8 important display specifications and what they mean for the consumer

[Redaktion]

3D Ready, DisplayHDR 400, Flicker-Free, 10000:1. Reading the specification sheet of a monitor can quickly get confusing because of cryptical abbreviations and numbers just like these. Here, we set out to clarify some of them and describe in brief how they relate to an average user´s everyday life.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/8-important-display-specifications-and-what-they-mean-for-the-consumer.726528.0.html

[LL]

Nobody should waste their money on displays incapable of covering the sRGB spectrum.

Precisely.

[Gess]

Nobody cares about this, only cares about the cost of them...

[Alexander_]

Nobody cares about this, only cares about the cost of them...

It is because of such considerations of students/beggars/short-sighted users that bad screens are sold.
And I also do not agree that "everyone". My acquaintances and I are not all. And it is important for us that the same laptops or smartphones have a normal high-quality screen. That's why individual monitors are sold for $5k [And it's not because they just put a price tag on it. It's for those who care about a high-quality picture, etc.].

BTW, I don't agree with the author that 300 nits should be enough. Personally, my preference is from 400.

[HDRn't]

Putting HDR in the first place and calling it a "complex backlight system", but then contradicting own statement with "but just stay away from HDR400 displays" because...well their backlight is not so complex. Well...

Maybe that's because HDR is not just a complex backlight, but a certain way of displaying content with a high dynamic range. Keywords: REC.2020, HDR metadata, panel color depth, wide color gamut and why it's important for HDR, types of HDR standards (only some open ones are on the picture, and details are missing). All this info is crucial for understanding what makes panel HDR-capable and it's missing in this article.

There are a lot of misleading/poor tech articles on the internet. this site is intended for good and detailed ones.

[Alexander_]

contradicting own statement

Well, first of all, the author of the article notes that the use of HDR is possible only with a complex screen illumination system.
What is the contradiction?

He also notes that you should not take monitors (laptops with screens) certified as Display HDR400. Because it will actually be the same SDR, only with two backlight zones and barely doubled contrast (due to which such a screen receives this certification). Simply put, this is a certain marketing trick, because 400 nits (okay, even under 500) on an 8-bit matrix is not enough for the HDR that consumers expect and for which advertising so often says.

All other types of HDR screen certifications are worth attention to some extent (and of course there will already be at least 10bit)