Introduction

There's been interest in Korean import monitors for a couple of years now, since manufacturers like Yamakasi and Achieva first appeared on the scene. Another manufacturer which has attracted buyer interest in recent times is QNIX. As with most of the models coming out of Korea the aim of the game seems to be low cost 27" sized screens, but featuring higher end panels as used in more expensive rivals from the likes of Dell, HP and Apple. These Korean models use IPS and PLS panels commonly to offer good all round performance, and are also famous in some cases for their ability to be "overclocked" to higher refresh rates.

Looking at QNIX's products there are actually 3 different versions of their 27" display as shown above. They differ in a few regards, most notably with connections being offered. QNIX have sent us their newest QX2710 model for review here, which is known by the rather long product name as the "QX2710 LED Evolution II DPmulti TRUE10". Breaking that down slightly you will see that all their 27" models shown above are "QX2710 LED Evolution II" displays. There is then a model with DisplayPort connectivity, giving rise to the "DPmulti" part of the product name. This model we have with us also features a "True" 10-bit panel as in the last part of the product name. For the purposes of this review we will refer to the screen throughout now as the "QX2710" for simplicity.

This model has a few features as you can see in the table above which make it particularly interesting to test. It uses an AU Optronics AHVA panel, the same as used in the BenQ BL2710PT and designed as an alternative to the popular LG.Display IPS technology which dominates the market. This supports a 10-bit colour depth as the product name suggests, and also apparently offers virtual 4k support (3840 x 2160 resolution) through the AD board inside the monitor. There is also a low blue light mode and flicker free backlight promoted, much like BenQ's own recent developments. The features list even mentions that the screen can be overclocked up to 120Hz. We will test all these features through the course of this review to check if they deliver.

Specifications and Features

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

The QNIX QX2710 version we have offers a full range of connectivity options. There are dual-link DVI, DisplayPort 1.2, HDMI and D-sub interfaces provided for video connections which is great to see. The digital interfaces are HDCP certified for encrypted content. Cables are provided in the box for DVI only.

The screen has an external power supply brick which is provided along with the necessary power cable which is a normal kettle lead. There are integrated 5+5W stereo speakers on this model and an audio jack if you need it and are sending audio to the screen over HDMI. There are no USB ports or other features like card readers, ambient light sensors or motion sensors. As a result it is certainly more limited than some more mainstream rivals, but that is one of the reasons the cost can be kept down.

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

OSD Menu

Above: views of OSD operational buttons on the bottom right hand edge of the screen

The screen is controlled through a series of 5 buttons located on the bottom edge in the lower right hand corner of the screen. The source button allows you to switch between the various inputs. This is actually quite a slow and cumbersome process and it takes a while to cycle to the one you want (if you have more than one device connected). You have to cycle through them in order each time as well to get to the one you want.

The down arrow gives you quick access to the volume control as shown above, if you're using the built in speakers or headphone jack. The up arrow switches between the two aspect ratio modes, wide and 4:3.

The "menu" button brings up the main OSD as shown above. This is split into 7 sections, although two are greyed out here as they relate to the analogue input only and we are using DVI.

The "bright / Cont" section gives you control over the brightness and contrast settings as you would expect.

The "color settings" menu gives you access to the colour preset modes and the user configurable mode, useful for calibration. The "OSD" section allows you to adjust the behaviour of the menu itself.

The "language" section is self explanatory. The "misc" section contains the aspect ratio control and DCR function. The 'initialize' setting does a factory restore of the screen.

All in all there were not many options or settings in the menu to play with. We would have liked to have seen better preset mode availability and perhaps certain settings defined for different uses. There is also no control over the overdrive impulse so we will have to hope the manufacturer has set this up appropriately. We did find navigation a little tricky in some cases and it wasn't as intuitive as it could have been. We found we sometimes switched the screen off accidentally via the power button which is locations next to the "up" arrow, and is not aligned with the power LED. Because the stand is fairly unstable the screen wobbles a lot when you use the buttons on the bottom edge, so it didn't feel very sturdy. One last minor gripe is if you reset the screen using the initialize option, the default language returns to Korean, so you have to find the language section and turn it back to English.

 

Power Consumption

In terms of power consumption the manufacturer lists 46.0W typical usage during operation and 0.5W in standby. We carried out our normal tests to establish its power consumption ourselves.

We tested this ourselves and found that out of the box the screen used 49.2W at the default 73% brightness setting. Once calibrated the screen reached 24.0W consumption, and in standby it used only 0.5W. We have plotted these results below compared with other screens we have tested. The consumption is very comparable to other W-LED backlit displays, with wide gamut GB-r-LED units like the Dell U2713H and ViewSonic VP2772 using slightly more (comparing calibrated states). The CCFL units like the Eizo SX2762W and NEC PA271W are even more power hungry.

Panel and Backlighting

Panel Part and Colour Depth

The QNIX QX2710 utilises an AU Optronics M270DAN01.0 AHVA (Advanced Hyper-Viewing Angle) panel which is capable of producing 1.07 billion colours. According to the detailed panel spec sheet this is done with an 8-bit colour depth and an additional Frame Rate Control (FRC) stage (8-bit + FRC) as opposed to a true 10-bit panel. This is a measure commonly taken on modern IPS panels as well to offer 10-bit colour support, and the FRC algorithm is very well implemented to the point that you'd be very hard pressed to tell any difference in practice compared with a 10-bit panel.

The panel offers support for 10-bit content. This gives a colour depth support for 1.07 billion colours. However,  you need to take into account 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.

This is the first panel produced by AU Optronics using their new AHVA technology, designed to offer similar performance to the very popular IPS tech produced by LG.Display. We have already seen the same panel used for the BenQ BL2710PT display as well. The panel is confirmed when dismantling the screen as shown:

 

Screen Coating

The screen coating on the QX2710 is a light anti-glare (AG) offering as opposed to any kind of glossy coating. This is contrary to a lot of other older competing IPS based screens which usually feature a grainy and aggressive AG solution. It retains its anti-glare properties to avoid unwanted reflections, but does not produce an overly grainy or dirty image that some AG coatings can. There are no visible cross-hatching issues with 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 approximately equal to the sRGB colour space (equating to ~72% NTSC). Anyone wanting to work with wider colour spaces would need to consider wide gamut CCFL screens, or perhaps the new range of GB-r-LED displays emerging. 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 100% brightness a constant voltage is applied to the backlight and there is no need for any kind of PWM regulation. As you begin to lower the brightness setting a low amplitude, low frequency oscillation is introduced as you can see above. This isn't a full off/on typical pulse width modulation operation and the amplitude is low. As you reduce the brightness the amplitude increases but even at the minimum 0% brightness setting the backlight is not being completely cycled off and on. If you refer to the scale on the vertical axis you can see that it is only oscillating between 1V and 0.5V, as opposed to between 1V and 0V, so there's a 50% amplitude when at the lowest brightness setting of the screen.

0% 20ms Scale
Above scale = 1 horizontal grid = 20ms

If we alter the horizontal scale from 5ms to 20ms per grid you can see the oscillation more clearly. We can measure the frequency of the PWM as well which is ~156Hz, which is low and could present problems to some users. At least there isn't a full 100% amplitude cycling but the frequency is low. This is all a bit odd since the screen is advertised as being flicker free when clearly it is not.

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

 

Contrast Stability and Brightness

The brightness control gave us a very good range of adjustment. At the top end the maximum luminance reached 288 cd/m² which was high, but a fair bit lower than the specified maximum brightness of 350 cd/m² from the manufacturer. There was a large 246 cd/m² adjustment range in total, and so at the minimum setting you could reach down to a luminance of 43 cd/m². This should be more than adequate for those wanting to work in darkened room conditions with low ambient light. A setting of 20 in the OSD menu should return you a luminance of around 120 cd/m² at default settings. Note that the brightness control doesn't change in steps of 1, so the next step down (17) is a bit lower than 120 cd/m².

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. Thankfully unlike some other Korean screens we've tested in the past the brightness control was altering the backlight intensity and not simply making digital white level adjustments. Screens using the latter method reduce luminance through digital changes, but this drastically impacts contrast ratio and does not offer any power saving benefits. Instead, a proper backlight control is achieved from the brightness setting on this model.

The brightness regulation was not a linear relationship and at the top end of the setting there was not much actual change in the luminance output of the screen. Only from a setting of ~80% did the luminance really change and drop as you then adjusted the setting lower. It should be noted that the brightness regulation is controlled by Pulse Width Modulation at a low ~156 Hz frequency but with a modest amplitude.

The average contrast ratio of the screen was 617:1 and it remained stable across the brightness adjustment range as shown above and represented a rather low figure for an IPS-type matrix. More comparisons with other screens later on in the review.

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.

I restored my 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:

QNIX QX2710 LED Evolution II DPmulti TRUE10 - Default Factory Settings

  

 

Out of the box the screen looked reasonable to the naked eye. Colours felt balanced and the temperature felt good as well. You could tell the screen was a standard sRGB gamut of course, as compared with any wide gamut display. The screen was far too bright which is normal, and this was at the screens default 73% brightness setting. 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) in this 'native' color adjust mode is approximately equal to the sRGB colour space. There was some slight over-coverage in blues and greens, but nothing too major. Default gamma was recorded at 2.1 average, leaving it with a small 6% deviance from the target of 2.2. White point was measured at 6921k leaving it again with a small 6% deviance from our target of 6500k.

 

Luminance was recorded at a very bright 286 cd/m² which is far too high for prolonged general use. The screen was set at a default 73% brightness in the OSD menu but that is easy to change of course to reach a more comfortable setting. The black depth was 0.45 cd/m² at this default brightness setting, giving us a rather low static contrast ratio of 636:1. Colour accuracy was reasonably good out of the box with a default dE average of 2.4, and maximum of 5.1. Testing the screen with various gradients showed smooth transitions with no sign of any banding thankfully. There was some gradation evident, particularly in darker tones as you will see from most monitors.

 

It should be noted the the default setup in the "user" preset mode was basically identical. Overall this default setup was moderate. The gamma and white point could do with being slightly more accurate out of the box but the colour accuracy was good. The brightness is easy enough to turn down to a comfortable level, but the contrast ratio was a bit disappointing really, even for IPS-type panel technology (AHVA).

 

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.

 

 

QNIX QX2710 LED Evolution II DPmulti TRUE10 - Calibrated Settings

   

 

We first of all reverted to the 'user' color presets mode in the OSD menu to allow us access to the individual RGB channels. Adjustments were made during the process to the RGB channels as shown in the table above as well as the brightness control. This 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 had been met now at 2.2 average, correcting the 6% deviance we'd seen out of the box. The target white point was also now achieved at 6492k, again correcting a 6% default deviance. Luminance had also been improved thanks to the adjustment to the brightness control and was now being measured at 129 cd/m². Note that this was with the brightness control set at 20 in the OSD. The next step down for that control was 17, and returned us a luminance of 114 cd/m². This left us a black depth of 0.18 cd/m² and delivered a slightly improved static contrast ratio of 696:1. Colour accuracy of the resulting profile was excellent, with dE average of 0.3 and maximum of 1.0. LaCie would consider colour fidelity to be excellent. Testing the screen with various colour gradients showed mostly smooth transitions. There was some 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 was reasonable overall. Gamma and white point were a little out from the targets, but with only a 6% deviance. Colour accuracy was good with an average dE of 2.4 and colours felt well balanced. It was a shame not to see some more useful additional preset modes for other colour temperatures though.

 

 

 

The panel was a little disappointing in terms of black depth and contrast ratio. Out of the box the contrast ratio was only 636:1, which is poor even for IPS-type panel technology. We actually improved this a little through our calibration process, thanks to the tweaked RGB settings primarily. At 696:1 after calibration it was still weak compared with the only other AHVA panel we have tested, the BenQ BL2710PT (788:1). It was comparable to some older IPS and PLS panels like the HP ZR2740w V2 (708:1) and Samsung S27A850D (761:1) for instance. Some more modern IPS/PLS panels could reach much higher, for example the Dell P2414H (1010:1) and P2714H (1065:1).

 

 

Viewing Angles

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

Viewing angles of the QX2710 were very good as you would expect from an IPS based panel. Horizontally there was very little colour tone shift until wide angles past about 45° although the image did get paler from a wide angle. Shifts were slightly more noticeable in the vertical field but overall they were very good, with some darkening introduced as you get to a wide angle. The screen offered the wide viewing angles of IPS technology and was free from the very 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 IPS panel.

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

On a black image there was a white glow from an angle which is also characteristics of most IPS panels. If you are working in darkened room conditions and with dark content on the screen this may prove a problem perhaps since as you change your line of sight the white, silvery glow appears across the panel. Given the size of the screen you may notice some glow towards the corners in normal use, depending on how close you sit to the screen and your line of sight.

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, with the only issue really being the right hand region of the screen where it was a little darker. Luminance dropped by a maximum of -17% in the upper right hand corner down to ~ 110 cd/m². Around 70% of the screen was within a 10% deviance from the centrally calibrated point which was ok. No major problems here with brightness uniformity.
 

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. There was no obvious backlight bleeding detectable to the naked eye. The camera picked up some slight clouding in the corners, perhaps most apparent in the bottom right hand region. Nothing too severe and nothing you should notice in day to day use at all though.

 

General and Office Applications

The QX2710 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 0.231mm is very 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. These ultra-high resolution 27" models offer the tightest pixel pitch and therefore the smallest text as well. We found it quite a change coming from 21.5 - 24" sized screens, even those offering quite high resolutions and small pixel pitches.  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. We found a 30" screen to be quite a change with text size when we first used one, and this is very similar and even a little bit smaller! The extra screen size takes some getting used to over a few days as there really is a lot of room to work with.

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" 1920 x 1200 resolution, and it's good to see QNIX have opted to stick with the high res panel here rather than reverting to some other 1920 x 1200 / 1920 x 1080 res panel as you may find in other 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 screen can also support "virtual 4k" resolutions if you have a suitable graphics card and set up a custom resolution to send to the panel (30Hz maximum refresh rate at 3840 x 2160). This seems to be a current trend with some manufacturers so that they can advertise their screen as supporting 4k resolution, but without actually providing a native 4k panel. It's a bit misleading in our opinion and buyers should watch out for it. We tried it on the QX2710 out of interest but fail to see any real use for it. The high resolution just gets scaled by the panel back down to the 2560 x 1440 pixels which make up the panel. As a result you lose sharpness and clarity and text looks more blurry. It is also far too high a resolution we feel for a 27" screen, making everything miniscule and hard to see. 2560 x 1440 is enough we feel for a 27" sized screen, and 4k really needs a bigger screen to make it at all practical. Add to this also that you are limited to using a 30Hz refresh rate and it's not a great feature.

The light AG coating from the AHVA panel is a positive feature when it comes to these kind of uses and we had been pleased with the coating on this model. This light panel coating ensures that white backgrounds of office documents looked good, and did not suffer from the overly grainy and dirty feel of some competing IPS panels featuring heavy, aggressive AG coating. It also remained free from the reflections you might experience from a full glossy solution so seems to be a good half-way between the two.

The wide viewing angles provided by the IPS 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 pretty good overall and should provide a reasonably reliable setup for those who don't have access to a calibration device of their own. The gamma and white point were a little off sadly, and the contrast ratio was weak, even for an IPS-type panel. The provided preset colour modes are useless and do pretty much nothing in real terms. The Low Blue Light mode is also pointless and doesn't work.

The brightness range of the screen was also very good, with the ability to offer a luminance between approximately 288 and 42 cd/m². This should mean the screen is perfectly useable in a wide variety of ambient light conditions, including darkened rooms. A setting of ~19 in the OSD brightness control should return you a luminance close to 120 cd/m². The backlight regulation is controlled using Pulse-Width modulation (PWM) and so the screen can't be classified as being flicker-free, despite the spec suggesting it is. The amplitude is quite low but the frequency also low at ~156Hz so it could be problematic for some users. Those who suffer from eye fatigue or headaches associated with flickering backlights may want to keep it in mind. There was no audible buzzing from the screen, even when specifically looking for it using test images with a large amount of text at once. The screen remains cool even during prolonged use. There is no specific 'text' preset mode available from the menu or anything so you will need to set up the screen to suit your needs. There's no real way to have different modes saved either so it's a bit inflexible when it comes to different uses and setups.

The screen doesn't really have any extras features at all, so there are no USB ports, ambient light sensors or card readers which can be useful in office environments. There are only a very limited range of ergonomic adjustments available from the stand as well with only a stiff, hard to use tilt adjustment offered. The VESA mounting support may be useful to some people though as an alternative.
 

 
Above: photo of text at 2560x 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 sharp as you can see from the top photograph. When you switch to a lower resolution the text is larger of course but still clear enough with only low amounts of overlap between pixels. The screen seems to interpolate the image well although you of course lose a lot of desktop real-estate running at a lower resolution.

Responsiveness and Gaming

The QX2710 is rated by QNIX 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 no control over the overdrive impulse within the OSD menu so we must rely on the manufacturers set up here. The part being used is the AU Optronics M270DAN01.0 AHVA (IPS-type) panel. 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 20 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.

 

If we look at these response time measurements we can see there's a rather mixed set of results. A lot of the transitions are actually quite slow, with G2G figures ranging up to 22.6ms in the worst cases. Rise times were noticeably slower, those being changes from dark to light shades, with an average G2G measured at 15.6ms. This was particularly apparent when changing between similar dark shades like 0-50, 0-100 etc. Full changes from grey to white (x - 255) were a bit faster, but were still nowhere near the specified 4ms G2G response time spec given by the manufacturer. Fall times (changes from light to dark shades) were a bit faster, with an average G2G response time of 10.8ms. Changes to black were the fastest (x - 0), reaching down to 6.3ms in the best cases. This was still not as fast as the 4ms G2G spec quoted. You could tell from these results that there was some modest overdrive impulse being applied, and transitions were faster than we'd seen from some other Korean monitors such as the Achieva 27" IPS Zero-G for instance. However, it was not being applied sufficiently to reduce response times enough and so you were left with overall quite a slow panel.

Transition: 0-150-0 (scale = 20ms)

Above is an example of a typical transition we saw, with a slow rise time (21.1ms) and fast fall time (6.8ms).

Transition: 150-255-150 (scale = 20ms)

In some cases the rise times were faster, here shown at 9.3ms. The rise times were fastest when changing to white (x - 255).

On the positive side, if we evaluate the RTC overshoot you can see that there was no overshoot evident at all on any transition. Thankfully the overdrive impulse is being applied so lightly that it doesn't introduce any overshoot problems or artefacts. We would have probably traded some light overshoot though for boosted response times.

Display Comparisons

As we begin to measure more screens with the oscilloscope system we can begin to plot them on a graph like the above for easy comparison. This shows you the lowest, average and highest G2G response time measurement for each screen. There is also a traffic light style circle mark to indicate the RTC overshoot error for each screen, as the response time figure alone doesn't tell the whole story.

As you can see, the QX2710 was a bit slow compared with most modern IPS-type panels we've tested. It had an average G2G response time of 13.2ms which left is considerably slower than models like the Dell P2414H (8.9ms) and P2714H (8.9ms), which seemed to offer about as fast a response time as you can get from IPS-type technology, without introducing lots of noticeable overshoot. The BenQ BL2710PT is based on the exact same AHVA panel as the QX2710 and was again a bit faster with an average response time of 10ms G2G, again without any significant overshoot problems. We were a little disappointed in the pixel response times of the QX2710 although we were glad that no overshoot was evident at all. Perhaps QNIX should have boosted the overdrive impulse a bit more to squeeze some faster transitions out of it, even if it meant some slight overshoot was introduced. Getting the right balance is tricky, but with other models reaching more like  9 - 10ms G2G without overshoot problems, it must be possible. The TN Film models like the BenQ XL2720Z achieve much faster overall response times so if you're looking for a gaming screen you may want to consider TN Film technology.

 

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

In practice the QNIX QX2710 showed moderate levels of blur with some trail images visible in these test photos. In practice the moving images were not as sharp as some faster screens and more blur was apparent. At least there are no overshoot artefacts here though.

27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA

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

27" 8ms G2G LG.Display AH-IPS

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

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

Firstly it is interesting to compare the QX2710 to some of the other popular 27" models we have tested with 2560 x 1440 resolutions and IPS-type panels (IPS, PLS and AHVA). You can see first of all a comparison against the BenQ BL2710PT which is the other screen using the same AHVA panel. The motion blur is more apparent on the QNIX due to the slower pixel response times and even though both models are using the same panel, the overdrive control is different. The Dell U2713HM was a little faster still and eliminated even more of the visible blurring, but also remained free from overshoot which was a bonus. The Asus PB278Q was again faster than the QX2710 and although it showed a little dark overshoot it was very slight. The ViewSonic VP2770-LED was more comparable to the BenQ BL2710PT in visible blurring, but again was still slightly faster than the QNIX. The QNIX was the slowest of the bunch here.

 

27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA

27" 8ms G2G Samsung AD-PLS

23.8" 8ms G2G LG.Display AH-IPS

We have provided a comparison of the QX2710 against a couple of other IPS-type screens. The Dell P2714H and P2414H had impressed us considering their IPS/PLS panel technologies, and represented about the best you can get from a modern IPS panel at the moment for response times, without introducing any significant overshoot problems.
 

27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA

27" 2ms G2G Chi Mei Innolux TN Film +144Hz (Trace Free = 60)

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 VG278HE 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 LightBoost strobed backlight which we talked about in depth in our article about Motion Blur Reduction Backlights.

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 QX2710 is marketed as being able to overclock to higher refresh rates up to 120Hz, but in practice we discovered there is frame-dropping on this multi-input model making it pointless.



Refresh Rate Overclocking

One are which some Korean monitors are known for are their ability to overclock the refresh rate. In affect this would allow you to boost the native 60Hz maximum refresh rate supported by the panel to 100Hz or more. The ability to overclock a monitor depends on several factors including the panel, internal electronics and your graphics card. You will need third party apps to set up a custom resolution and refresh rate to test it, and results will vary from one screen to another often. Some Korean monitors can be overclocked up to around 100Hz which then brings about benefits in terms of frame rate and motion smoothness for gaming. It also means you can have a 2560 x 1440 resolution IPS (or PLS/AHVA) panel with a refresh rate of >60Hz which is desirable to some. A lot of people have been hoping for IPS panels with native 120Hz support, but to date there have only been TN Film and a couple of MVA panels which can support those kind of refresh rates.

There are a couple of considerations which should be made when even thinking about overclocking. Firstly you need to consider whether the response time of the panel is even sufficient to cope with the increased frame rate. For instance if you are running a screen at 120Hz, there is a new frame sent to the screen every 8.33ms. If the response time is not less than this it will not be able to keep up with the demand. This is one of the reasons why TN Film panels are the main technology for 120Hz+ displays as their response times allow for this frame rate support. Most IPS-type panels are much slower and so while you might be able to send 120 fps to the screen, the response time of the pixels may struggle to keep up. There are still benefits in terms of gaming frame rate and smoothness of movement but refresh rate isn't everything. You also need to be aware that although you might be able to run a screen at a higher refresh rate, and it will display an image, it may well drop frames which makes the whole thing pointless anyway. That will lead to stuttering and frame drops which no one wants. What you are looking for is a display with a fast response time, and the ability to support higher refresh rates without frames being dropped.

This screen is advertised as being able to support overclocked refresh rates up to 120Hz. We tested the QX2710 LED Evolution II DPmulti TRUE10 and it was easy enough to create custom resolutions and refresh rates which the monitor accepted. An image was displayed fine at 2560 x 1440 resolution and at 75, 100 and 120Hz refresh rates. We tested these over both DL-DVI and DisplayPort. Although the image was displayed, frames were unfortunately dropped in all cases, meaning this was all rather pointless. Some artefacts were also visible in some situations. It didn't seem to allow any useful overclocking beyond 60Hz sadly. Maybe results will vary with other models in the range of single input variants as some people have reported. The specified ability to overclock up to 120Hz is somewhat misleading for this particular model though.

 

The overall gaming performance of the QNIX QX2710 was moderate overall. The response time was slow by modern IPS standards at 13.2ms G2G average which meant it did not appear as sharp or crisp in moving content as other popular IPS-type models we've tested. On the positive side it was at least free from any overshoot problems which can really be distracting if manufacturers push the overdrive too much (e.g. Dell U2713H etc). The screen should be able to handle some moderate gaming without too much problem, although if you want to play a lot of fast FPS games there are faster panels out there. The advertised ability to overclock the refresh rate up to 120Hz was interesting, but in reality it couldn't live up to this claim and just dropped frames when you attempt it. Maybe the single input versions of the screen will be better in that regard, but even if you are able to boost the refresh rate a bit, the response time isn't really adequate to keep up with much more than 60Hz anyway.

If gaming is your priority you may want to consider some of the more gamer orientated 120Hz+, TN Film based compatible displays out there, or perhaps something like the Eizo FG2421. Even better still would be models equipped with LightBoost systems or other motion blur reduction backlights for optimum motion blur elimination.

Additional Gaming Features

Aspect Ratio Control - The QX2710 has a very limited range of aspect ratio control options through the OSD 'Misc' menu. There are only options for "wide" and "4:3" only. At least with the screen being a native 16:9 aspect ratio it should handle a lot of content and external devices without much issue, as a lot of content is in the same aspect ratio nowadays anyway. Would have been nice to see more options available though like an auto-aspect retention, 5:4 and 1:1 pixel mapping perhaps.

Preset Modes - There are no specific gaming preset modes available in the OSD.

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.

We have provided a comparison above against other models we have tested to give an indication between screens. Those shown with blue bars in the bottom half represent the total "display lag" as at the time of review we did not have access to an oscilloscope system to measure the response time element and provide an estimation of the signal processing. The screens tested more recently in the top half 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 22.0ms as measured with SMTT 2. Taking into account half the average G2G response time at 6.6ms, we can estimate that there is ~15.4ms of signal processing lag on this screen. This is quite high and so might not be suitable for fast FPS type gaming for many users.

 

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 of course.

• 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 interface support HDCP for any encrypted and protected content

• DVI, DisplayPort, D-sub and HDMI connections available, offering great connectivity choices for modern DVD players, Blu-ray, consoles etc.

• Cables provided in the box for DVI only so a little limited.

• Light 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 ~288 cd/m² and a good minimum luminance of ~43 cd/m². This should afford you very good control for different lighting conditions. Contrast ratio remains stable across that adjustment range as well although it is fairly low. Brightness regulation is controlled using a low frequency, but fairly low amplitude PWM which may be off-putting to some users.

• Black depth and contrast ratio are pretty weak for an IPS-type panel at 696:1 after calibration. Detail in darker scenes should be moderate as a result.

• There is no specific 'movie' preset mode available for movies or video

• Reasonable pixel responsiveness which can handle fast moving scenes in movies without issue. No overshoot issues at all which is good news.

• Wide viewing angles thanks to AHVA panel technology meaning several people could view the screen at once comfortable and from a whole host of different angles.

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

• Limited range of ergonomic adjustments available from the stand, so might be tricky to obtain a comfortable position for multiple users or if you want to sit further away from the screen for movie viewing. Even the tilt is stiff and hard to use.

• 2x 5W integrated stereo speakers on this model and a headphone jack if sending sound to the screen over HDMI.

• Limited range of hardware aspect ratio options with only 4:3 and 'wide' being available. At least the screen is natively 16:9 aspect ratio.

• Picture in picture (PiP) and Picture By Picture (PbP) are not available.
  
   

  This review had been made available to download and save in PDF format (.pdf) allowing you to: Save a copy for personal use and archiving Save and read our reviews offline Read our reviews on your eBook reader (e.g. Kindle, iPad and other tablets) Please visit our Store for more information and to download a copy. A small fee will contribute towards the running of TFTCentral and allow us to continue to make high quality and detailed reviews in the future.

Conclusion

The QNIX QX2710 left us with mixed feelings but it was an interesting screen to test. First of all we felt let down by some of the specified extra features which just failed to deliver anything useful. The "virtual 4k" support worked, but was impractical we felt on a screen this size, and with the resulting scaling required to fit it back down to a 1440p resolution it was not really practically useful. The Low Blue Light mode didn't work at all, nor did any of the preset modes for different colour temperatures. Despite being advertised as flicker free the screen uses a low frequency PWM which is a real shame. The spec also states the ability to overclock the screen to up to 120Hz refresh rate, and while it will comfortably accept a refresh rate signal this high, it just drops frames at anything over 60Hz making it all rather pointless. These were all the special features which made the  QX2710 interesting to test out, and no doubt might attract some buyers, but in reality we were disappointed in what they delivered.

On the more positive side, the all round performance of the AHVA panel was pleasing, offering wide viewing angles, good image stability, a nice light AG coating and good colour reproduction. Default setup was also pretty good, although the contrast ratio was poor even for an IPS-type panel. We improved this a bit after calibration but not enough to compete with some IPS models. Office use was reasonable and we were relieved to see a proper backlight control from the brightness setting, unlike the digital white level control we'd seen from many Korean models in the past. Response times were moderate and we were at least pleased to see no overshoot problems. We were also pleased by the wide range of connectivity options which for a screen of this cost was decent. We can forgive the fact that the stand is very limited and there are no other extras like USB ports since keeping retail costs down is the name of the game. What you end up with is a low cost screen with a wide range of connections which offers fairly good all round performance thanks to its choice of decent panel. There's nothing special particularly about its performance and some areas are a little weak. The added extra features were a let down, but given the low retail cost we expect it would still make a decent screen for general day to day use if money is tight. You can purchase the QNIX screens from their eBay store here.