AdobeRGB has a much larger gamut than sRGB. Even if we can’t control the gamut on the Nixeus VUE 30, moving to a larger gamut target should result in smaller errors overall. If this improves things this might work well for those doing color work, as they may want the larger gamut anyway. For normal use like gaming or web browsing, very few applications use AdobeRGB so it won’t be improved.

  Post-Calibration, 200 cd/m2 Post-Calibration, 80 cd/m2
White Level (cd/m2) 199.7718 81.959
Black Level (cd/m2) 0.3455 0.1473
Contrast Ratio 578:1 566:1
Gamma (Average) 2.1975 2.351
Color Temperature (missing) 6521K
Grayscale dE2000 0.8217 0.8328
Color Checker dE2000 1.3821 1.5443
Saturations dE2000 1.5282 1.6211

Besides the gamut, I left every target the same as with our sRGB calibration. As we can see, we get far, far better results for the color than we did before. The performance for the 80 cd/m2 target has also improved a lot with the grayscale. That shouldn’t have been affected, but it could be a better calibration run, as sometimes the software does better than other times. The visible difference with an average dE2000 of 1.33 vs. 0.83 for the grayscale is pretty minimal and hardly noticeable in real life.

The big change is the colors. While Red still falls outside of the AdobeRGB gamut, Green, Cyan and Yellow all line up nearly perfectly now. Magenta is still affected by the Red, but even those two colors are much closer to accurate than before. A quick look at the saturations table shows that the dE2000 stays below 3, or the visible error level, for every color except for highly saturated Red and Magenta. The 96-point Color Checker chart shows the same results, with those highly saturated red shades providing the only errors that really fall into the unacceptable realm.

One key chart to look at that I’ll pull out here separate from the gallery is the Delta Color Error on the Color Checker chart. As you can see, the Red shades are highly affected by an over-abundance of color here. If I were to pull out the other charts that break down the individual color errors, Delta Luminance and Delta Hue, you would see that those errors are virtually non-existent. The issue is that red has too much saturation, but the light level and the tint on it is correct.

Moving to the AdobeRGB target really improved the performance of the Nixeus VUE 30, but that isn’t without a caveat or two. Most people don’t use AdobeRGB color, and most applications don’t support the larger gamut. For those applications you are still going to see overly saturated colors on a regular basis and this won’t correct them. However, for people that can use AdobeRGB, color accuracy might be more important to them than it would be for someone that doesn’t use it.

If you are only gaming or doing general office productivity on this display, you might not care about the over-saturated gamut. If you are going to be doing photo work you certainly would, and hence this AdobeRGB target might solve your issues. If you want to have accurate colors on the Nixeus, this is the only way you can really get there, and you’ll likely know if this will work for you.

sRGB Measurements Display Uniformity
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • cheinonen - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    I probably need to have a Cut-and-Paste note for the lag section at this point. I was using SMTT which worked reasonably well, but no longer is selling licenses and mine has long expired now. Mirroring a counter can have issues, but the main one is there isn't a CRT I can reasonably buy that does beyond 1920x1200 (since I'm moving into the world of Barco and Sony 9" CRT projectors that cost a ton and take up far too much room) so then I have to scale the video input anyway. All the lag testers, like the Leo Bodnar, are designed around TVs so they cap at 1080p for output right now.

    Hopefully with 4K TVs coming out there will be someone that makes a lag tester that uses HDMI 1.4a and can run at multiple resolutions, but it doesn't exist yet. All other lag measurement methods use oscilloscopes and custom software, which is beyond what I can manage at the moment. The Leo Bodnar is far from ideal for this, but it's the best of a bad situation. For monitors that allow direct 1:1 input, I always measure that mode and not a scaled mode. Often I find the differences are only 1-2ms, though, so the scaler really isn't adding that much of an impact.
  • ZeDestructor - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    Thanks for the clarification.

    That aside, scopes aren't too expensive.. I mean, a bunch of my friends (Uni students) bought a bunch of Rigol scopes (around 300AUD each) just so they didn't have to trek down to uni for working on their projects. Sure, you can get really expensive ones well into the thousands range, but last I checked a few weeks ago from reading TFTCentral's reviews, a USB scope is in the €300 range, which IMO isn't bad at all considering the sheer datalogging you can do from a computer vs an independent scope...
  • AnnonymousCoward - Thursday, August 22, 2013 - link

    Wouldn't you rather have a Copy-and-Paste note? If you Cut you'd lose it after the first usage!
  • piroroadkill - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    It's not cheap enough to make me want to buy it over a 30" Dell.

    The fit and finish and look of this is so ultra-cheap. A bit of decent quality matte plastic and a stand that isn't terrible wouldn't break the bank, but it would make this look worth the money they're charging.
  • ZeDestructor - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    TBH, all they really needed to do was skip glossy anything.. a simple, flat, square matte bezel and all would be good in the world...
  • spat55 - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    Funny thing is this has the same OSD as my DGM (Digimate) 27" 1440p monitor. Really nice quality, but I have heard bad things about the power supplies going bang, but I have had mine for 4 months so hopefully I will be good and have a decent batch.
  • coolhardware - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    Crazy timing, I just ordered a 27" 2560x1440 Korean made display last night. It was a hair over $300 at Amazon (shortened URL: ) and I was shocked that it was so cheap. It is no frills, with Dual Link DVI as the only interface but that is my preferred interface anyway. :-)

    As for size:
    30" 2560x1600 = 404.49 square inches (25.4″x15.9″)
    27" 2560x1440 = 311.5 square inches (23.5″x13.2″)
    So for $300 for a 27" model you get 77% of the display area of the $700 30" model... not bad!
    (Source: Desktop LCD List)

    After reading this review I am glad that I did not get a 30" Korean model as it looks like there is still some improvements to be made and that price is still very high. I agree with the article and other commenters that a Dell 30" (or similar) may still be preferred and I am looking forward to comparing the new 27" display to my old standby the Dell 3007WFP (from way back in 2005!)
  • Nfarce - Wednesday, August 21, 2013 - link

    Good luck. Those inexpensive Korean knock-offs have a high rate of QC issues, from dust/dirt inside the display to plenty of dead pixels and uneven LCD mounting inside the bezel. I just dropped $699 on an LG 27EA83-D at Fry's and am seriously thinking of returning it and getting a 30" Dell U3014 direct from Dell for $999 on sale all month with a coupon code. The LG is great but not as big a leap from my 24" 1920x1200 Samsung as expected, even with the higher resolution.
  • peterfares - Wednesday, August 21, 2013 - link

    I've had a cheapo Korean for over a year now. Paid $290 for it shipped to my door. Sits next to my Dell U3011. Not a single issue. No defective pixels, either.

    Don't buy a model with edge-to-edge glass and you won't have any dust in your screen. Glass=glare and is stupid anyways.
  • dlang1234 - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    I don't understand why you haven't tested the MonoPrice version of the monitors considering they are around the same price range.
    30" IPS Crystal Pro Monitor $797.50

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now