Razer Blade 14 Screen thoughts

A lot of people seem to think this is the worst screen ever based on what i've seen it isn't the worst.

I'm not here to justify razers decision just to say i think that this screen isn't as bad as it is made out to be.

I thought i was going to return the laptop it wasmade out to be so awful. I have it next to a Asus 27" 1080p 144Hz monitor and a Shimian 27" 1440P

I think this screen is better than the Asus aside from the viewing angles, which honestly, i haven't noticed much yet, and not as good as the Shimian obviously.

I also think this display is brighter than my Shimian, although the colors aren't as good, but it is bright enough to make up for it being matte.

All in all for it being a laptop screen. I'd give it an 7.9 out of 10 on the review. Its bright, and clear. But lacks vibrancy, and viewing angles, which don't really matter on a laptop where you are moving it.

 

To be completely honest, when you have such a great product all around, it's not that hard to focus on it's weak point, I think the screen could have been better for the overall price of the laptop, however the screen does not detract from the actual experience which this laptop was made to offer: Gaming.... I really can live with the viewing angles and the not so perfect color depth, I agree with you on that 100%. To me the top 3 things on a gaming laptop that I'm going to be taking with me around are:

1- Portability
2- Performance
3- Noise/Heat

All in which the Razer Blade excels.

 

I have to agree. The display is the only weak point on the Blade in my opinion. Didn't stop me from buying it! Everything else about it is phenomenal. It is a perfectly acceptable screen for me when I am on the go. When I am at home, I have it plugged into an Asus 24" 1920x1200 16:10 IPS 2ms(gtg) monitor anyways. (No desktop here. I don't hardcore game like I use to. I mainly play League of Legends, Counterstrike Source/GO, and other various Steam games that are not all that demanding) I can play League of Legends (My main game) at max settings using the Asus Display with ease!

 

Honestly, the more I use the laptop the more I like the screen. I was able to play TW:R2 and XCOM:EU in starbucks with the sun streaming in. Most other people were having a hard time reading their emails. Up/down viewing angles are the weakest, but side to side is very acceptable.

 

I've had my RB14 for about 24 hours, and the screen only seems to be a (mild) nuisance while browsing the web etc. While gaming it seems to do rather well. I don't regret the purchase

 

Honestly, while the screen isn't going to win any awards for web browsing related stuff, I think it's quite nice when playing a game.

As somebody who runs a shimian 27 inch IPS 2560x1440 panel on my desktop, I know all too well the tradeoffs one has to make to have a beautiful IPS panel when gaming. The Shimian is one of the fastest IPS panels out there for games, and I -still- get occasional tearing and issues related to the speed. Simply put, there are no really good high end IPS panel out there that is comparable to a TN panel for gaming (speed wise). There are always going to be tradeoffs that need to be made when it comes to finding the best screen for games.

So while no, browsing the web, viewing angles, etc arent that great on this thing.. I certainly did NOT spend 2000$ on this thing to have the best web browsing experience ever. I bought it 100% for the games, and when gaming, the screen looks JUST fine. Its very fast and responsive and looks nice enough for me.

 

Don't forget the reason they went with that display was due to its much faster refresh rate which, to serious gamers, would be more important. It's totally about performance when it comes to serious gaming. I, for one, would prefer a prettier image, but I'm far from a hardcore gamer.

I've seen lots of comments and nearly every review dings the Razer on the display. If you look at the Razer Blade. Check out the engineering... both outside and in... you'd realize that it would be pretty much impossible for them to put a "crappy" display in the system without knowing it. And considering how much work they put into that system, it's safe to say they wouldn't have put a cheap display in so they could charge $100 less. They simply put the fastest display they could in it.
------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by Min-Liang Tan View Post

I’ve been asked many times why we chose a TN panel over an IPS panel for the Razer Blade and my response has been “It’s the best 14” panel available for gaming.” I thought I’d go into it in greater detail.

The TN panel on the Razer Blade has a transition time of 8ms (16ms worst case) and essentially, that means that pixels can completely turn on or off within the refresh time allotted in a 60Hz display. The IPS panels available to us at the time had a refresh rate of 35ms (50ms worst case) and basically that means there could be visible artifact during pixel transitions from any one color to another.

The difference between 50ms and 16ms means that we can avoid any chance of visible artifact during quickly changing frames, i.e. gaming performance is best on the panel we chose.

However, admittedly, while gaming performance is better on the panel we chose, other issues like vertical viewing angles are poorer for the TN panel as compared to IPS panels.

We made these decisions well aware that it would have an impact on other uses – i.e. lying in bed and watching a movie with a friend etc, but it has always been gaming first here at Razer. Honestly, from my own personal perspective, I don’t have any issues with viewing angles cos I’m forever alone on my laptop anyway.

This is akin to the decision that we made for the first Razer Blade Pro 2 years ago where we picked a dual-core CPU with a higher clock rate vs a quad-core CPU with a lower clock rate. For the tech uninitiated then, most said “why not Quad core?” but the hardcore gamers understood that a higher clock speed dual core CPU would outperform a lower clock speed quad core for gaming. It was only till the Quad Core CPUs met our gaming spec that we moved to a Quad Core CPU. Similarly, when it came to screen selection for the new Razer Blade, we picked the 14” best screen there was for gamers.

Would we pick an IPS panel in the future? Possibly, but only if the refresh rates are up to par with our expectations for our customers – you – the gamer. Until then, the 14” TN panel is the best panel there is for gaming.

Our design philosophy has always been to design and build the best possible products for gamers. And that will never change!

For Gamers. By Gamers

 

I agree with their decision. What most people looking to buy this don't understand is that the reviewers dinging the display are journalists, not gamers.

 

The criticisms over the screen are generally theoretical. Viewing angle? That's as preposterous as commenting on how a phone feels "flimsy" in your hand. Who the hell cares? Adjust the angle. Are you watching the screen while it's on the floor and you're suspended from the ceiling like Tom cruise in mission impossible?

Resolution is a valid criticism. A top flight device should be 1920x1080.

Brightness/darkness...look. I'm not a cyborg. I cannot see the difference between 3.999 black pixels and 3.78 black pixels. Who cares?

 

You know i'm not so sure 1080p would be the best decision. the 765m has trouble at 1080p.

 

I disagree. I have been gaming with my Blade 14" using a 24" 1920x1200 external display. All of the games I play don't even make the Blade break a sweat.

 

Depends if your sweat means 30 fps or 60 fps. I prefer 60.

 

You have a point if you're looking to max out your settings. For me, medium to high settings at 60 or near 60 fps gets it done.

 

The screen while is not good, it's tolerable at best. If you can find the sweet spot it's decent, but the grainy look on any white background is horrible. The resolution is perfect for gaming on the 765M though Any higher, such as with my AW 14 and it's 1080p IPS screen, is too high for the 765M to keep up with high - ultra settings in most games.

 

It's not the settings in games at 1080p, it's the bandwidth, regardless of settings, it will suffer at 1080p because of the 128-bit memory bus. If you can have really fast vRAM to compensate it will help. The 765m vRAM in my laptop can OC to nearly 600MHz over stock, and I'm sure the Blade and AW 14 can do similar. That will help with the higher resolutions for sure.

But 1600x900 yes is a great fit for games with this GPU. Too bad it sucks in quality and also for desktop work 1080p is better. I'm surprised there's not a quality alternative screen found yet though for this machine. Speed isn't all that important, honestly. 16ms or better is all you need, really. I'd rather have improved viewing angles, contrast, and brightness at 12-16ms than crappy viewing angles, with low contrast and brightness with 6ms, even for gaming. People justifying the screen for this machine at this price point as being "OK" are kidding themselves. It's the one thing that prevented me from even considering purchasing the laptop.

 

there is, its called the x1 carbon screen, its a phillips screen if im not mistaken

 

Its grainy because its matte.

Razer took measurements of different screens that would fit in themselves. The TN panel is 16ms and the ips was upwards of 50ms.
The only thing i notice that is subpar on this display are the viewing angles, which since i am always the primary user, i never notice.

Edit: One thing i have noticed is if i use an IPS display and get 30 fps it feels choppy. 30 fps on this TN feels like 60 fps on an ips. First screen i can say that about.

 

So is there a place to buy a screen, I see some places let you up grade to a better screen for extra cash..

 

Thinking about buying that beauty aswell Razer Blade 14 vs Alienware 14 : razer

How are your experiences with the screen in everyday usage? Would be nice if someone could provide two or three photos of the laptop screen while having an open browser or something, if that's possible, since I'll be mostly using it for all day work and not dedicated gaming, so I mainly care about the screen / like to know how bad it really is.

 

My brother has the M14X 2013 with the 1080 IPS screen and i have the Razer Blade Pro 2013, too. After comparing display quality of TN panel vs IPS, we came to the conclusion that they are just different and it would be subjective to say one is superior to the other. In fact, we have noticed that the Razer Blade pro TN panel has better horizontal angles, while the Alienware M14X 1080p has better vertical angles. We also noticed that both screens achieve exelent black levels, however the Razer Blade achieves higher brightness for whites.

My conclusion is that If the Razer Blade 14 screen looks bad, then it is not a problem of being TN but a problem of which TN.

 

My brother has the M14X 2013 with the 1080 IPS screen and i have the Razer Blade Pro, 2013 too. After comparing display quality of Razer's TN panel vs Alienware's IPS panel, we came to the conclusion that they are just different and it would be subjective to say one is superior to the other. In fact, we have noticed that the Razer Blade pro TN panel has better horizontal angles, while the Alienware M14X 1080p has better vertical angles. We also noticed that both screens achieve exelent black levels. Finally, in terms of brightness, The Razer Blade Pro was higher.

My conclusion is that both TN and IPS are nice. If the Razer Blade 14 screen looks bad as people complain, then it is not a problem of being TN but a problem of which TN.

 

So is the screen rely bad at that size?? Would you wait to buy one for a better screen?

 

The screen is perfectly fine. It's very bright and will allow you to work and play in total comfort. This razer blade I is not my computer, I'm setting it up and tweaking it for a friend, and after using it for a week or so, I must say that screen really grows on you. Don't underestimate it only because other units have an IPS installed, like Alienware. True, the razer's viewing angles are not as wide as an IPS, but who really cares? When I use the computer I'm sitting in front of it anyways. By the way, the razer blade is also comfortable to watch movies with someone in bed , as long as you set it on laptop-holder (they're quite cheap on amazon), and don't keep right on your faces. I see no need to bash this screen as I have seen happening around, it is better than what detractors say.

 

I would disagree with most of the posts so far... sounds like people in denial trying to justify the price tag of this laptop.. the screen is so laughably bad it actually affects your gaming experience in dark games like fallout 3 and skyrim. It isn't just about TN vs. IPS - even as far as TN panels go, this one is atrocious. I have seen netbooks and chromebooks with better displays. If Razer really was 100% focused on a smooth gaming experience, they sacrificed far far too much in the way of picture quality

When you line this laptop up against other premium ultrabooks, it looks like it belongs right up until you turn it on. Then everyone asks what is wrong with the screen. A-B comparison vs. even $900 ultrabooks, the screen makes the whole Blade look cheap then when you tell people it is actually over two grand canadian they are aghast

 

And I would disagree with yours, which depicts this screen way worse than it actually is. I don't mind this screen at all, I actually like that's very bright. The argument that for you there are "better" screens out there is not an argument, because there's always something better in general. Calling this screen "atrocious" is just biased. You compared the razer with an ultrabook? Why don't compare the iphone retina screen to the razer blade then? This computer is a package. Its 1600x900 is quite fit for this size and allows a good compromise detail/high graphic settings in game. I don't speak to justify the purchase, since the one I'm testing it's not even mine. Besides, I calibrated it with SyderExpress, and it does look quite nice now.

 

Care to share the profile?

Thanks in advance!

 

As the owner of a 14 inch laptop with 900p screen, and who works on a FHD IPS display on a desktop, i can say i like my laptops screen more. If i would have any more pixels, it would make reading uncomfortable.

Why do people care about viewing angles so much? I personally am the only person using my computer, so it doesnt bother me.

 

The screen is subpar considering the price, but it's adequate for the gamer.

 

It ain't the resolution or the TN panel and its viewing angles that people are complaining about. It is the quality of the panel and the tn panel on the Razer 14 is mediocre with low contrast ratio, such high black value levels making everything looks greyish like a foggy film was put on the panel, grainy/smudgy display with low color gamut.

So again, it ain't the resolution or that being a tn panel that's the problem, the HD+ 900p resolution is just pefect imo but the tn panel on it suck and when I had mine, it was so grainy and smudgy I thought the screen had a defect.


I actually had both the Razer 14 and Y410p and the HD+ 900p panel on the y410p is much much better since it wasn't smudgy or grainy and it is 100% very clear since the glossy finish helped but that is not an excuse since I had anti-glare matte TN panels that are very clear in the past so for a $2,000 with a horrendous cheap matte panel that is smudgy and grainy is unacceptable.

 

Omg it's the best screen ever! Rich vibrant colors! 4k resolution! The 1600x900 in the specs was a typo. It's actually 4k. Oh, and the viewing angles are amazing! Someone can be standing in front of you when your on your blade and they still see everything in detail! HaHaHa

 

So what's your honest take on the screen? Is it good enough to game with as well as web browsing, do work related stuff (office), etc? I want a sexy notebook to take on the go for all around usage and for games since I love gaming as well. Thanks!

 

​

 

In all honesty the screen is about a 6 - 7/10, its as good as any average laptop but has almost twice the brightness. vertical viewing angles are rubbish, extending perhaps 20 degrees before colours become inverted and washed out (that`s why you can change the angle of the lid!) whilst horizontal angles are pretty decent, with around 70 degrees either side being the maximum viewing angle before a considerable drop in brightness is visible. Colours look better than an average tn panel but pale in comparison to an ips laptop or plasma tv although coming from someone who has been using tn laptops for years look fine if not good. Contrast however could be much better and is probably around 200-400:1, this makes games like metro last light frustrating and difficult as increasing the brightness also increases the brightness of dark areas, the contrast is fine for movies and text though making this laptop practical for general use, I have a feeling that many people merge contrast and colour gamut/saturation into one judgement, calling it poor panel as a result, the colours are ok but the contrast is terrible for nowadays ultrabook, mbpr standards but is on par with your average laptop. The matte covering is quite grainy but is far from the worst I have seen. This is compared to an Asus u36sd, hp dv3, alienware m11x and clevo w230st which has a pretty much perfect screen yet terrible speakers that ruin any entertainment. The main complaint is not that this is a bad display but that this is a bad display for a laptop of this calibre and price range, thus the screen is not bad compared to a bestbuy sub $1000 laptop but is bad in comparison to an alienware 14, clevo w230st, samsung ativ 9 plus, etc, all laptops that cost less or similar to the razer.