The HP z27x is a display that pushes the limits of what a desktop display can do, but it has one serious drawback that will limit its acceptance. For people that want accurate color, larger color gamuts, and the ability to really have fine control over their display the HP z27x is hard to beat. The post-calibration and pre-calibration numbers are some of the best we have seen. The built-in management makes it easy to tie users down to the correct color space and to switch between them as needed. Self-calibration removes the PC from the equation when it comes to getting colors correct.

The uniformity of the display is a big deal to me, though. Professionals need the colors they see on the screen to be accurate, even if they are at the edge of the screen and not in the center. Having to reposition anything you are looking at to the center of the screen to know it is correct is something that most people will not want to do. That the uniformity of the HP is so far off is surprising to me.

It also limits whom I think the HP z27x will apply to. If you don’t need the larger color gamut, there are other displays out there with very accurate color but also fantastic uniformity. The NEC Professional displays let you switch between color spaces easily and their uniformity is the best out there. They don’t offer the same self-calibration or management that the HP z27x does, but that might not matter to you.

If you need the larger DCI or Rec.2020 color gamuts, then I don’t know what other choices you might have. The HP can do these larger gamuts but you need to look at the center of the screen for them to be accurate. Of course, there is the chance that my sample just has a uniformity issue and most displays are much better. That same logic could also apply to the quality of the calibration; maybe every other display is worse than mine, so I don’t like to make that leap. I can only go by what I see and measure and not what might be. Even if my sample is worse than average, it says something about quality control that this sort of unit could end up shipping to a customer.

The price is quite high compared to many other 27" QHD displays, but we expect that from a professional level monitor. While many would balk at the $1500 MSRP ($1400 online), given all of the features it's actually not too bad. NEC's PA272W has a $1300 MSRP and the PA272W SpectraView model has a $1550 MSRP, so considering the wider gamut and management features the z27x is pretty competitive. Except a professional display really needs uniformity.

If the uniformity on the HP z27x was better then I wouldn’t have a reason to really criticize it. The colors are accurate, the gamut is huge, and it is very nice to use as well. It has a specific target market, and it fits that well, but the backlight uniformity holds it back. As it is, I’m conflicted on what to do with the HP. The backlight bleed on the left side is a serious issue, but it doesn't take away for everything else the HP does right. The HP z27x is an impressive display, and if HP can improve the backlight uniformity on it, it might be the best display I've reviewed to date. As it stands, it does exceptionally well in most areas but it has an Achilles' Heel that needs to be addressed.

Input Lag, Gamut and Power Use
Comments Locked

47 Comments

View All Comments

  • bobbozzo - Tuesday, December 2, 2014 - link

    Hi,

    It wasn't clear to me which is preferred - using (renting?) a Klein K-10A colorimeter and doing the self-calibration, or doing software calibration?

    Thanks for the article
  • cheinonen - Tuesday, December 2, 2014 - link

    Doing it inside the monitor is best, as you don't need to worry about the PC LUT being correct, it will just be accurate on any computer hooked up to it.
  • Samus - Tuesday, December 2, 2014 - link

    A worthy successor to my Dreamcolor LP2480, moar resolution and USB 3.0!
  • Oubadah - Sunday, December 21, 2014 - link

    Plus no A-TW Polarizer and inferior backlight array. This monitor isn't in the same class as the last gen Dreamcolor. Not to mention it's bugs and abysmal quality control. http://www.liftgammagain.com/forum/index.php?threa... I wouldn't touch this monitor with a barge pole at the moment.
  • tyger11 - Tuesday, December 2, 2014 - link

    When are we going to see monitors with HDMI 2.0 and DP 1.3?
  • cheinonen - Tuesday, December 2, 2014 - link

    Once we have chipsets. The issue with HDMI 2.0 is that all the current HDMI 2.0 chipsets with the full bandwidth don't have HDCP 2.2 as well. The HDCP 2.2 chipsets only use a subset of HDMI 2.0 and so they can't send as much data. Hopefully at CES next month we'll see products announced using new chipsets.
  • wolrah - Wednesday, December 3, 2014 - link

    Does HDCP actually matter to PC users? Aside from legitimate playback of Bluray/HD-DVD content what else on a PC ever gave a shit about it? I think iTunes did at one point, no idea if it still does.

    I mean there are technically roles a PC can fill for which it matters, but personally even among those I know who have BD-ROM drives in their PCs (a slim number, optical drives altogether are a dying breed) I don't know anyone who actually uses their PC to watch movies from disc. Anyone who uses discs uses a hardware player or more often a console, and anyone who uses a PC just sources from the internet in one way or another.

    For TVs HDCP is a big deal, but for a computer monitor I'm finding it hard to care.
  • cheinonen - Wednesday, December 3, 2014 - link

    I don't know that it's a big deal for straight PC usage, but it's also likely to upset people if they buy an HDMI 2.0 monitor, only to discover when they try to hook up their other 4K devices to it that they won't play back a 4K image. Since the chips are expected to be at CES, I don't think we will have to wait too long for them and IMO I'd rather have a display that can do that, without needing MST for a 60Hz refresh rate, than have a monitor today that will be out of date that fast.
  • chaos215bar2 - Wednesday, December 3, 2014 - link

    On a Mac, at least, iTunes most certainly still does care about HDCP. Even Netflix manages to check it when using the HTML5 player. HDCP may be silly, but it's still important if you want to watch videos on your computer without the hassle of stripping DRM.
  • DanNeely - Thursday, December 4, 2014 - link

    As of about 8 months ago (last time I tried using it) Amazon Instant Video also required HDCP for higher quality streams.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now