As mentioned before, NEC consumer displays use a regular percentage for brightness instead of the more precise cd/m^2 numbers in their professional displays. Despite this change, one thing that NEC does offer for both is a wide range of brightness settings.

The EA294WMi only produces 6 cd/m^2 with the brightness control at the minimum setting while still putting out 326 cd/m^2 at the maximum level. I would suggest that 6 is too low and that you could make the minimum 40 cd/m^2 while still allowing more granular control and a better minimum and maximum. That’s being picky and seeing a level that is low enough for anyone is much better than seeing a minimum value of 100 cd/m^2 that would make the ES294WMi too bright for many users.

White Level -  i1Pro and C6

Black levels are also good on the NEC. At maximum brightness we see a black level of 0.330 cd/m^2. With the brightness at minimum it produces 0.0076 cd/m^2 with a pure black screen. Both are good numbers for an IPS panel.

Black Level - 1iPro and C6

The contrast ratio at the maximum light output level is 989:1 but that falls down to 838:1 at minimum brightness. Since the minimum brightness extends so low, that probably influences the contrast ratio at that level. Small errors in reading the black level, or any stray light that might be picked up, can cause a larger shift. Kept at a more commonly used level, like 120 cd/m^2, the contrast ratios will be closer to the 989:1 of the maximum backlight level.

Contrast Ratio -  i1Pro and C6

The NEC does quite well on these initial measurements. The 21:9 IPS panel continues to produce some of the best measurements of any IPS panel out there right now.

Introduction, Design and Specs Bench Results - sRGB Gamut
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • purerice - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link

    good points there. My old monitor is 16x10 which was supposed to be 16x9+subtitles/menus but that didn't fly I guess.
    As long as you don't have to watch a movie like Multiplicity with the camera shaking back and forth to catch the various Michael Keatons (VHS version). That was perhaps the worst edit-butchering of any decent film I have ever seen.
  • iamezza - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link

    The best use case by far for 21:9 is for gaming. Just about any game that uses a first person (and not just FPSs) or over the shoulder perspective is a lot better with a wider screen.
    I've had triple 16:9 screens for a couple of years and it friggin rocks!
  • kyuu - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link

    Agreed -- I'm quite tempted to use a 21:9 monitor since it seems ideal for gaming.
  • Panzerknacker - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link

    Nice screen but too high input lag.
  • purerice - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link

    ?????? Stated market, medical imaging...
    Not sure how much movement you get in your MRIs or X-rays but the ones I have seen seem to be pretty still.
  • gochichi - Friday, February 14, 2014 - link

    Though it sounds like it may be insignificant, there's actually 33% more pixels in a 2560x1440 27" display than 2560x1080.

    I initially thought that if a laptop could drive one resolution it would drive the other and vice versa. This is NOT the case in practice, where I had laptops whose HDMI outputs displayed plug-n-play perfection on the 2560x1080 display but couldn't handle 2560x1440 without a bunch hacking and compromise(to where you had to hack the settings and go to 30Hz and so on, or it just going 1920x1080 etc).

    So keep that in mind, I had an HD4000 Samsung Ultrabook that worked flawlessly with the 2560x1080 but not at all on any of me 1440 screens via HDMI.

    So for some it may be well worth the strange aspect ratio to gain the plug and play functionality on some fairly decent still relevant laptops (the original 13" Yoga for example).

    I'd love to see 1440P on a high quality 21" screen for some $400. 3360 x 1440 p sounds beautiful too. For me these 29" 1080p widescreen have pixels that are entirely too chunky... but I suppose for frame rate purposes having 25% fewer pixels to push would be a boon games.

    2014 should be a year of much overdue innovation in the PC monitor space. I'm loving the 4k displays from Dell so far and can't wait to see what ASUS, Apple, and others will come up with.
  • dszc - Sunday, February 23, 2014 - link

    Chris and Jarred,
    I can't thank you guys enough for your continuing excellent display reviews. You continue to be my trusted "go-to" source.
    I have a request. I'd like to know what TV I can use as a monitor, so I'd like to see some tested. What I need doesn't need to be reference quality level, like some of the higher-end EIZOs or NECs. But it does need to be in the same ballpark as these: HP 27xi, AOC i2757fh, ViewSonic VX2770Smh-LED. We need a very accurate representation of what our customers are likely to see on the web in the sRGB color space.
    I suspect that there are LOTS of folks out there who would like to have an accurate 1080p sRGB monitor in the 50-60" size that can be comfortably viewed by a few people simultaneously, whether it be a workgroup or small conference setting, or a home family room, or gaming group.
    Anyway, please move this request up as high as you see fit on your list. Currently, we have lots of reviews and information on 20-30" monitors that are really largely similar. We could REALLY use your help on a bigger size class (40-60" TV size) of monitors.
    Thanks for your consideration.
    Ever a fan of Anandtech,

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now