

Introduction It's not very often that we get something truly new in the monitor market, but we were certainly excited by the arrival of the 23.5" Eizo Foris FG2421 screen. Aimed firmly at gamers, the FG2421 brings something unique to the gaming monitor market - the first VA technology panel to support 120Hz refresh rates. For a while now there has been a lot of investment in 120Hz compatible displays, bringing obvious advantages to gamers with improved motion clarity, smoothness and support for higher frame rates. Coupled with low response times and various additional gaming extras, these screens have remained a popular alternative to CRT displays for a lot of hard core gamers. Manufacturers integrated stereoscopic 3D support as well thanks to the boosted refresh rate, and more recently discoveries have been made relating to the noticeable motion blur reduction benefits in 2D gaming of using the LightBoost backlight system designed for this 3D application. The problem with all these 120Hz displays for a lot of people is that they have all been limited to TN Film panels. While certainly a responsive technology, well suited to gaming and perfectly adequate for a lot of users, they do have some draw-backs. Contrast ratios are ok, but nowhere near as high as you can get from some other competing panel technologies like VA. Viewing angles are also very restrictive, especially in the vertical field. Finally, while the LightBoost system can be used to reduce motion blur, it does come at the cost of a significantly reduced brightness, limiting the practical use of that method for some users. It's also not an official feature, and requires a third party "hack" to get it working, so it's far from ideal. Most screens also only allow use of the LightBoost backlight system with NVIDIA graphics cards, making it even more restrictive. Gamers have been shouting out for other panel technologies to be able to support 120Hz refresh rates. The Eizo FG2421 features the first MVA panel natively supporting this refresh rate. Not only can it support 120Hz, but it also integrates a special backlight system designed for reduced motion blur, dubbed 'Turbo 240'. Being built into the screen itself it is easily accessed and controlled and offers users an official system for use from any graphics card and PC. Being VA users can hope for much better contrast ratios, wider viewing angles and better all-round performance than TN Film based models. We will test the screen thoroughly throughout the review to see if it can deliver on these hopes. Eizo's website states: "Everything looks smoother on the world’s first 240 Hz gaming monitor. The fluid motion combined with low input lag and color presets from professional gamers ensure a can’t-miss experience whether you play first-person shooter, fighting or other fast-action genres."

Eizo Foris FG2421 Now Available



Specifications and Features The following table gives detailed information about the specs of the screen: Monitor Specifications Size 23.5"WS (59.8 cm) Panel Coating Light AG coating, semi glossy Aspect Ratio 16:9 Interfaces DL-DVI (HDCP), DisplayPort, HDMI. Audio in and out. Resolution 1920 x 1080 Pixel Pitch 0.272 mm Design colour Matte black bezel stand and base Response Time Panel spec: 4ms G2G

Eizo spec: <1ms G2G (Turbo 240 On) Ergonomics Tilt, 60mm height, swivel Static Contrast Ratio 5000:1 Dynamic Contrast Ratio 15,000:1 VESA Compatible No Brightness 400 Accessories Power, DisplayPort, USB and audio cables. Cable clip Viewing Angles 176 / 176 Panel Technology MVA Weight Net: 6.2Kg Backlight Technology W-LED Physical Dimensions (WxHxD with stand max height)

563.5 x 451.0 x 200.0 mm Colour Depth 16.7m (palette 1.06b) Refresh Rate 120Hz Special Features Rear light up Eizo logo, cable clip, 240Hz motion blur reduction mode, 2x USB ports, side audio jack, ambient light sensor, carry handle, Pro Gamer preset downloads Colour Gamut Standard gamut

sRGB, ~72% NTSC The FG2421 offers a reasonable set of connectivity options. There are Dual-link DVI, DisplayPort and HDMI provided for video interfaces, but the screen is lacking D-sub (VGA), presumably due to the bandwidth limitations and the inability to support the native resolution at 120Hz over analogue. The digital interfaces are HDCP certified for encrypted content. The screen comes packaged with a DisplayPort, audio and USB cables although it might have been useful to include DVI as well. The screen has an integrated power supply and so it only needs a standard kettle lead which is provided in the box. There is a built-in 2 port USB 2.0 hub as well on this model, located on the right hand edge of the screen for easy access. There is an ambient light sensor for detecting your room lighting conditions and adjusting the brightness dynamically for you. There are no further extras such as integrated speakers or card readers, although there is an audio headphone jack on the left hand side of the screen and an additional audio out port on the back. Below is a summary of the features and connections of the screen: Feature Yes / No Feature Yes / No Tilt adjust DVI Height adjust HDMI Swivel adjust D-sub Rotate adjust DisplayPort VESA compliant Component USB Ports Composite Card Reader Audio connection Ambient Light Sensor HDCP Support Touch Screen MHL Support Hardware calibration Integrated Speakers Uniformity correction PiP / PbP



Design and Ergonomics



Above: front and back views of the screen. Click for larger version The FG2421 comes in an all-black design from the front, with matte black plastics used for the bezel, stand and base. From the rear there is some red highlight trim as shown above. On the front there is a small Eizo logo in the bottom left hand corner but no other writing or labels signifying the model name anywhere. The OSD control buttons, ambient light sensor and power LED are situated in the middle of the lower bezel. The power LED glows blue during normal operation and amber when the screen is in standby. The bezel measures ~14mm along the top and bottom edges, and is a little thicker at ~20mm on the right and left hand edges. We're not sure why Eizo couldn't have just made it the same thickness all round, but it still looks reasonably thin and sleek overall. Eizo say that the front design is "deliberately simple so you can concentrate on the screen".

Above: front views of the screen. Click for larger version The base of the stand is fairly small but does provide a sturdy and strong base for the screen. It comes packaged separately and needs to be just clipped and screwed into place which is very easy.

Above: front and back views of the screen. Click for larger version The rear cabinet design features an LED backlit EIZO logo on a glossy surface surrounded by a vermillion frame. The logo glows brilliantly in a dimly-lit room or in a tournament setting. It can also be turned off if you want from within the OSD menu. There is an orange/red coloured highlight trim on the back as well as you will notice a small circular cable tidy clip on the back of the base, hidden behind the stand. This is in the same orange colour as the trim as well.

Above: Back view showing light up Eizo logo. Click for larger version

Above: back views of the screen. Click for larger version The back of the screen also features a useful carry handle to make transporting to competitions and LAN parties easier.

Above: side views showing USB ports as well. Click for larger version The screen offers a reasonably thin profile thanks to the use of a W-LED backlight system, although it appears fairly square and blocky in design. On the right hand edge of the screen there are 2x USB 2.0 ports, as well as the upstream port to connect the hub back to your PC so it can work. These aren't right on the edge of the screen and are instead inset a little behind the back so the cables can be kept out of the way. It may have been better to see the USB upstream on the underside where the video connections are, but it's not a big deal.

Above: top view of the screen. Click for larger version The dimensions of the screen are shown above for reference.

The FG2421 offers a modest range of ergonomic adjustments. There is a 60mm height adjustment, a tilt function and a side to side swivel on offer. There is no rotation function from the stand though.

Above: full range of tilt adjustment shown. Click for larger versions The tilt function is smooth and reasonably easy to use, although a little stiff. It does offer a wide range of angles to choose though.

Above: full range of height adjustment shown. Click for larger versions Height adjustment is more stiff to operate, but is fairly smooth and offers a modest range of adjustment. At the lowest height setting the bottom edge of the screen is approximately 65mm from the edge of the desk. At the maximum setting it is ~125mm, and so there is a 60 mm total adjustment range available here. Please note that we have blanked the screen area with a solid grey background for those height photos above to cut out annoying reflections. The pictures are designed to show the height adjustment range. Side to side swivel is built into the base with a rotating section which sits on the desk. Due to the weight of the screen though when you move it side to side it doesn't feel like it's moving on this disc, and feels more like you are just moving the whole screen yourself, as if it didn't have a swivel adjustment at all. As a result the movement is quite stiff and doesn't really offer you anything that you couldn't just do by moving a screen without swivel side to side in its entirety. A summary of the screens ergonomic adjustments is shown below: Function Range Smoothness Ease of Use Tilt Yes Smooth A little stiff Height 60mm Smooth Stiff Swivel 344° Smooth Very stiff Rotate No n/a n/a Overall Modest range of adjustments and a bit stiff to use some of them. Tilt and height most important and present. The materials were of a good standard and the build quality felt good as well. There was no audible noise from the screen, even when conducting specific tests which can often identify buzzing issues. The whole screen remained fairly cool even during prolonged use as well which was pleasing.

Above: interface connections on back of the screen The back of the screen provides connections for the power cable (not pictured) which is provided with the screen. There are then video connections for DisplayPort, DL-DVI and HDMI. Audio in and audio outputs are also provided although there are no integrated speakers on this model. Oddly Eizo have the connections located on the back right hand side of the screen (when looking at it from the front) when most other screens we've tested have them on the left. A minor point of course. The cable tidy clip can be used to help keep cables out of the way and can be removed as well if you want.



OSD Menu

Above: views of OSD operational buttons on the bottom right hand edge of the screen The OSD menu is controlled from a series of 6 buttons located in the middle of the bottom bezel. There is also an on/off power button. To the right of the power button is an LED which glows blue during normal operation, or amber when the screen is in standby. The mode button gives you quick access to the preset modes and a small menu pops up in the bottom left hand corner of the display as shown above. You can quickly switch between the 3 user defined modes, or use the FPS, RTS or web preset modes. There is also quick access to the volume control using the down arrow button, and to the brightness control using the up arrow. It would have been useful to have quick access to the Turbo 240 feature we think, perhaps from the 'enter' button which doesn't have a quick launch function. The signal button is used to switch between each video input. The screen does not automatically switch if you have more than one device connected and powered on, and you turn one of them off. When you press the menu button you are presented with the above interface, split into 6 sections. The first 'color' section contains some of the normal settings you would expect, like brightness, contrast etc. There is also an option to alter the black level if you want to and you can select from the various temperature and gamma modes here too. The 'advanced settings' section of the 'color' menu allows you to control the gain (RGB) channels and the dynamic contrast ratio and Turbo 240 features. This might have been better as a separate section in the menu we felt, as it was a bit fiddly getting to the Turbo 240 option for instance through a few levels of menu. The gain section allows you to control the RGB channels individually if you need to, or you can just rely on one of the preset temperature modes if you'd rather. The 'screen' section of the menu has a couple of options in it. You can control the hardware aspect ratio control here, with options for full, enlarged or normal. We will look at those later on in the review in more detail. If you're using HDMI you can control the colour space as well here. The 'sound' section has a couple of options as shown above if you're connecting headphones or speakers to the audio out ports. The 'PowerManager' section only has one option, which controls whether the screen goes to sleep or not when your PC is turned off or in standby. A bit odd having a whole section to a setting like that, but never mind. The 'Monitor settings' section has a couple of useful features. There is the 'Auto EcoView' setting which controls the ambient light sensor. You can turn the power LED on and off, and also the rear Eizo logo light if you want. The 'information' section confirms a few things as shown above, including your resolution, refresh rate and whether Turbo 240 is on or off. All in all the menu seemed to offer a decent set of options. Navigation was a bit fiddly, and it wasn't always easy getting to some of the settings like the DCR and Turbo 240 for instance. Returning back a layer was also a bit tricky as you had to browse up to the 'return' button and select it from each sub-section as opposed to just being able to press a key to go back a level. One other annoying thing was the lack of any option to control how long the OSD menu remained on screen.



Power Consumption In terms of power consumption the manufacturer lists 20W typical usage during operation and <0.5W in standby. The spec also lists maximum power consumption of 53W but that may mean when devices are connected via USB as well, it doesn't specify. We carried out our normal tests to establish its power consumption ourselves. State and Brightness Setting Manufacturer Spec (W) Measured Power Usage (W) Factory Default (100%) 20.0 36.5 Calibrated (24%) - 21.0 Maximum Brightness (100%) 53.0 36.5 Minimum Brightness (0%) - 17.1 Standby <0.5 0.5 We tested this ourselves and found that out of the box the screen used 36.5W at the default 100% brightness setting. We're not sure what the "typical power consumption" spec is supposed to represent, but given the screen is shipped at 100% brightness it seems a bit arbitrary. Once calibrated the screen reached 21.0W consumption, and in standby it used only 0.5W. We have plotted these results below compared with other screens we have tested. If you compare the calibrated power consumption (when each screen had been set to achieve a 120 cd/m2 luminance) you can see the power consumption of most W-LED models if quite comparable. Those using modern GB-r-LED backlights (Dell U2413 and U2713H shown) use a bit more power, and the CCFL units (Eizo SX2762w) are even more power hungry.



Panel and Backlighting Panel Manufacturer Sharp Colour Palette 1.06 billion Panel Technology MVA Colour Depth 8-bit + FRC Panel Module LQ235D1LW03 Colour space Standard gamut Backlighting Type W-LED Colour space coverage (%) sRGB, ~72% NTSC Panel Part and Colour Depth The Eizo FG2421 utilises a Sharp LQ235D1LW03 MVA panel contrary to what you may initially think when you read "VA" in the spec. Most VA panels that are widely used in the market are manufactured by AU Optronics, but with this being very new and quite niche, it is actually being supplied by Sharp. To be honest, Sharp are not particularly active in the desktop monitor panel market, although we have seen their 31.5" IGZO MVA panel used in recent 4k resolution screens as well (Asus PQ321Q etc). Perhaps this is a sign that they are looking to develop and grow their panel business more? With new and exciting technologies being introduced by them (4k, 120Hz VA), this can only be a positive thing. The MVA panel used here is the first of its kind to natively support 120Hz refresh rates as well, certainly sparking interest in the gaming community. We have been told that AU Optronics are not planning at this time to produce any 120Hz compatible VA panels incidentally. The panel is capable of producing 1.07 billion colours. We confirmed with Eizo that this is done with an 8-bit colour depth and an additional Frame Rate Control (FRC) stage (8-bit + FRC) as opposed to a true 10-bit panel. This is a measure commonly taken on modern IPS panels as well to offer 10-bit colour support. You do need to take into account whether this is practically useable and whether you're ever going to truly use that colour depth. You need to have a full 10-bit end to end workflow to take advantage of it which is still quite expensive to achieve and rare in the market, certainly for your average user. This includes relevant applications and graphics cards as well, so to many people this 10-bit support might be irrelevant. The panel is confirmed when dismantling the screen:

(image courtesy of SlayeRBoxeR)

Screen Coating The screen coating on the FG2421 It is a normal anti-glare (AG) offering as opposed to any kind of glossy coating. It is light and does not appear at all grainy, and in fact could be described as semi-glossy. We heard some rumours before we were sent the screen that it might suffer from the so-called "cross hatching" appearance like the Dell U2713HM screen did. This is a defect with the panel appearance which produces a grid like pattern which some people noticed and complained about. We have seen this ourselves from the U2713HM as well, but we're pleased to report there is no obvious issue on the FG2421 that we could see from our sample. We set up the FG2421 side by side with the U2713HM in fact and could easily spot the cross-hatching on the Dell when looking closely. On the Eizo there is certainly nothing as noticeable as on the Dell screen. If you looked very closely at the Eizo you could make out the individual pixels and on certain solid colours you could maybe pick out a very small amount of cross-hatching. To be honest this was extremely hard to spot, and if it is there it is very slight indeed. It's quite noticeable on the Dell U2713HM but we wouldn't say there is any significant issue here at all. Maybe some people with a particularly keen eye may notice it but from a normal viewing distance it isn't something you should see in normal use.

Backlight Type and Colour Gamut The screen uses a White-LED (W-LED) backlight unit which has become very popular in today's market. This helps reduce power consumption compared with older CCFL backlight units and brings about some environmental benefits as well. The W-LED unit offers a standard colour gamut which is approximately equal to the sRGB colour space (equating to ~72% NTSC). Anyone wanting to work with wider colour spaces would need to consider wide gamut CCFL screens, or perhaps the new range of GB-r-LED displays like the Dell U2413, U2713H and U3014 models.

Backlight Dimming and Flicker We tested the screen to establish the methods used to control backlight dimming. Our in depth article talks in more details about a common method used for this which is called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM). This in itself gives cause for concern to some users who have experienced eye strain, headaches and other symptoms as a result of the flickering backlight caused by this technology. We use a photosensor + oscilloscope system to measure backlight dimming control with a high level of accuracy and ease. These tests allow us to establish 1) Whether PWM is being used to control the backlight

2) The frequency and other characteristics at which this operates, if it is used

3) Whether a flicker may be introduced or potentially noticeable at certain settings If PWM is used for backlight dimming, the higher the frequency, the less likely you are to see artefacts and flicker. The duty cycle (the time for which the backlight is on) is also important and the shorter the duty cycle, the more potential there is that you may see flicker. The other factor which can influence flicker is the amplitude of the PWM, measuring the difference in brightness output between the 'on' and 'off' states. Please remember that not every user would notice a flicker from a backlight using PWM, but it is something to be wary of. It is also a hard thing to quantify as it is very subjective when talking about whether a user may or may not experience the side effects.

100% 50%



Above scale = 1 horizontal grid = 1ms

20% 0%



Above scale = 1 horizontal grid = 1ms



0%



Above scale = 1 horizontal grid = 250 nano seconds (1/4 of 1ms) Between a brightness adjustment range of 100 and 20 in the OSD menu, there is a constant voltage being applied to the backlight, and backlight dimming is controlled via a Direct Current (DC) method. As a result there is no need for Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) and the backlight is not cycled on and off at all. This means that the screen is flicker free as well, so those who suffer from eye related issues from PWM usage need not worry. When you go below a setting of 20% then the backlight dimming switches to Eizo's so-called Hi-PWM mode which introduces a high frequency oscillation as you can see above. This allows Eizo to reduce any colour issues which might appear when using DC methods at low brightness and is a "hybrid" solution they've employed on most of their recent screens. This isn't your typical on/off PWM cycling though and the amplitude is small. Note that we have changed the vertical scale on the 0% brightness graphs so you could see the oscillation more clearly. We can also zoom in to the graph in the last image and view it at a very small scale. Each horizontal grid is now only 1/4 of 1ms. From there we can calculate that the frequency is a very high 18,000Hz (18 Khz). This also shouldn't really present any problems to users, but if you are worried about any possible flickering you can always just stick with a brightness setting of 20% or more. Pulse Width Modulation Used No / Hybrid Cycling Frequency n/a, 18,000Hz Possible Flicker at 100% Brightness No 50% Brightness No 20% Brightness No 0% Brightness Yes For an up to date list of all flicker-free (PWM free) monitors please see our Flicker Free Monitor Database.

Contrast Stability and Brightness We wanted to see how much variance there was in the screens contrast as we adjusted the monitor setting for brightness. In theory, brightness and contrast are two independent parameters, and good contrast is a requirement regardless of the brightness adjustment. Unfortunately, such is not always the case in practice. We recorded the screens luminance and black depth at various OSD brightness settings, and calculated the contrast ratio from there. Graphics card settings were left at default with no ICC profile or calibration active. Tests were made using an X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter. It should be noted that we used the BasICColor calibration software here to record these, and so luminance at default settings may vary a little from the LaCie Blue Eye Pro report. OSD Brightness Luminance

(cd/m2) Black Point (cd/m2) Contrast Ratio

( x:1) 100 386.05 0.08 4826 90 359.29 0.07 5133 80 325.04 0.06 5417 70 294.37 0.06 4906 60 261.04 0.05 5221 50 224.76 0.04 5619 40 191.18 0.04 4780 30 153.64 0.03 5121 20 118.05 0.02 5902 10 79.07 <0.02 - 0 39.37 <0.02 - Total Luminance Adjustment Range (cd/m2) 346.68 Brightness OSD setting controls backlight? Total Black Point Adjustment Range (cd/m2) >0.06 Average Static Contrast Ratio 5214:1 PWM Free? Recommended OSD setting for 120 cd/m2 21 We carried out these tests in the default state for the 'user1' preset. We moved out of the 'FPS1' mode which the screen is shipped in because the Turbo 240Hz is always on in that mode, and we wanted to establish the full brightness range of the screen without that feature enabled first of all. The brightness control gave us a very good range of adjustment. At the top end the maximum luminance reached 386 cd/m2 which was only slightly less than the specified maximum brightness of 400 cd/m2 from the manufacturer. There was a very large 347 cd/m2 adjustment range in total, and so at the minimum setting you could reach down to a luminance of 39 cd/m2. This should be more than adequate for those wanting to work in darkened room conditions with low ambient light. A setting of ~21 in the OSD menu should return you a luminance of around 120 cd/m2. We have plotted the luminance trend on the graph above. The screen behaves as it should in this regard, with a reduction in the luminance output of the screen controlled by the reduction in the OSD brightness setting. This was a linear relationship. It should be noted that the brightness regulation is not controlled by Pulse Width Modulation either for the most part. Between the settings of 100 and 20% brightness a Direct Current (DC) method is used and so the screen is flicker free. From 20 to 0% an oscillation is introduced but at a very low amplitude and a very high frequency of 18,000Hz. With a setting of 21% brightness returning you a luminance of ~120 cd/m2 this means you should be able to set the screen to a comfortable luminance without even needing to introduce the Hi-PWM oscillation at all. If you do want to work at lower luminance levels, the 18,000Hz frequency and low amplitude should mean there are no significant issues with flicker for most users. The average contrast ratio of the screen was a very impressive 5214:1 and it remained reasonably stable across the brightness adjustment range as shown above. We haven't included our normal contrast stability graph as the low black level readings mean that most of the variance is probably down to rounding errors. What we do know is that the screen is capable of delivering a contrast ratio around the 5000:1 mark as per the panel spec which is great news. Certainly a strong point of this Sharp MVA panel and significantly better than you can get from any TN Film, IPS or PLS panel out there. This high static contrast ratio is one of the big factors separating this from the gaming TN Film models out there.

Turbo 240 Mode = On

OSD Brightness Luminance

(cd/m2) Black Point (cd/m2) Contrast Ratio

( x:1) 100 257.42 0.06 4290 75 220.57 0.05 4411 50 169.13 0.04 4228 25 109.61 0.02 5480 0 41.41 <0.02 - Total Luminance Adjustment Range (cd/m2) 216.01 Brightness OSD setting controls backlight? Total Black Point Adjustment Range (cd/m2) >0.04 Average Static Contrast Ratio 4602:1 Flicker Free? Recommended OSD setting for 120 cd/m2 29 We also carried out the same tests but in the FPS1 mode. This results in the Turbo 240 feature being turned on, something which we will look at in more detail later on in the review. When this feature is enabled the luminance of the screen is reduced. At maximum 100% brightness the luminance now only reached 257 cd/m2 maximum, instead of nearer 400 cd/m2 which we'd seen when it was turned off. There was still a very good range of adjustment possible, all the way down to 41 cd/m2. Even though the maximum luminance was reduced a lot, it should still be more than adequate for most users and for gaming one would hope. It was also a lot higher than the maximum luminance we'd seen from screens using LightBoost systems for reduced motion blur. On the Asus VG278HE for instance we'd measured a maximum luminance of only 87.14 cd/m2 with LightBoost on. The Eizo FG2421 can clearly offer much brighter images when using its integrated motion blur reduction system (Turbo 240) than models using LightBoost as a third party tweak/hack. We will look at the Turbo 240 setting more later on in the review. While the screens backlight operation remains the same in this mode in terms of PWM usage (see panel section), a flicker is introduced because of the backlight blinking of the Turbo 240 mode. This is a deliberate blinking but that does mean it probably wouldn't be wise to use the feature in normal office type work day to day, as although there isn't any visible flicker, it is there and may lead to eye strain and headaches, just like PWM can. On moving content, which is what it's designed for it will probably be less of an issue in terms of flicker side affects, but may vary by person.



Testing Methodology An important thing to consider for most users is how a screen will perform out of the box and with some basic manual adjustments. Since most users won't have access to hardware colorimeter tools, it is important to understand how the screen is going to perform in terms of colour accuracy for the average user. I restored my graphics card to default settings and disabled any previously active ICC profiles and gamma corrections. The screen was tested at default factory settings using the DVI interface, and analysed using an X-rite i1 Pro Spectrophotometer (not to be confused with the i1 Display Pro colorimeter) combined with LaCie's Blue Eye Pro software suite. An X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter was also used to verify the black point and contrast ratio since the i1 Pro spectrophotometer is less reliable at the darker end.

Targets for these tests are as follows: CIE Diagram - validates the colour space covered by the monitors backlighting in a 2D view, with the black triangle representing the displays gamut, and other reference colour spaces shown for comparison

Gamma - we aim for 2.2 which is the default for computer monitors

Colour temperature / white point - we aim for 6500k which is the temperature of daylight

Luminance - we aim for 120 cd/m 2 , which is the recommended luminance for LCD monitors in normal lighting conditions

Black depth - we aim for as low as possible to maximise shadow detail and to offer us the best contrast ratio

Contrast ratio - we aim for as high as possible. Any dynamic contrast ratio controls are turned off here if present

dE average / maximum - as low as possible. If DeltaE >3, the color displayed is significantly different from the theoretical one, meaning that the difference will be perceptible to the viewer. If DeltaE <2, LaCie considers the calibration a success; there remains a slight difference, but it is barely undetectable. If DeltaE < 1, the color fidelity is excellent.



Default Performance and Setup Default settings of the screen were as follows: Monitor OSD Option Default Settings Brightness 100 Contrast 50 Preset mode FPS 1 Temperature 6500k Gamma FPS (High) RGB Gain n/a

Eizo FG2421 - Default Factory Settings







Default Settings luminance (cd/m2) 263 Black Point (cd/m2) 0.06 Contrast Ratio 4319:1 Out of the box the screen looked pretty good to the naked eye. Colours felt even and well balanced, although it was too bright for comfortable use as is the norm for a desktop monitor out of the box. It should be noted that the screen is shipped in the FPS1 mode which is designed for gaming, and has the 'Turbo 240' feature locked 'on'. As a result, for day to day desktop use this might not really be the ideal mode to use as there is some flickering introduced by the motion blur reduction backlight, and some of the other default settings are more orientated at gaming uses. Given this is very much a gamers screen, it of course makes perfect sense to be shipped with these default settings. We went ahead and measured the default state with the i1 Pro, and we'll also test the default setup in the 'user1' mode afterwards as well. The CIE diagram on the left of the image confirms that the monitors colour gamut (black triangle) matches the sRGB colour space reasonably well, with some over-coverage evident in blue and green shades and some slight under-coverage in reds. It wasn't a perfect sRGB coverage but that's fairly common and confirms the screen is standard gamut as we expected. Default gamma was recorded at 2.4 average, leaving it with an 10% deviance from the target of 2.2. You may note that in the default FPS1 mode the gamma setting in the OSD is actually set to "FPS (high)", and so it is deliberately higher than 2.2 here anyway. We will test the other gamma settings in a moment to see how they perform. White point was measured at 6364k leaving it a small 2% out from our target of 6500k which was pleasing, just slightly too warm. In the OSD the temperature mode was set at 6500k by default in the FPS1 preset, so it seemed this mode was being met pretty well here. Note that we are using a spectrophotometer to make these measurements which is not sensitive to the wide gamut backlight as some colorimeter devices can be. When using a standard gamut colorimeter not designed to work with modern backlighting units like W-LED, WCG-CCFL and GB-r-LED there can be a typical deviance of 300 - 600k in the white point measurement which is why some sources may refer to a different white point in this test incorrectly. Luminance was recorded at a bright 263 cd/m2 which is a bit too high for prolonged general use, but not too severe. The screen was set at a default 100% brightness in the OSD menu though which is easy to change of course to reach a more comfortable setting. Note that the screen is not as bright in the FPS mode, even at 100% brightness, as the user modes since the Turbo 240Hz motion blur reduction leads to a reduced overall luminance of the screen. The black depth was a very impressive 0.06 cd/m2 at this default brightness setting, giving us an amazing static contrast ratio of 4319:1, more than we'd seen from any other panel to date in fact. Colour accuracy was not great, but at least there were no obvious colour discrepancies and the balance was quite even. We measured default dE average of 3.7, and maximum of 6.3. Testing the screen with various gradients showed very smooth transitions with no sign of any banding thankfully. Because of the high gamma in this mode (Gamma = FPS (High)) the darker range of the gradients was more limited than normal and there was also some obvious stepping in the very darkest tones. Changing the gamma setting in the OSD menu overcame this. Overall the default setup of the screen was ok, certainly aimed more at gaming uses with its high default luminance, high gamma setting and Turbo 240Hz mode enabled. For normal day to day uses we wanted to test the other preset modes and settings to see how easy it is to improve the image quality for non-gaming.

We switched the screen into the 'User1' mode and tested it again: Monitor OSD Option Default Settings Brightness 100 Contrast 50 Preset mode User 1 Temperature Off Gamma 2.2 RGB Gain 100, 100, 100

Eizo FG2421 - Default Factory Settings, User 1 mode



Default Settings

User 1 mode luminance (cd/m2) 394 Black Point (cd/m2) 0.08 Contrast Ratio 4826:1 In the default 'user1' mode there were a few things to note from the OSD settings. Again the screen was set at 100% brightness by default, and the screen was now much brighter than the FPS1 mode, since the Turbo 240 feature was no longer active. The image appeared a little cooler as well to the naked eye, and if we look in the OSD menu we can see that the default 'temperature' mode was now set to 'off', whereas before it was 6500k. The gamma mode had been changed in the OSD menu though and was now set at 2.2. After taking measurements with the i1 Pro again we can see that this mode is actually not as accurate as the FPS1 mode. Gamma was further from our 2.2 target, despite the fact the screen was set to 2.2 in the OSD menu now. It was measured with a 2.5 gamma average leaving it 12% out from our target. With the 'temperature' now set to 'off' in the OSD menu we measured a white point of 7387k, moving it further away from our desired 6500k (14% out). Luminance was much higher in this mode as we had observed with a luminance of 394 cd/m2 recorded. We had a black depth of 0.08 cd/m2 and an even higher static contrast ratio though now of 4826:1 which was amazing. Colour accuracy was slightly worse than the FPS1 mode, with average dE of 4.4 now, and maximum of 8.6. This user1 mode did at least allow you to use the screen without the Turbo 240 mode active (it's locked to 'on' in the FPS1 mode). This means you can use the screen comfortably without any issues with flicker introduced by the backlight blinking technology. That may well bring advantages in dynamic content like games (more on that later), but for desktop use you don't want it turned on. To be honest we were hoping for more reliable and accurate setup for normal uses but again given the screen is aimed primarily at gamers it can be forgiven to some degree. We will have a look at the OSD settings to see what each of the different gamma and temperature modes can offer us, and see what we can achieve with some basic OSD changes only. White Point and Gamma The FG2421 features a selection of colour temperature and gamma presets within the OSD 'Color' menu as shown above. For colour temperature there are four defined temperature options as well as an 'off' mode mode. There are also 10 gamma preset modes in a separate option. We measured the screen with the X-rite i1 Pro spectrophotometer while in the default 'user1' preset mode, changing only the temperature or gamma setting we were measuring. All other settings were left at factory defaults and no ICC profile was active. The results are recorded below: When selecting the 'temperature' setting the menu appears as above and you can scroll up and down to choose the setting you wish to use. Preset Mode Measured Colour Temp (k) Deviance (k) Off 7495 n/a 9300 8459 -841 8000 7739 -261 6500 6455 -45 5000 5103 +103 We measured each of the defined colour temperature modes as shown above. The coolest mode for 9300k was some way off the target, being 841k too warm. As you made the colour temperature mode warmer, the measurements became closer to their target thankfully, and in fact the 6500k mode seemed to be very close to the target, with a small 45k deviance only. Apart from the 9300k mode, the other 3 were pretty reliable overall. Setting the screen in the 6500k mode would probably be desirable for most people, certainly for day to day use of the screen. Gamma Preset mode Average Gamma Deviance from 2.2 Gamma Target 2.6 3.0 35% 2.4 2.7 25% 2.2 2.5 12% 2.0 2.3 3% 1.8 2.0 7% Power 2.0 9% RTS 2.8 26% FPS (low) 2.6 17% FPS (medium) 2.5 14% FPS (High) 2.4 10% The gamma modes offered you an adjustment range from 2.6 up to 1.8 average gamma as well as some preset modes designed for different gaming uses. The pre-defined gamma levels seemed to actually be too high, and deviated a fair amount from their target. The 2.0 mode delivered us a gamma curve closest to our 2.2 target and will probably be desirable for most normal uses. The other modes with higher gamma may well be useful for some gaming requirements, depending on taste.

Tweaked User Setup We thought we would re-measure the screen after finding out the optimum OSD settings to start from. This result can be achieved simply through changing those settings and so represents what any user can expect, even without access to a calibration device. Monitor OSD Option Default Settings Brightness 24 Contrast 50 Preset mode User 1 Temperature 6500k Gamma 2.0 RGB Gain Default

Eizo FG2421 - Basic Tweaked Settings



Basic Tweaked Settings luminance (cd/m2) 120 Black Point (cd/m2) 0.025 Contrast Ratio 4793:1 We set the screen in the 6500k temperature mode, and 2.0 gamma mode in the OSD menu, as we'd already established that they were optimum settings to reach our targets. We also altered the brightness control to try and achieve a more comfortable luminance close to 120 cd/m2. The RGB channels were left at default for the 6500k temp mode. We measured the screen again with the i1 Pro and were pleased by the results. The gamma was now much closer to our target, with only a small 1% deviance. White point was also very close to 6500k, with only a 3% deviance (6336k). Luminance was now much more comfortable after reducing the brightness control significantly, and contrast ratio was still an excellent 4793:1. Colour accuracy was improved somewhat as well, certainly compared with the default settings in the 'user1' preset mode. We had an average dE now of 2.9 which was reasonable. After making these very basic settings we at least had a better setup to use for day to day use and office work. If you don't have access to a calibration tool, this would be a good starting point if nothing else. Colour gradients looked very smooth with barely any gradation at all, and no sign of any banding.

Calibration We used the X-rite i1 Pro spectrophotometer combined with the LaCie Blue Eye Pro software package to achieve these results and reports. An X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter was used to validate the black depth and contrast ratios due to lower end limitations of the i1 Pro device. Monitor OSD Option Calibrated Settings Brightness 24 Contrast 50 Preset mode User 1 Temperature Off Gamma 2.0 RGB Gain 100, 96, 90

Eizo FG2421- Calibrated Settings



Calibrated Settings luminance (cd/m2) 120 Black Point (cd/m2) 0.025 Contrast Ratio 4845:1 We first of all reverted to the 'user1' preset mode in the OSD menu to allow us access to the individual RGB channels and a wider variety of controls. Adjustments were made during the process to the RGB channels as shown in the table above which changed the screen automatically into the 'off' temperature mode (i.e. it was being user defined now). We stuck with the 2.0 gamma mode which was closest to our desired 2.2 gamma curve, and altered the brightness control to achieve a desired luminance. This allowed us to obtain an optimum hardware starting point and setup before software level changes would be made at the graphics card level. We left the LaCie software to calibrate to "max" brightness which would just retain the luminance of whatever brightness we'd set the screen to, and would not in any way try and alter the luminance at the graphics card level, which can reduce contrast ratio. These adjustments before profiling the screen would help preserve tonal values and limit banding issues. After this we let the software carry out the LUT adjustments and create an ICC profile. There were unfortunately some issues with the resulting calibration. On the positive side, average gamma had been corrected to 2.2 according to the initial test, correcting the 1% deviance we'd found out of the box after switching to gamma mode 2.0 which was good. The white point was also corrected to 6522k, correcting the small 3% deviance we'd seen before after our tweaked settings. Luminance had also been improved thanks to the adjustment to the brightness control and was now being measured at 120 cd/m2. This left us a black depth of 0.025 cd/m2 and retained an excellent static contrast ratio of 4845:1. Blacks appear very dark and inky and this is certainly a strong point of the MVA panel. The issue however came with the colour accuracy and dE measurements. As you can see here, average dE had only been improved to 1.8, and there were still some high values in some shades. The screen looked ok to the naked eye, but there appeared to be some non-linearity in the colours which was causing problems. We measured the profile using the Gamutvision tool and found an absolute sRGB coverage of ~83%. This under-coverage of sRGB seems to be causing issues with the colours being rendered. We tried to calibrate the screen in all the different preset modes, and with various different gamma and temperature settings as well. We tried different calibration software packages and different calibration tools, but were unable to improve on the above. It seems there is some issues with the colour accuracy of this screen. We've seen it before on some other models (e.g. Asus PA248Q, BenQ BL2710PT) but in those instances this issue was limited to the 'user' configurable modes. It was possible to achieve a more accurate calibration in other preset modes, but that did not seem to be possible here on the FG2421. Again we suppose it could be argued that this is a gaming screen and that finite colour accuracy is perhaps not a main concern, but it was a shame not to be able to achieve a perfect calibration seemingly on this screen. Setup was better than we'd seen out of the box, and corrected the small gamma and white point deviance we'd seen even after our tweaked OSD settings so that was at least positive. For gaming and multimedia uses a calibrated ICC profile wouldn't normally be used anyway, and so not being able to make these finite corrections doesn't matter much for those uses, which after all is what the screen is designed for. Testing the screen with various colour gradients showed mostly smooth transitions. There was some very slight gradation in darker tones and some very slight banding introduced due to the adjustments to the graphics card LUT from the profilation of the screen. You can use our settings and try our calibrated ICC profile if you wish, which are available in our ICC profile database. Keep in mind that results will vary from one screen to another and from one computer / graphics card to another. Calibration Performance Comparisons

The comparisons made in this section try to give you a better view of how each screen performs, particularly out of the box which is what is going to matter to most consumers. When comparing the default factory settings for each monitor it is important to take into account several measurement areas - gamma, white point and colour accuracy. There's no point having a low dE colour accuracy figure if the gamma curve is way off for instance. A good factory calibration requires all 3 to be well set up. We have deliberately not included luminance in this comparison since this is normally far too high by default on every screen. However, that is very easily controlled through the brightness setting (on most screens) and should not impact the other areas being measured anyway. It is easy enough to obtain a suitable luminance for your working conditions and individual preferences, but a reliable factory setup in gamma, white point and colour accuracy is important and not as easy to change accurately without a calibration tool. From these comparisons we can also compare the calibrated colour accuracy, black depth and contrast ratio. After a calibration the gamma, white point and luminance should all be at their desired targets. Default setup of the screen was not great but you do need to keep in mind this is a gamers screen, and as such is shipped in settings which might be more popular for gaming. The screen comes in the FPS1 mode by default and this has the Turbo 240 feature on by default as well. Gamma is a bit high at 2.4 (10% deviance) out of the box, again possibly a preference for gaming needs. The white point was close to the 6500k target though at 6364k (2% deviance). Colour accuracy wasn't great with an average dE of 3.7, but the colours were at least balanced and appeared ok to the naked eye. The panel did excel in terms of black depth and contrast ratio and we were very impressed. With a 4845:1 contrast ratio (that's static, not dynamic!) after calibration it was the best we had tested. It even out-performed other MVA technology panels like the Dell S2440L (2954:1) and BenQ GW2450HM (2443:1) in a similar size, and by quite a margin in fact! It had a contrast ratio twice that of the nearest competitor pretty much. This is almost 5 times higher than any TN Film or IPS/PLS panel can reach, and so this is certainly a big positive for the FG2421.

Dynamic Contrast The Eizo FG2421 features a dynamic contrast ratio (DCR) control, which has a very modest spec of 15,000:1. Dynamic contrast ratio technology in theory involves controlling the backlight of the screen automatically, depending on the content shown on the screen. In bright images, the backlight is increased, and in darker images, it is decreased. We have come to learn that DCR figures are greatly exaggerated and what is useable in reality is often very different to what is written on paper or on a manufacturers website. For this test we would use an i1 Display Pro colorimeter to record the luminance and black depths at the two extremes. Max brightness would be recorded on an almost all white screen. Black depth would be recorded on an almost all black screen. In real use you are very unlikely to ever see a full black or full white screen, and even our tests are an extreme case to be honest. Carrying out the tests in this way does give you a good indication of the screens dynamic contrast ratio in real life situations however. The DCR feature is available in all preset modes, and is found within the 'color > advanced settings' section of the OSD menu as shown above. It is labelled as 'contrast enhancer' and there are options for off, standard and enhanced. Dynamic Contrast Specified DCR Range 15,000:1 Available in Presets All modes Setting Identification / Menu option Contrast Enhancer Settings Off / Standard / Enhanced Measured Results User1 mode Default Static Contrast Ratio 4793:1 Max luminance (cd/m2) 120.23 Min Black Point (cd/m2) 0.025 Max Dynamic Contrast Ratio 4793:1 Useable DCR in practice No Backlight turned off for 100% black No We had high hopes that the DCR feature would be quite good here given the modest spec of only 15,000:1. We have become so accustomed to silly specs in the millions:1 which don't deliver that we assumed that with a figure as low as this it would at least be achievable. Knowing the static contrast ratio was close to 5000:1 as well gave us further hope this could deliver a boost for those who like dynamic contrast. Unfortunately the DCR feature didn't seem to do anything at all in practice. When switching between an almost all-white and almost all-black screen there seemed to be no change to the brightness of the screen at all. Even switching to a 100% black image didn't result in the backlight turning off completely, a trick a lot of manufacturers use to give them a crazy high DCR spec. We're not sure whether this was some kind of issue with our unit, but it didn't seem to do anything. Given the static CR is very high, most people probably won't need DCR anyway, but it would have been nice to see it do something since they've bothered to include it.

Viewing Angles

Above: Viewing angles shown from front and side, and from above and below. Click for larger image We weren't sure what to expect from the viewing angles of the FG2421 given it is using a Sharp MVA panel which we've not had chance to test before. Overall they were somewhere in between older generation AMVA panels from AU Optronics (models like the BenQ GW2750HM) and newer generations with "Color shift-free technology" (models like the BenQ GW2760HS). On the FG2421 horizontally the viewing angles were not bad. As you moved you line of sight past about 45° contrast shifted and a pale tint appeared on the image. The image got progressively more washed out as you moved further away from a central point of view. On older AMVA panels the image tends to go very yellow from a wide horizontal angle but on the FG2421 it just went pale and washed out instead. Vertically the contrast shift was more pronounced and the image became more washed out from a shorter angle. From wide angles a slight yellow/green colour tint was introduced to the image as the colour tone shifted. Again this was not as pronounced as on most older AMVA panels. Viewing angles were not as wide as IPS or PLS panels as you might expect given this is an MVA matrix. They were not too bad though compared with a lot of other VA panels out there which was pleasing. The contrast shifts were evident here from wider angles, but there was very little colour tone shift thankfully which is far more noticeable on most other VA panels. Being VA based the panel did suffer from the off-centre contrast shift you will see from these technology panels. If you view a very dark grey image with a black background head on, the grey content is lost in the image and appears black. Only as you move your line of sight slightly away from a head on central field of view does the grey content appear again. This is common of all VA matrices, and is one of the reasons why IPS is so popular for colour critical work. It should be noted that not everyone would even see this issue or be bothered by it. Certainly the FG2421 is a step in the right direction when it comes to viewing angles for a gaming screen as compared with the range of TN Film based models which currently dominate this sector.

Above: View of an all black screen from the side. Click for larger version On a black image there was a slight pale glow from an angle but it was nothing really bad at all. Certainly you don't get the obvious white glow you see on a lot of IPS and PLS panels when viewing dark content from an angle. From that point of view this is one area where VA panel viewing angles are preferred.



Panel Uniformity We wanted to test here how uniform the brightness and colour temperature was across the screen, as well as identify any leakage from the backlight in dark lighting conditions. Measurements of the luminance and colour temperature were taken at 35 points across the panel on a pure white background. The measurements for luminance were taken using BasICColor's calibration software package, combined with an X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter with a central point on the screen calibrated to 120 cd/m2. Measurements for colour temperature (white point) were taken using BasICColor software and the i1 Pro spectrophotometer which can more accurately measure the white point of different backlighting technologies. The below uniformity diagram shows the difference, as a percentage, between the measurement recorded at each point on the screen, as compared with the central reference point. It is worth noting that panel uniformity can vary from one screen to another, and can depend on manufacturing lines, screen transport and other local factors. This is only a guide of the uniformity of the sample screen we have for review.



Uniformity of Luminance

The luminance uniformity of the screen was moderate overall. The bottom area of the screen seemed to show a darker region than the rest, dropping down by ~29% to about 95 cd/m2 minimum in the bottom left hand corner. Aside from this darker section along the bottom edge, the rest of the upper part of the screen remained pretty uniform. Approximately 57% of the screen was within a 10% deviance of the central point. Not great if you are working with solid colours or doing colour critical work, but then that's not really the market for this screen. Keep in mind also that results may vary here.



Uniformity of White Point / Colour Temperature

The colour temperature uniformity was measured based on a centrally calibrated 6500k point. As you can see, the colour temperature was very uniform across the panel with only small deviations across the screen. There was a maximum of 4% deviance between any two points on the screen. There was only a very slight 1 - 2% deviance in the lower left hand region of the screen so nothing noticeable at all.



Backlight Leakage



Above: All black screen in a darkened room. Click for larger version As usual we also tested the screen with an all black image and in a darkened room. A camera was used to capture the result. Three was no obvious leakage from the backlight at all. We tried various shutter speeds and screen brightness settings as the black depth is so deep here, but we were impressed with the results.

General and Office Applications The 1920 x 1080 resolution and 23.5" screen size give a nice decent area in which to work and the vertical resolution is a little less than the range of 16:10 aspect 24" models (1920 x 1200) out there in the market. The screen is also half an inch smaller you might note as well. A lot of people prefer that extra vertical area of a 1200p screen, and it is useful for office applications we think as well. You may want to consider the fact that high resolution 27" 2560 x 1440 models are becoming increasingly available and so the difference in desktop size is certainly noticeable coming from a 27" screen like that. Nevertheless, the 23.5" 1920 x 1080 resolution should be adequate for many users. The screen offered a comfortable 0.272mm pixel pitch which delivered easy to read text at a nice size, in our opinion. It is slightly smaller than 24" screens with the same resolution of course, since the screen size here is slightly less at 23.5" diagonal. The resolution is big enough for side by side split screen working as well in many cases although we do find that nowadays a lot of web content needs more than half a screen (i.e. wider than 960 pixels). The light, semi-glossy AG coating of the MVA panel is certainly welcome. VA panels have generally been like this in the past, and it's good to see Sharp haven't opted for some overly grainy coating on this new panel. The pretty wide viewing angles provided by the panel technology in both horizontal and vertical planes, helps minimize on-screen colour shift when viewed from different angles. It is certainly less restrictive than competing TN Film gaming screens. The viewing angles are not as wide as IPS/PLS panels though and you do see the characteristic off-centre contrast shift from the VA matrix. The default setup of the screen was reasonable in terms of white point, but gamma was too high as it is designed to come out of the box for gaming. In fact the screen is in the FPS1 mode by default which also has the Turbo 240 mode enabled (and cannot be turned off in that preset mode). This again brings gaming advantages which we will look at later on, but for office and general use it may introduce visible flicker and should be turned off. In fact you will want to immediately move out of the FPS1 mode for office work and in to one of the user modes. You can actually achieve a pretty decent setup easily with a couple of OSD tweaks which we looked at earlier. If you are looking to calibrate the screen any further there are a few issues with correcting the colour accuracy, and the sRGB coverage is a little limited. Again, this is a gaming screen and those issues are unlikely to affect casual users anyway. The tweaked setup we talked about earlier should be more than adequate for most office work. The contrast ratio was excellent and certainly a strong point of this panel technology in general. With figures close to 5000:1 before and after calibration we were very impressed. The brightness range of the screen was also very good, with the ability to offer a luminance between approximately 386 and 39 cd/m2. This should mean the screen is perfectly useable in a wide variety of ambient light conditions, including darkened rooms. A setting of ~21 in the OSD brightness control should return you a luminance close to 120 cd/m2 by default. Thankfully the brightness regulation is not controlled using Pulse-Width modulation (PWM) either, and uses a hybrid solutions which is PWM-free down to 20% brightness. From 20 - 0% a Hi-PWM frequency kicks in at 18Khz which shouldn't be a problem to most users at all. Those who suffer from eye fatigue or headaches associated with flickering backlights shouldn't need to worry here, especially as you can run the screen at a luminance of ~120 cd/m2 without even needing to enter the Hi-PWM phase anyway. There was no audible noise or buzzing from the screen, even when specifically looking for it using test images with a large amount of text at once. The screen also remains cool even during prolonged use. There is a 'web' preset mode available from the menu which may be useful if you want to set up the screen for different uses perhaps. The DVI and DisplayPort connections provided a sharp and crisp image. The screen offers 2x USB 2.0 ports which can be useful, although a lot of modern screens are now offering USB 3.0 instead. Might have been nice to keep this up to date with them perhaps. There is also an ambient light sensor which might be useful to some people. There are no further extras like speakers or card readers which can be useful in office environments. There was a moderate range of ergonomic adjustments available from the stand allowing you to obtain a comfortable enough position. The movements were a little stiff but not exactly hard to move still. We could have perhaps done with a slightly wider height adjustment range. The lack of VESA mounting support may be annoying to some people perhaps. Eizo's included ScreenManager Pro software can be installed to allow you to control some aspects of the display from your PC if you want. This includes options to set up shortcut keys for certain things like the preset color modes. The color adjustment section allows you to control a lot of the features you might need in the OSD menu, including the DCR function and Turbo 240 option.

Above: photo of text at 1920 x 1080 (top) and 1600 x 900 (bottom) The screen is designed to run at its native resolution of 1920 x 1080 and at a 60Hz or 120Hz recommended refresh rate. The higher refresh rate adds to the speed and smoothness when moving things around your desktop so would be advisable where you can. Make sure you don't have Turbo 240 enabled though as you don't want the flickering side effect for office work. If you want you are able to run the screen outside of the native resolution. We tested the screen at a lower 1600 x 900 resolution to see how the screen handles the interpolation of the resolution, while maintaining the same aspect ratio of 16:9. At native resolution the text was nice and sharp as you can see from the top photograph and there was no overlapping of pixels. When you switch to a lower resolution the text is larger and becomes softer in appearance. The screen seems to interpolate the image reasonably well although you of course lose a lot of desktop real-estate running at a lower resolution.



Responsiveness and Gaming Quoted G2G Response Time (panel) 4ms G2G Quoted G2G Response Time (Eizo) <1ms (Turbo 240 on) Quoted ISO Response Time n/a Panel Manufacturer and Technology Sharp MVA Panel Part LQ235D1LW03 Overdrive Used Yes Overdrive Control Available to User No Overdrive Settings n/a Refresh Rate Support 100 / 120Hz Motion Blur Reduction Turbo 240 Mode The panel used in the FG2421 is rated by Sharp as having an 4 ms G2G response time, with the panel using overdrive / response time compensation (RTC) technology to boost pixel transitions across grey to grey changes. There is no user control over the overdrive impulse within the OSD menu and so we are reliant on the factory setup. The part being used is the Sharp LQ235D1LW03 MVA panel. Eizo actually go a step further in their spec and list a response time of "less than 1ms (Turbo 240 on)", but that is based on using the Turbo 240 feature. That feature doesn't actually alter the behaviour of the pixels or their underlying response time, but does impact what the user sees in terms of pixel persistence due to the backlight blinking technology. More on that in a moment. Have a read about response time in our specs section if you need additional information about this measurement. We will first test the screen using our thorough response time testing method. This uses an oscilloscope and photosensor to measure the pixel response times across a series of 20 different transitions, in the full range from 0 (black) to 255 (white). This will give us a realistic view of how the monitor performs in real life, as opposed to being reliant only on a manufacturers spec. We can work out the response times for changing between many different shades, calculate the maximum, minimum and average grey to grey (G2G) response times, and provide an evaluation of any overshoot present on the monitor. We use an ETC M526 oscilloscope for these measurements along with a custom photosensor device. Have a read of our response time measurement article for a full explanation of the testing methodology and reported data. The response time performance was on the whole very good for a VA type panel. You will see though that in our measurement sample there were two much slower response times, most notably the transition from black to very dark grey (0 - 50). Here the response time reached up to a very slow 44ms. The transition from 0-100 was also fairly slow at 23ms, but apart from that most of the response times were very good. Overall the average response time from all our measurements was 8.4ms which was respectable, although if we exclude those two high figures (0-50 and 0-100) then the average was as low as 6.9ms. If we ignore those two slow measurements then the rise times were on average ~6.7ms, and were very close to the average fall time of 6.5ms. Of course we can't just discount those slow times because we feel like it, and in fact that meant the average rise time was slower at 10.2ms. It did seem the matrix had some issues when changing from black to darker grey shades. Transitions to white (x - 255) were very fast, with the lowest being measured at 2.9ms which was impressive.

Transition: 50-200-50

(scale = 20ms) Above is a fairly classic example of what we saw from the response times. The rise and fall times were pretty similar, and there was no sign of any overshoot either which was positive news.

Transition: 0-50-0

(scale = 20ms) Above is the oscillograph from the slowest transition measured. You can see that the rise portion of the graph takes a long time to reach the desired luminance, but the fall time is much faster. This only seemed to be a problem when changing from black to dark grey shades. If we evaluate the Response Time Compensation (RTC) overshoot then the results are excellent. There was pretty much no overshoot at all, with only some very slight 1 - 3% overshoot in a couple of transitions. A very good result here especially seeing as the response times (with the exception of a couple of very slow changes) were very good for a VA panel. Thankfully Sharp haven't pushed the overdrive impulse too far in the search for low response time figures.

As we begin to measure more screens with the oscilloscope system we can begin to plot them on a graph like the above for easy comparison. This shows you the lowest, average and highest G2G response time measurement for each screen. There is also a traffic light style circle mark to indicate the RTC overshoot error for each screen, as the response time figure alone doesn't tell the whole story. As you can see, the FG2421 performed overall similarly to most of the IPS technology models here. The average G2G response time was 8.4ms (including the particularly slow transitions we talked about already). This left it actually slightly faster on average than the Dell P2414H and P2714H (8.9ms) which had impressed us recently for IPS panels. The other VA panel tested here, the BenQ GW2760HS, was a bit slower with an average G2G figure of 10.9ms. The Eizo also showed next to no overshoot which was excellent. The only issue really with the response times of the FG2421 were those particularly slow transitions from black to dark grey shades, which inflated the average G2G figure and left us with a couple of extremely slow changes.



Turbo 240 and 120Hz Support The FG2421 features a new motion blur reduction backlight system referred to as Turbo 240. We've looked in the past at the interesting benefits offered from displays enabled for NVIDIA's LightBoost system. Originally designed by NVIDIA for boosting the brightness in 3D gaming, enthusiasts discovered that the system could be "hacked" to allow you to use the LightBoost backlight system in 2D gaming as well. The result was a strobing backlight which ran in sync with the refresh rate of the screen, turning the backlight off rapidly in sync with the frame rate to remove a large portion of the pixel persistence which the user sees when viewing moving content. This greatly reduced the perceived motion blur and began to attract serious gamers to LightBoost enabled screens. To date that system has been exclusively available on models supporting 120Hz refresh rates and above, and where NVIDIA 3D vision and LightBoost support has been included. That meant the technology was only available on the fast gamer-orientated TN Film technology models. Until now there have not been any IPS, VA or PLS panels which can support a native 120Hz refresh rate. A few Korean manufactured IPS based models have been known for their ability to "overclock" to higher refresh rates than the native 60Hz, with some reaching up above 100Hz. However, that is not an official native refresh rate support and can vary a lot. Those models do not support NVIDIA 3D or LightBoost and so while they were capable of delivering higher refresh rates and frame rates, they didn't offer the motion blur reduction benefits that the fast TN Film based models with LightBoost could (or indeed the same response times). The Eizo FG2421 uses the first VA panel on the market to support a native true 120Hz refresh rate. Interestingly the FG2421 isn't the first screen to use this panel, as Eizo had already released a very niche (and expensive) model aimed at satellite imagery a couple of months prior. Their FDF2405W uses the same panel and technology, but the FG2421 is certainly the first gamer-orientated screen to use a 120Hz VA panel, and also the first to more "affordable" alternative to the FDF2405W. The panel is manufactured by Sharp and is MVA in technology. Back in 2011 AU Optronics, probably the main manufacturer of VA matrices in the market, looked to be investing in 120Hz compatible VA panels. However in the end this amounted to nothing and as we understand it now, AUO have no current plans to develop 120Hz VA panels themselves. Perhaps this will change with the arrival of Sharp's offering if it takes off.

120Hz Support and Frame Rate In simplistic terms, a 120Hz refresh rate means that the frame rate of the screen is doubled compared with a normal 60Hz LCD display and the image can appear smoother and more fluid to the user. The signal input is increased from 60 frames per second (fps) to 120 fps, something particularly useful for gaming and fast moving content. There are actually benefits in normal desktop use as well as you will see smoother movement of windows and objects around the screen generally. While a higher refresh rate can lead to a more natural and smooth movement it does increase the load on the PC and graphics card, especially for graphically intense games. While frame rates are improved using a 120Hz refresh rate and there are no doubt improvements in image clarity in gaming, there is still an issue with perceived motion blur due to the hold-type nature of LCD displays. This is discussed in detail in our motion blur reduction backlights article, but the perceived motion blur remains the obstacle for many 120Hz displays. The LightBoost backlight systems of TN Film based displays have helped overcome much of that issue and greatly reduce motion blur. Thankfully Eizo have also added a similar feature here on the FG2421. Eizo Turbo 240 In order to help improve the the gaming performance and smoothness of moving content an additional feature has been added to the display by Eizo. This is independent of the 120Hz refresh rate support and Eizo refer to it as "Turbo 240". This is available in the OSD menu 'color' section, in the 'advanced settings' as shown above. In some preset modes (FPS1 and 2) the Turbo 240 is enabled by default and cannot be turned off. In the user modes you can choose whether to have it enabled or not. This feature is designed to reduce the perceived motion blur much like the LightBoost system does. Since it is natively supported by the screen and easily turned on and off at a screen level from the OSD, there is no need for "hacking" your graphics card settings of trying to enable backlight strobing like on LightBoost monitors. It also means the feature can be used with non-NVIDIA graphics cards which is useful. Turbo 240 involves doubling the frames of the input signal (replicating each frame) and then blinking the backlight off and on in sync with these new frames like an impulse-type display. This should help reduce perceived motion blur much like the LightBoost backlight strobing does on TN Film screens. This can bring benefits to dynamic content in gaming and movies, but should be disabled during normal desktop use as a flicker may become apparent. We also noticed some pixel walk / inversion on test patterns at Lagom.nl when Turbo 240 was enabled (image 3 particularly), but this was not a problem with the feature was turned off. The Turbo 240 feature also has an impact on the luminance range of the screen as we measured earlier in the review. Further Reading: Eizo's whitepaper talks more about 120Hz refresh rate support and their Turbo 240 mode



Scale: each horizontal grid = 5ms If we measure a static white image using our oscilloscope when Turbo 240 is enabled you can see the backlight blinking in action. The screen is set at 120Hz here.

Scale: each horizontal grid = 2.5ms We can zoom in on the oscillograph to see what is happening more clearly. The blue > red section represents one frame at 120fps (i.e. 8.33ms). You can see that the backlight is being turned on and off twice during each frame, which fits in with Eizo's description of the frame doubling element. The first "frame" is very short and the image does not reach the desired luminance. The second flash is longer and reaches the desired luminance. The backlight flashes seem to be the same length no matter what the brightness is set to. The first flash lasts about 0.250 ms and the backlight is then turned off for ~3ms. It is then turned on for ~2.125ms for the second longer flash before being turned off again for ~3ms.

Transition: 50-200-50, Turbo 240 on

(scale = 20ms) If we measure an actual pixel transition as we had earlier we can see the operation of the backlight blinking again here. Above is the oscillograph for the 50-200-50 transition. We can compare the graph with and without Turbo 240 on as shown below:

Turbo 240 off Turbo 240 On

Transition: 50-200-50

(scale = 20ms) The underlying pixel transition response times remain constant for the panel, as the Turbo 240 feature has no bearing on those. What it does control is what you as the user actually see and so has a direct impact on perceived motion blur (more on that in a moment).

Transition: 50-200-50

(scale = 20ms) It's a bit hard to make out what the graph should show, so we've superimposed the original response time curve in red on the graph where Turbo 240 is enabled to make it a bit clearer.



Motion Blur Tests Of course the main concern with Turbo 240 is how it performs in practice and can it live up to the expectations of those who have used a LightBoost strobing backlight system for motion blur reduction before? We carried out several motion blur tests including PixPerAn to see how the screen performed. Some of this is hard to capture in images as a lot of the improvement is perceptual. Below are sample photos which we believe show the fairest representation of what the user actually sees. We will explain... Firstly it should be noted that the Turbo 240 mode can operate when you are running at both 60Hz and 120Hz refresh rates (and steps in between for that matter). We first tested the screen at a 60Hz refresh rate. (Top left image). The moving car in PixPerAn was pretty smooth and showed very low levels of blurring, and no ghosting issues at all. Taking that on its own for a second, that is a very good performance for any panel and certainly a marked improvement over what we've seen from other VA matrices in the past. If we ignore the few very slow transitions we measured with our oscilloscope then we already know the average G2G response time is a very good 6.9ms G2G. This puts it faster than other VA panels we've tested and even a bit ahead of most IPS panels. The blur was a little stronger than we'd seen on some very fast TN Film panels still, but a very impressive performance from a VA panel here. It should also be noted that there were no overshoot problems at all, something we'd also confirmed with our oscilloscope measurements. (Top right image). We went ahead and switched on the Turbo 240 mode while running at 60Hz refresh rate. Here we were actually less impressed with the resulting image. The picture shown is the fairest representation we could get of what you see as a user when using Turbo 240 at 60Hz. A rather obvious ghost image appears as part of the moving object, and the image doesn't look right. Perhaps the frames are being duplicated too many times here (from 60 frames to 240 frames?) and then operating along with the backlight blinking, but it is resulting in an odd appearance to the image. Probably not advisable to use Turbo 240 if you're running only at 60Hz refresh rate we felt. (Bottom left image). Switching to 120Hz produced a noticeable improvement to the image smoothness and clarity. First of all with Turbo 240 off, the image became a little sharper than we'd seen at 60Hz. There was still some blurring noticeable to the naked eye, but this is a result of the sample and hold effect of an LCD display. (Bottom right image). When switching Turbo 240 on there was a significant improvement in the clarity of the moving image. It's very hard to capture with the camera, but we've done the best we can, again giving what we believe to be the fairest view of what the user sees. What you can't capture though is the perceived improvement in motion blur as that is perceptual to the user. The moving object is noticeably sharper and easier to track across the screen with the eye. It appears sharper and nearly all the motion blur you saw before is eliminated. A very pleasing result and similar to what we'd seen from LightBoost backlight systems in the past. The only slight niggle is that there appears to be a slight pale trail introduced behind the moving car. It's hard to pick up with the camera and it doesn't appear to be a result of overshoot, since we know the pixel transitions and overdrive impulse do not produce any of that. It seems to be related to the frame doubling and backlight blinking method, but it's quite slight really. In normal uses you probably won't see this much, and the motion blur reduction benefits of Turbo 240 certainly out-weigh that slight negative for us. If for some reason you don't get on with Turbo 240 in some cases, you're still left with a VA panel capable of running at 120Hz and offering very good response times (and no overshoot) anyway. Great result from the FG2421.



Display Comparisons The screen was tested using the chase test in PixPerAn for the following display comparisons. As a reminder, a series of pictures are taken on the highest shutter speed and compared, with the best case example shown on the left, and worst case example on the right. This should only be used as a rough guide to comparative responsiveness but is handy for a comparison between different screens and technologies as well as a means to compare those screens we tested before the introduction of our oscilloscope method.

23.5" 4ms G2G Sharp MVA + 120Hz In practice the Eizo FG2421 showed low levels of motion blur and no noticeable ghosting. Image clarity and smoothness was improved with the higher frame rate that 120Hz offered. Blurring was still noticeable to the user due to the hold-type nature of LCD displays, but could be reduced significantly with the use of the integrated Turbo 240 blinking backlight technology. Overall we were impressed with the pixel response times from this new VA panel.



23.5" 4ms G2G Sharp MVA + 120Hz

23.8" 8ms G2G LG.Display AH-IPS

24" 8ms G2G LG.Display e-IPS We have provided a comparison of the FG2421 first of all against a couple of popular IPS based Dell screens in a similar size. The FG2421 was actually a little faster in practice than the 23.8" P2414H which was pleasing. The Dell U2414M showed nice low levels of motion blur and the moving image was a little sharper than on the P series screen here. However, a noticeable dark overshoot was introduced, caused by an overly aggressive overdrive impulse. Don't forget also that the Dell screens only support a maximum 60Hz refresh rate and so cannot offer the frame rates or overall smoothness of the Eizo either.

23.5" 4ms G2G Sharp MVA + 120Hz

27"WS 4ms G2G AU Optronics AMVA (AMA = High)

24" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AMVA (AMA = Premium)

27" 4ms G2G AU Optronics AMVA (AMA = Premium)

24" 6ms G2G AU Optronics AMVA Perhaps the best comparison is against other VA technology screens we have tested in the past. The other models shown here represent various panels from AU Optronics, using their similar AMVA technology. As you can see, the BenQ GW2760HS could not keep up with the Eizo and showed a more obvious blurring to the image. The BenQ GW2450HM, Dell S2440L and BenQ GW2750HM to a lesser extent, were a bit faster than the GW2760HS in practice but did introduce a dark overshoot trail which was unfortunate. The overdrive impulse was being pushed a bit too far here to try and reach low response times, but the resulting artefacts were an unwanted side-effect. Thankfully the MVA panel from the Eizo FG2421 offered low response times as well as freedom from overshoot problems, out-performing all other VA panels we have tested to date.

23.5" 4ms G2G Sharp MVA + 120Hz

27" 2ms G2G Chi Mei Innolux TN Film +144Hz (Trace Free = 60)

24" 2ms G2G AU Optronics TN Film + 120Hz (AMA = On)

27" 1ms G2G Chi Mei Innolux TN Film + 120Hz (Over Drive = 0) We've also included a comparison above against three very fast 120Hz+ compatible screens we have tested. In all cases these other screens are using TN Film panels and are aimed primarily at gamers. Firstly there is a comparison against the Asus VG278HE with its 144Hz refresh rate. This showed very fast pixel response times and smooth movement thanks to its increased refresh rate. This was a bit faster in practice, and also confirmed by our response time measurements for that screen. Like the Eizo's Turbo 240 mode, you are able to reduce the motion blur even more through the use of the LightBoost strobed backlight which we talked about in depth in our article about Motion Blur Reduction Backlights. However this was not nearly as easy to operate as on the FG2421 and had some obvious drawbacks including very low maximum luminance. Then there is a comparison against the BenQ XL2420T. This showed low levels of motion blur, but some dark overshoot was introduced as a side-effect. The Iiyama G2773HS was very responsive and even has a quoted 1ms G2G response time. This showed very low levels of blur and had minimal issue with overshoot. For gaming it should also be noted that these other TN Film models (with the exception of the Iiyama) support 3D stereoscopic content as well and are NVIDIA 3D vision certified. That is one thing missing from the Eizo FG2421 as although it can support the high refresh rate, it does not support NVIDIA 3D vision.









Additional Gaming Features

Aspect Ratio Control - The screen offers three options for hardware level aspect ratio control, available within the 'screen' menu as shown above. There are options for full screen, enlarged and normal which should cover a wide variety of uses. Full screen is designed to stretch the input resolution to fill the whole screen, ignoring the aspect ratio and whether it skews it at all. Enlarged should maintain the source aspect ratio and fill as much of the screen as possible, adding black borders along the sides if needed. Normal mode should 1:1 pixel map the source input and add black borders where needed. The results of using this aspect ratio control seemed to vary a bit. When trying 5:4 resolutions such as 1280 x 1024 each option worked as they should. 4:3 resolutions like 1280 x 960 also behaved properly. However, some others like 1600 x 900 and 1366 x 768 for instance (both 16:9 aspect) always filled the screen no matter what you set it to in the OSD menu. This wasn't a major problem as the aspect ratio was still the same, and in fact 'full' and 'enlarged' would do the same thing here anyway. We were missing the option to 1:1 pixel map those resolutions though for some reason. 16:10 resolutions like 1680 x 1050 also seemed not to work, and would be stuck in the 'enlarged' mode. Again good that it at least kept the source aspect ratio, but there was no option to fill the whole screen and skew the aspect (not that you'd probably want to), or 1:1 pixel map the source. So overall, nothing too serious but some aspects were a bit hit and miss in terms of how they were controlled. The important 4:3 and 5:4 aspect ratios worked as they should though thankfully.

Preset Modes - There are 2 defined 'FPS' preset modes and a third set up for 'RTS' games. These carry certain default gamma and temperature modes and may be useful for those wanting to set up the screen for different situations and different games. The Turbo 240 feature is available in all these modes, although it actually can't be turned off in the FPS presets and is always on. This does bring about motion blur reduction benefits when running at 120Hz so is worth using anyway. The DCR function is available in all modes although we've already seen it does nothing seemingly in practice. You can also "Play like the pros with gaming presets from pro gamers such as Counter-Strike legend Patrik “cArn” Sättermon and Dota 2 player Johan “n0tail” Sundstein. Use the bundled software, ScreenManager Pro for Gaming, to download these and other presets from gaming.eizo.com or to export your own presets." This allows you to save custom preset modes into the user1,2,3 spaces if you want. The software also allows you to set up hotkeys from your keyboard to quickly switch between preset modes and also control the aspect ratio.



Lag We have written an in depth article about input lag and the various measurement techniques which are used to evaluate this aspect of a display. It's important to first of all understand the different methods available and also what this lag means to you as an end-user. Input Lag vs. Display Lag vs. Signal Processing To avoid confusion with different terminology we will refer to this section of our reviews as just "lag" from now on, as there are a few different aspects to consider, and different interpretations of the term "input lag". We will consider the following points here as much as possible. The overall "display lag" is the first, that being the delay between the image being shown on the TFT display and that being shown on a CRT. This is what many people will know as input lag and originally was the measure made to explain why the image is a little behind when using a CRT. The older stopwatch based methods were the common way to measure this in the past, but through advanced studies have been shown to be quite inaccurate. As a result, more advanced tools like SMTT provide a method to measure that delay between a TFT and CRT while removing the inaccuracies of older stopwatch methods. In reality that lag / delay is caused by a combination of two things - the signal processing delay caused by the TFT electronics / scaler, and the response time of the pixels themselves. Most "input lag" measurements over the years have always been based on the overall display lag (signal processing + response time) and indeed the SMTT tool is based on this visual difference between a CRT and TFT and so measures the overall display lag. In practice the signal processing is the element which gives the feel of lag to the user, and the response time of course can impact blurring, and overall image quality in moving scenes. As people become more aware of lag as a possible issue, we are of course keen to try and understand the split between the two as much as possible to give a complete picture. The signal processing element within that is quite hard to identify without extremely high end equipment and very complicated methods. In fact the studies by Thomas Thiemann which really kicked this whole thing off were based on equipment worth >100,1000 Euro, requiring extremely high bandwidths and very complicated methods to trigger the correct behaviour and accurately measure the signal processing on its own. Other techniques which are being used since are not conducted by Thomas (he is a freelance writer) or based on this equipment or technique, and may also be subject to other errors or inaccuracies based on our conversations with him since. It's very hard as a result to produce a technique which will measure just the signal processing on its own unfortunately. Many measurement techniques are also not explained and so it is important to try and get a picture from various sources if possible to make an informed judgement about a display overall. For our tests we will continue to use the SMTT tool to measure the overall "display lag". From there we can use our oscilloscope system to measure the response time across a wide range of grey to grey (G2G) transitions as recorded in our response time tests. Since SMTT will not include the full response time within its measurements, after speaking with Thomas further about the situation we will subtract half of the average G2G response time from the total display lag. This should allow us to give a good estimation of how much of the overall lag is attributable to the signal processing element on its own. Lag Classification

To help in this section we will also introduce a broader classification system for these results to help categorise each screen as one of the following levels based on the overall display lag (signal processing + response time element): Class 1) Less than 16ms / 1 frame lag - should be fine for gamers, even at high levels

Class 2) A lag of 16 - 32ms / One to two frames - moderate lag but should be fine for many gamers. Caution advised for serious gaming and FPS

Class 3) A lag of more than 32ms / more than 2 frames - Some noticeable lag in daily usage, not suitable for high end gaming For the full reviews of the models compared here and the dates they were written (and when screens were approximately released to the market), please see our full reviews index. (Measurements in ms) Turbo 240 Off Turbo 240

On Total Display Lag (SMTT 2) 14.0 18.0 Pixel Response Time Element 4.20 4.20 Estimated Signal Processing Lag 9.80 13.80 Lag Classification 1 2 Class 1 - 2 We have provided a comparison above against other models we have tested to give an indication between screens. Those shown with blue bars in the bottom half represent the total "display lag" as at the time of review we did not have access to an oscilloscope system to measure the response time element and provide an estimation of the signal processing. The screens tested more recently in the top half are split into two measurements which are based on our overall display lag tests (using SMTT) and half the average G2G response time, as measured by the oscilloscope. The response time is split from the overall display lag and shown on the graph as the green bar. From there, the signal processing (red bar) can be provided as a good estimation. There are a few different parts to these tests. Firstly we tested the screen with Turbo 240 disabled, both at 60Hz and 120Hz for completeness. The total display lag shown was 14ms on average. If we account for half the average G2G response time (4.2ms) we can estimate that the signal processing time is ~9.8ms. The total lag of 14ms is under 1 frame (at 60Hz) and so is classified as class 1 as per our above description. If you're running at 120Hz that actually accounts for a little under 2 frames (each frame is 8.33ms instead of 16.7ms). The overall feel of lag from the signal processing element remains constant and is pretty low. It's quite similar to the BenQ XL2420T in total lag (13ms) and Asus VG278HE which measured 8.45ms signal processing at 144Hz refresh rate. If we enable Turbo 240 a small amount of additional lag is added due to the frame doubling and backlight blinking system being used. The total display lag was 18ms now, and so we can estimate the signal processing to be ~13.8ms, 4ms longer than before. The total lag is just over 1 frame (1 frame at 60Hz = 16.7ms) but it it still not too high. Neither should be particularly problematic for gaming. Similar additional lag is added when using LightBoost backlight systems on TN Film gaming screens as well, although just how much is hard to quantify as it's very difficult to measure.

For more information about the SMTT 2.0 tool, or to purchase a copy please visit:



http://smtt.thomasthiemann.com/index_en.html



Gaming Summary The overall gaming performance of the Eizo FG2421 was very good and we were pleased with what we saw. From a pixel response time point of view we were impressed by the fast transitions on the most part. True, there were a couple of dodgy transitions which were very slow (changes from black to dark shades) but most of the response time measurements were very good. They were certainly faster than we'd seen from other VA technology screens in the past. The average G2G response time was 8.4ms overall, but if we ignore those couple of very slow changes, it should have been more like 6.9ms. That puts it faster than the better IPS/PLS panels we have tested in fact. Add to this the fact the transitions were free of any overshoot problems at all and you have a great performance from the panel side of things. Sharp have done a very good job squeezing the best response times out of a VA matrix, while avoiding the need for an aggressive overdrive and resulting overshoot problems. The support of 120Hz refresh rates speaks for itself really. You get a noticeable improvement in smoothness and clarity of moving images. Gaming can support frame rates up to 120fps instead of 60fps and even normal day to day movements around your desktop feel snappier and quicker. Being the first VA 120Hz model on the market is also an achievement and clearly it can offer some advantages over TN Film panels. The response times might not be quite as quick to be fair as TN Film, but should be fine for most users. The much higher static contrast ratio (near 5000:1) and improved viewing angles are certainly two advantages of this panel over the mass of TN Film gaming screens out there. Eizo didn't stop there either, and have provided a natively supported motion blur reduction technology from the Turbo 240 mode. Like LightBoost systems we have seen before, which aren't official methods even, this works well. It greatly reduces the perceived motion blur, makes moving images sharper and allows for much easier tracking of movement with the eye. It's easy to control and can be used at a monitor level without needing to do graphics card hacks like with LightBoost monitors. Also of importance is the fact that there is still a huge brightness range possible when using Turbo 240, unlike on LightBoost screens. Perhaps one issue with Turbo 240 though is that at 60Hz refresh rates the frame doubling seems to create a distracting double image and doesn't look right. This is eliminated at 120Hz, although a small pale trail is introduced instead, but hardly a major issue. With Turbo 240 not really working well at 60Hz this might mean the feature is more limited when playing consoles or running PC's at lower refresh rate. Still, you can just turn the feature off and still enjoy the decent response times, great contrast and wide viewing angles. Display lag is reasonably low, and on par with similar gaming screens with LightBoost systems in fact. With Turbo 240 off, the short 9.8ms signal lag is unlikely to cause any major problems. There is a small additional lag or around 4ms added when Turbo 240 is enabled, but still not a huge number to worry about. It should be noted that unlike a lot of 120Hz compatible TN Film screens, the FG2421 does not support NVIDIA 3D Vision so if you wanted to game in 3D then the other screens may be more suitable. Obviously the other "limitation" at the moment is the maximum resolution of 1920 x 1080. More than adequate for most users we're sure, and in fact the demands on a PC of running much higher at 120Hz would probably be out of reach for most users. Some are clamouring for high res 120Hz modes, and maybe one day we will see them. We expect at some point there might be a 27" equivalent of this panel emerge, but no official word at the moment.

Movies and Video The following summarises the screens performance in video applications: 23.5" screen size makes it a reasonable option for an all-in-one multimedia screen, but being quite a bit smaller than most modern LCD TV's of course. Also quite small compared with the wide choice of 27" screens out there now.

16:9 aspect ratio is more well suited to videos than a 16:10 format screen, leaving smaller borders on DVD's and wide screen content at the top and bottom.

1920 x 1080 resolution can support full 1080 HD resolution content

Digital interface support HDCP for any encrypted and protected content

DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort connections available, giving you good connectivity choices for modern DVD players, Blu-ray, consoles etc.

Cables provided in the box for DisplayPort, but not DVI or HDMI.

Light, semi-glossy AG coating provides clean and clear images, without the unwanted reflections of a glossy solution.

Wide brightness range adjustment possible from the display, including high maximum luminance of ~386 cd/m 2 and a good minimum luminance of ~36 cd/m 2 . This should afford you very good control for different lighting conditions. Brightness regulation from 100 - 20% brightness is not controlled by PWM and is flicker free. For lower brightness levels a Hi-PWM frequency of 18Khz is used, so again shouldn't present problems to most people.

Black depth and contrast ratio are outstanding at 4845:1 after calibration. Detail in darker scenes should not be lost as a result, and shadow detail should be very good. This is certainly a strong point of this MVA technology used.

Dynamic contrast ratio is available on this model but does nothing in real use.

There is no specific 'movie' preset mode available for movies or video but you could probably set up one of the user modes to your liking if you want.

Very good pixel responsiveness which should easily handle fast moving scenes in movies without issue. No overshoot issues at all which is very pleasing.

The 120Hz support and Turbo 240 modes may be desirable for some people, particularly if playing content from your PC. For an external device you will be limited to 60Hz and we found the Turbo 240 effect to look odd at that refresh rate, so probably wouldn't be advisable to use then.

Pretty wide viewing angles thanks to MVA panel technology meaning several people could view the screen at once comfortable and from a whole host of different angles. There is no annoying IPS/PLS glow like you get on those panel techs from wide angles, meaning you won't see annoying white glows on da