from wider angles as you can see above as the contrast shifted slighting. Contrast shifts were slightly more noticeable in the vertical field but overall they were very good. The screen offered the wide viewing angles of IPS-type technology and was free from the restrictive fields of view of TN Film panels, especially in the vertical plane. It was also free of the off-centre contrast shift you see from VA panels and a lot of the quite obvious gamma and colour tone shift you see from some of the modern AMVA and PVA offerings. All as expected really from a modern panel of this technology.


Above: View of an all black screen from the side. Click for larger version

On a black image there is a characteristic white glow when viewed from an angle, commonly referred to as IPS-glow. This is common on most modern IPS-type panels and can be distracting to some users. If you view dark content from a normal head-on viewing position, you can actually see this glow as your eyes look towards the edges of the screen. This  could be distracting if you work with a lot of dark content perhaps.



Panel Uniformity

We wanted to test here how uniform the brightness and colour temperature was across the screen, as well as identify any leakage from the backlight in dark lighting conditions. Measurements of the luminance and colour temperature were taken at 35 points across the panel on a pure white background. The measurements for luminance were taken using BasICColor's calibration software package, combined with an X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter with a central point on the screen calibrated to 120 cd/m2. Measurements for colour temperature (white point) were taken using BasICColor software and the i1 Pro spectrophotometer which can more accurately measure the white point of different backlighting technologies. The below uniformity diagram shows the difference, as a percentage, between the measurement recorded at each point on the screen, as compared with the central reference point.

It is worth noting that panel uniformity can vary from one screen to another, and can depend on manufacturing lines, screen transport and other local factors. This is only a guide of the uniformity of the sample screen we have for review.
 


Uniformity of Luminance

The luminance uniformity of the screen was pretty good overall. The upper corners of the screen were a little darker than the lower central region of the panel, and luminance deviated by about 19% in the most extreme case, down to 101 cd/m2. The luminance did seem to vary from top to bottom in these tests, but it was hard to spot during normal use as the deviance was not massive. Around 63% of the screen was within a 10% deviance from the centrally calibrated point which was not too bad.


Backlight Leakage


Above: All black screen in a darkened room. Click for larger version

As usual we also tested the screen with an all black image and in a darkened room. A camera was used to capture the result. The camera showed there was pretty much no backlight leakage here at all. A very small amount was detected in the right hand corners but it was very slight. A pleasing result..

 


General and Office Applications

The GW2765HT feature a large 2560 x 1440 WQHD resolution which is only just a little bit less vertically than a 30" screen. The pixel pitch of 0.233 mm is small as a result, and by comparison a standard 16:10 format 24" model has a pixel pitch of 0.270mm and a 30" model has 0.250mm. Some users may find the small text a little too small to read comfortably, and we'd advise caution if you are coming from a 19" or 22" screen for instance where the pixel pitch and text are much larger. The extra screen size takes some getting used to over a few days as there really is a lot of room to work with but once you do, it's excellent. The massive resolution is really good for office and general use, giving you a really big screen area to work with. It is a noticeable upgrade from a 24" 1080p or 1200p resolution, and it's good to see BenQ have opted to go with the high res panel here rather than their more common 1080p 27" models. For those wanting a high resolution for CAD, design, photo work etc, this is a really good option. The image was very sharp and crisp and text was very clear. With its WQHD display, you enjoy 77% more desktop space than a full HD screen to spread out your windows and palettes.

The light AG, semi-glossy style coating of the AHVA panel is certainly welcome, and a very positive change from the older grainy and 'dirty' appearance of older IPS AG coatings. The wide viewing angles provided by the AHVA panel technology on both horizontal and vertical planes, helps minimize on-screen colour shift when viewed from different angles. The default setup of the screen was very good in most regards, although the colour temperature let it down a little. We were also pleased with the strong ~1000:1 contrast ratio provided here. Some simple tweaking of the RGB levels as per our calibration section should return you a white point closer to 6500k, leaving you with a pretty reliable setup even without a calibration tool.

The brightness range of the screen was also very good, with the ability to offer a luminance between 367 and 62 cd/m2. This should mean the screen is perfectly useable in a wide variety of ambient light conditions, including darkened rooms. A setting of ~17 in the OSD brightness control should return you a luminance close to 120 cd/m2 out of the box. On another positive note, the brightness regulation is controlled without the need for the use of the now infamous Pulse-Width Modulation (PWM), and so those who suffer from eye fatigue or headaches associated with flickering backlights need not worry.

There was no audible noise or buzzing from the screen, even when specifically looking for it using test images with a large amount of text at once. The screen also remains cool even during prolonged use. There are no specific preset modes for reading, but you can easily set up one of the other modes to your liking. The Low Blue Light Mode is a useful feature when it comes to prolonged screen usage, helping protect your eyes and make viewing more comfortable. We've already seen this in action when we tested the XL2720Z, and BenQ now provide this as a feature on all their new screens. There are a decent range of input connections on this model, catering for the demands of different graphics cards well. Useful to also have cables for VGA, HDMI and DisplayPort included, although we're not sure why they didn't also bundle a DVI?

The extra features are a little limited. There are some basic 2x 1W speakers integrated into the screen, along with audio input and output connections. They might be ok for the odd Youtube clip, office sounds or an mp3, but aren't really up to much more. Sadly there are no USB ports provided on this model, which is a bit of a shame as they've almost become standard on desktop displays now. Other office-related features like ambient light sensors and human motion sensors are not provided here. On the other hand there was a great range of ergonomic adjustments available from the stand allowing you to obtain a comfortable position for a wide variety of angles. The VESA mounting support may also be useful to some people as well.

 
Above: photo of text at 2560 x 1440 (top) and 1920 x 1080 (bottom)

The screen is designed to run at its native resolution of 2560 x 1440 and at a 60Hz recommended refresh rate. However, if you want you are able to run the screen outside of this resolution. We tested the screen at a lower 1920 x 1080 resolution to see how the screen handles the interpolation of the resolution, while maintaining the same aspect ratio of 16:9. At native resolution the text was very sharp and clear as we've already discussed. When running at a 1920 x 1080 we were impressed actually with how sharp the text appeared. There was very little overlap of pixels at all, and the text looked good. The screen handles interpolation very well it seems.


Support TFTCentral, buy the BenQ GW2765HT using our affiliate link
 



Responsiveness and Gaming

Quoted G2G Response Time

4ms G2G

Quoted ISO Response Time

12ms

Panel Manufacturer and Technology

AU Optronics

Panel Part

M270DAN01.0

Overdrive Used

Yes

Overdrive Control Available to User

AMA

Overdrive Settings

Off, High, Premium

The GW2765HT is rated by BenQ as having a 4ms G2G response time, which indicates the panel uses overdrive / response time compensation (RTC) technology to boost pixel transitions across grey to grey changes. There is user control over the overdrive impulse within the OSD menu using the 'AMA' (Advanced Motion Accelerator) option. The part being used is the AU Optronics M270DAN01.0 AHVA (Advanced Hyper Viewing Angles) panel. This is an IPS equivalent technology, as opposed to their AMVA variety. Have a read about response time in our specs section if you need additional information about this measurement.

We will first test the screen using our thorough response time testing method. This uses an oscilloscope and photosensor to measure the pixel response times across a series of different transitions, in the full range from 0 (black) to 255 (white). This will give us a realistic view of how the monitor performs in real life, as opposed to being reliant only on a manufacturers spec. We can work out the response times for changing between many different shades, calculate the maximum, minimum and average grey to grey (G2G) response times, and provide an evaluation of any overshoot present on the monitor.

We use an ETC M526 oscilloscope for these measurements along with a custom photosensor device. Have a read of our response time measurement article for a full explanation of the testing methodology and reported data.
 

Response Time Setting Comparison (AMA Option)

The GW2765HT comes with a user control for the overdrive impulse available within the OSD menu in the 'picture' section as shown above. There are three options under the AMA setting. First of all we carried out a smaller sample set of measurements in all three of the AMA settings. These, along with various motion tests allowed us to quickly identify which was the optimum overdrive setting for this screen.

First we tested the screen with the AMA setting off. Average response times were measured at 12ms G2G. Some transitions, particularly those from black to darker shades were slower, reaching up to 18 - 21 ms. The pixel response times were pretty slow with AMA off, although with overdrive not being applied there was no overshoot at all.

With AMA now on 'High', the middle setting, response times had improved a fair amount. Average G2G response time was now lower at 9.5ms. Some of the slower transitions had been improved as well, although black > dark grey (e.g. 0 > 50) still seemed an issue. Some very minor overshoot was creeping in to the readings but not at any level you'd see with the naked eye. This mode definitely offered some improvement over AMA off without any draw backs.

With AMA pushed up to the maximum 'premium' setting, response times were once again improved. Average G2G was now 7.4, and the slow transitions had all been sped up. None reached down as low as 4ms G2G so the screen couldn't live up to its adventurous spec. Those transitions which had proved slow before with AMA off now showed the most overshoot, a side effect of pushing the overdrive impulse aggressively. The overshoot was high enough to be noticeable in practice, and this mode is probably a bit too aggressive for our liking. The 'high' mode seemed to offer a better balance and is our preferred option. This same panel was used in the BenQ BL2710PT and on that screen the Premium AMA mode was ridiculously aggressive, producing a response time of around 5.4ms G2G average, but with overshoot ranging up to 130.6% in the worst case! Thankfully BenQ have been a little more modest with the Premium AMA mode here.


Transition: 0-50-0 (scale = 20ms)

As an example, the overshoot can be seen above for the 0-50 transition, where it had a 20.5% overshoot.

If we also carry out some subjective assessment of the screen during gaming and with the use of the PixPerAn moving car tests, we can also see the differences between each AMA mode easily enough with the naked eye. With AMA Off there was a noticeable blur to the moving image as response times were pretty slow. As you switch up to the 'High' setting the blur is reduced nicely and the moving object becomes sharper. There is still some blurring noticeable but no sign of any overshoot at all. When you switch up to the 'Premium' AMA mode the blurring is reduced a little more, but you can pick out some slight overshoot in the test images, where the trails are a bit brighter than they should be. We know from our oscilloscope tests that there is some pronounced overshoot on certain transitions, and not all of them are picked out in these tests.

 

More Detailed Measurements - AMA High

Having established that the AMA 'High' mode seemed to offer the best response/overshoot balance we carried out our normal wider range of measurements as shown below:

The average G2G response time was more accurately measured at 10.1ms which was ok, but not great for an IPS-type panel overall. Some transitions were faster at 6 - 7 ms minimum, particularly when changing to white (x > 255) or to black (x > 0). The rise and fall time average was very similar and so pixel transition times were fairly consistent across the board, although a few of the changes from black to darker grey shades were slower at 17 - 19ms and dragged the average up a bit.

There was pretty much no overshoot as well in this AMA mode, with only a couple of transitions showing anything at all, and even then, very low and nothing you'd notice ever in practice. The overdrive impulse was being applied well and in a controlled fashion which was pleasing. If anything it was perhaps not quite aggressive enough as we would have probably preferred a slightly faster pixel response time, and put up with some minor overshoot in some cases.



Display Comparisons

The above comparison table and graph shows you the lowest, average and highest G2G response time measurement for a selection of screens we have tested with our oscilloscope system. There is also a colour coded mark next to each screen in the table to indicate the RTC overshoot error, as the response time figure alone doesn't tell the whole story.

The response time performance of the GW2765HT using the 'High' AMA setting was pretty good overall for an IPS-type panel, although not great. With an average G2G response time of 10.1ms measured, it was a little behind the fastest IPS models (where a massive amount of overshoot was not introduced) like the Dell U2415 (8.6ms) and U2414H (8.9ms). Those models are our reference point and represent about as good as you can get from modern IPS response times without introducing a significant amount of overshoot. The GW2765HT was at least free from any noticeable overshoot, but we would have perhaps even traded some low levels of RTC error for a slightly boosted response time. The AMA 'Premium' setting pushed things a bit too far though, so somewhere in the middle would have been useful. Some IPS-type models can reach lower response times, like the Dell U2713H for instance (7.2ms) but not without the cost of very high overshoot. Modern TN Film panels are still much faster, reaching down to 2.9ms for instance in the example of the new Asus ROG Swift PG278Q (with moderate overshoot).

 

The screen was also tested using the chase test in PixPerAn for the following display comparisons. As a reminder, a series of pictures are taken on the highest shutter speed and compared, with the best case example shown on the left, and worst case example on the right. This should only be used as a rough guide to comparative responsiveness but is handy for a comparison between different screens and technologies as well as a means to compare those screens we tested before the introduction of our oscilloscope method.


27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA (AMA = High)

In practice the BenQ GW2765HT performed best with AMA Response Time set to 'High'. There were pretty low levels of motion blur and no ghosting visible. Thankfully no overshoot was detectable at all which was pleasing.


27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA (AMA = High)


27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA (AMA Setting = High)


27" 12ms G2G Samsung PLS (Response Time = Advanced)


27" 8ms G2G LG.Display AH-IPS


27" 5ms G2G Samsung PLS (Trace Free = 40)

We first of all compare the GW2765HT against some other popular 27" general purpose displays. The GW2765HT performed very similarly to the BL2710PT which is not surprising since it is actually based on the exact same panel. Both were set to AMA 'High' as the optimum response time level and produced very similar results. The ViewSonic VP2770-LED was again very comparable in practice with similar low levels of blurring. The Dell U2713HM was slightly faster and showed a slightly lower level of blur to the moving image. Both the Dell and ViewSonic models were free from overshoot as well like the BenQ's. Finally the Asus PB278Q was a little faster than the GW2765HT with a little less blurring to the moving image, but some overshoot was introduced here as a side-effect.

 


27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA (AMA = High)


24" 8ms G2G LG.Display AH-IPS (Response Time = Normal)


23.8" 8ms G2G LG.Display AH-IPS


23.8" 8ms G2G LG.Display AH-IPS

We can first of all compare the performance of the GW2765HT against 3 fast (for IPS technology) 24" range screens from Dell. The three Dell screens have an average measured response time of 8.6 - 8.9ms G2G so were a little faster than the BenQ. They showed slightly lower blur in practice but it was not a massive amount.



27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA (AMA = High)


27" 1ms G2G AU Optronics TN Film @ 144Hz (OD = Normal)


27" 1ms G2G AU Optronics TN Film + 144Hz (AMA = High)


23.5" 4ms G2G Sharp MVA + 120Hz

We've also included a comparison above against 3 very fast 120Hz+ compatible screens we have tested. The other screens shown here are all aimed primarily at gamers and have various features and extras which make them more suitable overall for gaming. Firstly there is a comparison against the Asus ROG Swift PG278Q with its 144Hz refresh rate and fast response time TN Film panel. This showed very fast pixel response times and smooth movement thanks to its increased refresh rate. You are able to reduce the motion blur even more through the use of the ULMB strobed backlight as well if you need to. In other related areas this screen also supports NVIDIA's G-sync technology. There was some slight overshoot noticeable on the Asus but nothing major.

Then there is a comparison against the BenQ XL2720Z with another very fast TN Film panel and 144Hz refresh rate. This showed very low levels of motion blur, but some dark overshoot was introduced as a side-effect as you can see. This screen even includes a native Blur Reduction mode to help eliminate further perceived motion blur.

Lastly there is the MVA based Eizo FG2421 screen with a fast response time (especially for the panel technology being used) and 120Hz refresh rate support. There is also an additional 'Turbo 240' motion blur reduction mode which really helps reduce the perceived motion blur in practice.

While these pixel response tests from PixPerAn give one view of the performance of the panel, there is something else going on as well here which can't be picked out by the camera. All of these other gaming models are running at 120Hz (or higher) refresh rates, which allows for improved 120fps+ frame rates and in some cases the support of 3D stereoscopic content as well. This can really help improve smoothness and the overall gaming experience so these screens still have the edge when it comes to fast gaming. Any additional extras to reduce perceived motion blur can also have a real benefit in practical terms, and again not easy to pick out with this camera method.


The overall gaming performance of the BenQ GW2765HT was reasonably good for an IPS-panel. The AMA 'High' setting seemed to offer the optimum balance between response times and overshoot. With a 10.1ms G2G average it was comparable to the BenQ BL2710PT we'd tested before with the same panel. It couldn't quite keep up with the faster IPS models like the Dell U2415 (8.6ms G2G) but was not really far behind. Thankfully it was free from any overshoot problems at this setting which was very pleasing. It is a screen lacking higher refresh rate support or any advanced gaming features like blur reduction modes or G-sync, but as a general screen with decent IPS gaming performance, it's decent enough.
 



Additional Gaming Features

Aspect Ratio Control - The GW2765HT has 3 options for aspect ratio control through the OSD 'picture advanced' menu as shown above. There are options for 1:1 pixel mapping, full (fill the screen regardless of source aspect), or 'aspect' (fill as much of the screen as possible while keeping the correct aspect). A good selection of options there which should meet user demands fine..

Preset Modes - There is a specific 'game' available in the OSD which appears to make the image a little cooler than our calibrated custom mode. It gives you access to the dynamic contrast ratio control if you want to use it as well.



Lag

We have written an in depth article about input lag and the various measurement techniques which are used to evaluate this aspect of a display. It's important to first of all understand the different methods available and also what this lag means to you as an end-user.

Input Lag vs. Display Lag vs. Signal Processing

To avoid confusion with different terminology we will refer to this section of our reviews as just "lag" from now on, as there are a few different aspects to consider, and different interpretations of the term "input lag". We will consider the following points here as much as possible. The overall "display lag" is the first, that being the delay between the image being shown on the TFT display and that being shown on a CRT. This is what many people will know as input lag and originally was the measure made to explain why the image is a little behind when using a CRT. The older stopwatch based methods were the common way to measure this in the past, but through advanced studies have been shown to be quite inaccurate. As a result, more advanced tools like SMTT provide a method to measure that delay between a TFT and CRT while removing the inaccuracies of older stopwatch methods.

In reality that lag / delay is caused by a combination of two things - the signal processing delay caused by the TFT electronics / scaler, and the response time of the pixels themselves. Most "input lag" measurements over the years have always been based on the overall display lag (signal processing + response time) and indeed the SMTT tool is based on this visual difference between a CRT and TFT and so measures the overall display lag. In practice the signal processing is the element which gives the feel of lag to the user, and the response time of course can impact blurring, and overall image quality in moving scenes. As people become more aware of lag as a possible issue, we are of course keen to try and understand the split between the two as much as possible to give a complete picture.

The signal processing element within that is quite hard to identify without extremely high end equipment and very complicated methods. In fact the studies by Thomas Thiemann which really kicked this whole thing off were based on equipment worth >100,1000 Euro, requiring extremely high bandwidths and very complicated methods to trigger the correct behaviour and accurately measure the signal processing on its own. Other techniques which are being used since are not conducted by Thomas (he is a freelance writer) or based on this equipment or technique, and may also be subject to other errors or inaccuracies based on our conversations with him since. It's very hard as a result to produce a technique which will measure just the signal processing on its own unfortunately. Many measurement techniques are also not explained and so it is important to try and get a picture from various sources if possible to make an informed judgement about a display overall.

For our tests we will continue to use the SMTT tool to measure the overall "display lag". From there we can use our oscilloscope system to measure the response time across a wide range of grey to grey (G2G) transitions as recorded in our response time tests. Since SMTT will not include the full response time within its measurements, after speaking with Thomas further about the situation we will subtract half of the average G2G response time from the total display lag. This should allow us to give a good estimation of how much of the overall lag is attributable to the signal processing element on its own.

 

Lag Classification


To help in this section we will also introduce a broader classification system for these results to help categorise each screen as one of the following levels:

  • Class 1) Less than 16ms / 1 frame lag - should be fine for gamers, even at high levels

  • Class 2) A lag of 16 - 32ms / One to two frames - moderate lag but should be fine for many gamers. Caution advised for serious gaming and FPS

  • Class 3) A lag of more than 32ms / more than 2 frames - Some noticeable lag in daily usage, not suitable for high end gaming

For the full reviews of the models compared here and the dates they were written (and when screens were approximately released to the market), please see our full reviews index.

(Measurements in ms)

 

Total Display Lag (SMTT 2)

24.0

Pixel Response Time Element

5.05

Estimated Signal Processing Lag

18.95

Lag Classification

2

 Class 2

We have provided a comparison above against other models we have tested to give an indication between screens. The screens tested are split into two measurements which are based on our overall display lag tests (using SMTT) and half the average G2G response time, as measured by the oscilloscope. The response time is split from the overall display lag and shown on the graph as the green bar. From there, the signal processing (red bar) can be provided as a good estimation.

The screen showed a total average display lag of 24.0 ms as measured with SMTT 2. Taking into account half the average G2G response time at 5.05ms ('High' AMA Response Time setting), we can estimate that there is ~18.95 ms of signal processing lag on this screen. This is modest and equates to just over 1 frame of processing lag, which could be problematic for fast or competitive gaming.

 


Movies and Video

The following summarises the screens performance in video applications:

  • 27" screen size makes it a reasonable option for an all-in-one multimedia screen, but being quite a bit smaller than most modern LCD TV's nowadays.

  • 16:9 aspect ratio is more well suited to videos than a 16:10 format screen, leaving smaller borders on DVD's and wide screen content at the top and bottom.

  • 2560 x 1440 resolution can support full 1080 HD resolution content.

  • Digital interfaces support HDCP for any encrypted and protected content

  • HDMI and DisplayPort connections available. Nice to see HDMI connectivity included for modern DVD players, Blu-ray, consoles etc.

  • Cables provided in the box for DisplayPort and HDMI cable which is nice.

  • Light, semi-glossy style AG coating provides clear images with no major graininess, and without the unwanted reflections of a glossy solution.

  • Wide brightness range adjustment possible from the display, including high maximum luminance of ~367 cd/m2 and a good minimum luminance of 62 cd/m2. This should afford you very good control for different lighting conditions. Contrast ratio remains stable across most of that adjustment range as well and is very good for an IPS-type panel. Brightness regulation is controlled without the need for PWM and so is flicker free at all settings which is pleasing.

  • Black depth and contrast ratio are very good for an IPS-type panel at 944:1 after calibration. Detail in darker scenes should not be lost as a result.

  • There is a specific 'movie' preset mode available for movies or video in the OSD which looked fairly similar to our calibrated custom mode. Useful if you want to set up another preset for movie viewing where maybe you want brightness boosted somewhat compared with every day desktop use.

  • Good pixel responsiveness which can handle fast moving scenes in movies without issue. No overshoot issues when sticking to the 'high' AMA mode which is great news.

  • Wide viewing angles from IPS-type (AHVA) panel technology meaning several people could view the screen at once comfortable and from a whole host of different angles. White glow from an angle on black content may be problematic to some users.

  • No noticeable backlight leakage which is good, even in darkened room conditions.

  • Wide range of ergonomic adjustments available from the stand, allowing you to adjust the screen to suit varying viewing positions. The side to side swivel is too stiff and basically just involves you moving the whole screen, which might be a bit of a pain for viewing movies from a non desk position.

  • Basic 2x 1W integrated stereo speakers offered on this model, but not up to much for movie viewing, only the occasional Youtube clip or mp3. There is also an audio out connection if you want to connect to headphones or separate speakers when sending sound to the screen over HDMI.

  • Hardware aspect ratio control options are good, including options to maintain the source aspect and also for 1:1 pixel mapping.

  • Picture By Picture (PbP) or Picture In Picture (PiP) are not available on this model.

     


Conclusion

The BenQ GW2765HT performed pretty well overall, meeting our expectations really for this kind of display. Connectivity and features were solid, with a good range of video inputs and a decent stand provided. A few basic additional extras like simple speakers and an audio input added a little, but the screen was a little lacking in some common extras like USB ports for instance. The all-round performance was decent from the AHVA panel. Default setup was on the whole pretty good, if only they had just offered a slightly better colour temperature out of the box. The contrast ratio was impressive though and represented a good figure for an AHVA panel. Image stability and viewing angles were as expected from an IPS-type panel and we were pleased that BenQ continue to invest in flicker free backlighting and their useful Low Blue Light mode.

The GW2765HT uses the same AHVA panel as BenQ's BL2710PT model it should be noted. As a result, many areas of the screens performance are quite comparable. For instance the response times were basically the same when you had selected the optimum AMA setting. Lag was also the same between the two since the same scaler and electronics are presumably being used also. They were both a little too slow for serious, competitive gaming but offered reasonable performance for more regular users. Overall viewing angles, colour stability, IPS-glow etc were also the same between the two models. The GW2765HT has a better out of the box setup, as we'd found the BL2710PT to have a skewed gamma (2.5) at default settings. This was easy enough to correct on the BL of course with a simple setting change and once fixed, that model actually performed a little better before calibration because of its more reliable white point. The contrast ratio was much better on the GW model though, achieving 944:1 after calibration whereas the BL had only managed 788:1, so this was an area we were pleased to see had been improved.

While it offers similar performance characteristics from a panel point of view it has some different features. The BL model offers additional USB ports (v2 and 3), slightly better speakers (2x 3W), a human motion sensor, ambient light sensor and touch sensitive buttons. This carries a price premium of course of around 60 GBP. If you need some of these additional features then the BL series is available, but the GW model offers a more cost-effective option for the more general, basic user.

If you appreciate the review and enjoy reading and like our work, we would welcome a donation to the site to help us continue to make quality and detailed reviews for you.
 

Pros

Cons

Good default setup, but white point needs correcting a little. Strong contrast ratio

Missing a few extras like USB ports for instance

Good connectivity options and a decent stand

Default colour temperature could have been a little better

Flicker free backlight, no PWM

Lag is a little too high for serious gaming


Support TFTCentral, buy the BenQ GW2765HT using our affiliate link

 

 

Back to Top

 

Sections
______
 

Reviews

Articles

News

Forum

Buying Support

___________

 

TFT Selector

Specifications Explained

Terms and Functions

Technologies

Frequently Asked Questions

Resources

_______

 

Panel Search Tool
Settings and ICC Profiles Database

Monitor Panel Parts Database

Laptop Panel Parts Database

Links

About

_____

 

Contact

Donations

Store

Advertise

 


    Copyright, TFT Central.                 Privacy Policy and Cookies

 

     Search TFT Central