Picture quality, the lowest latency possible, immersive entertainment, and a user-friendly experience are some of the gaming improvements you can only obtain by using a dedicated monitor. These featur... Philips 436M6VBPAB Momentum Monitor
Got mine last week for under £700. All in all it's a great monitor for gaming on. No light bleed and no DSE are the two best features. Really high quality backlighting too.
This is my new monitor. It is indeed a true HDR1000 monitor as it can do 1000 nits. Reviews show that as well as my own test results. Although I usually go for the lower brightness HDR mode with even higher contrast. Only thing not up to ture HDR is 8bit+FRC, but the colours are great anyway. I had some 10bit panels at home, but I gladly take this sweet 8bit+FRC over mediocre 10bit panels. It got some quirks, check the reviews, but overall it's what you're looking for for HDR PC gaming (also consoles).
Check your facts before making false statements, it has indeed 1000 nits! And it uses a technique similar to FALD, although with much less zones, which makes FALD still superior.
Reaching 1000 nits doesn't make it HDR of any sort, if it even pulls that off. And for reference, 300 nits is enough to melt your face.
it is not 10 bit, which means its not true HDR, let alone HDR 10. it is very nice, i don't mean to sound insulting, but its HDR - compatible, not HDR. for most people that is good enough.
Even if 1000 nits, not every unit, brand, model will necessarily perform equally. Maybe over time quality may level out and we begin to see more standardized performance. Also not sure how 1000 nits will translate for PC monitors up close (24-30"). Spoiler The monitor also put in a very competent HDR performance, which accentuated its strengths in contrast and helped games and other HDR content make better use of its colour gamut. Being capable of outputting (over) 1000 cd/m² looks very impressive on paper, as does being the first monitor on the market with VESA DisplayHDR 1000 certification. In practice, the extreme brightness was noticeable. But even with a 32-dimming zone backlight solution, there was an undesirable leaching out of light into areas of the image that should be kept much darker than they were. Fortunately, there was a more moderate HDR setting that gave less extreme but still very impressive luminance output of around half that. Plenty to make bright elements stand out with eye-catching brilliance, whilst at the same time keeping the depth and atmosphere required in dark areas. The upshot of this; easily the most impressive HDR performance we’ve come across yet on a monitor. Even more impressive than the ASUS PA32UC and its 384-dimming zone solution. Which, don’t get us wrong, was impressive in some respects. It’s just that VA panels are much better at blocking light and can deal with mixed very bright and very dim content better. The holy grail for HDR, of course, would be per-pixel illumination – but we’re not there yet... https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/philips-436m6vbpab/
It's not 10bit and therefore you might not call it HDR, I can understand that. But we have 93% Adobe RGB and 97.6% DCI-P3, just 1.01deltaE (on my unit), in a consumer grade monitor. And we do hit the VESA1000 standard. (Which can be too bright for close up distance, that's something I've learned as well.) But we can also set it to insane constrast. So we have all the important facts for HDR: brightness colours contrast Yet some of you talk so negative, exactly like it's another 350nits 'HDR' panel. Sure it's a strange piece of hardware, any 43' monitor is quite uncommon, but this thing is even more for a specific audience only. But it got what everyone (at least me) was waiting for to have actual good HDR, finally all together in one monitor (and that far below the 2500€ of prior true HDR1000 monitors).
