90% Gamut Matte vs. 72% Gamut Matte

I see that sager is offering the 90% Gamut now.. I have a pre order in for a 72% Gamut but now that I see the 90% I am thinking of upgrading to that screen before it ships.

Is the upgrade worth it? Will you notice a difference and if so how much? To the resellers has this screen been shipped to you and will it be available as soon as IVy Bridge is announced or in this a further delay?

 

As far as I can tell, no one has yet to have tested or used the 90% Gamut screen on the 17" inch (assuming these are the ones you are talking about).

I would suggest upgrading, there is no point to settle in between the stock, the medium Gamut and the almost real colour declaration.
Go for the 90% and yes, the difference will be noticeable to say the least

Regarding the delay.. yeah I have no idea, but I would imagine it wouldn't delay anything.

Good luck have fun mate

 

The 90% they offer is actually a glossy one. I've heard good things about 72% matte and 90% glossy. You'll hear preferences and arguments why one is better then the other but it really will come down to you.

My vote, keep the 72% matte.

 

I'd also say stick with 72% unless you understand what color management is and if your applications allow for it. Windows and most apps, along with nearly everything on the web(and all games so far as I am aware) allow for only 72% and some of the colors will be off. Now, some people like the inaccuracy as they feel it is more vibrant, but that is a subjective appraisal that I can't advise you on.

 

I am looking at the powernotebooks site and these are the options:

17.3” Full HD (1920x1080) Super Clear Glossy LED-Backlit Display Standard
17.3” Full HD (1920x1080) 72% NTSC Color Gamut Matte LED-Backlit Display
17.3” Full HD (1920x1080) 90% NTSC Color Gamut Glossy LED-Backlit Display
17.3” Full HD (1920x1080) 90% NTSC Color Gamut Matte LED-Backlit Display

Maybe just an error or is there a 90% Matte?

 

There is a 90% Matte. Its new, we didnt have that a while ago. Not sure if they are shipping them yet, but soon the other resellers will have these too.

This is what Ive read anyway. Its sad that NOONE among the european resellers offer ANY screen upgrades beside 60% matte and 60% glossy. I wanted to order from the US but then somebody told me of the taxes I had to pay and Im devastated when I calculated the price.

 

Both pwnpcs.co.uk and pcspecialist.co.uk offer 95% matte.

 

By "european resellers" I meant only those in the European Union. Getting it from the UK would be expensive as hell.

So yeah, noone from the EU offers gamut displays.

 

The UK is in the European Union.

 

Damn, you're right. *blushes* They use UK pounds...I was referring to the lands that use EURO. If I get it from the UK, its gonna be around 1800~ish Pounds. And from Germany it would total at ~1800 EUR. Pounds>>EUR.

 

Which company in euro-land is that? I haven't found a reseller that's significantly cheaper than the UK ones, so I'd love to know

 

Here we go:

PCSPECIALIST.UK - £1,670.00
MYSN.DE - € 1.558,00

Config: i7 2760QM, 8gb 1333mhz, 500gb hdd, bigfoot 1103, gtx675m, matte display.



EDIT: Ram on MySN was 1600mhz not 1333.

 

I'm not sure what's going on there.

If I make PM150EM with Glare display, 2760QM, GTX675, 8 GB 1600 MHz, 500 GB Momentus XT, 6230 WiFi, DVD Burner, No software:

PC Specialist: £1261 -> ~ €1541
mySN.de: €1550

The difference is there, but pretty small.

EDIT: Keyboard was not backlit on mySN, updated

 

So we have established the existence of the screen.

It's $50 more than the 72% I ordered but has anyone seen the difference Side-by-Side? Also do resellers have these in stock already or will it further delay the NP9170 delivery date? Also with the 72%, 90% options what is the regular matte screen gamut?

 

Make it with P170EM and matte display (as I have made it). Then check with my numbers.

P.S. We were originaly talking about the screen upgrades that are non existant in the EU resellers. Well, both pcspecialist and pwnpcs dont offer any 72% gamut or 90% gamut to begin with. I feel like I should cry. Im going to a little corner to cry right now... ;(

 

Actually the PWNPCS matte screen is the AUO B173HW01 V.4 which is the 72% matte screen offered by some US resellers. So thats why its 100 quid more.
They dont specifically state it but this is solid info i got from pau1ow .

 

Google Search sent me right back here. Thanks Notebook Gamer

Link to thread found.


http://forum.notebookreview.com/hardware-components-aftermarket-upgrades/635248-explain-gamut-range-me-please.html#post8204540

 

I'm not going to select the matte screen. That's comparing apples and oranges. The matte screen is more expensive at pcspecialist as it's a wider gamut than mysn.de.

Again, if I select the same specs as I did with the P150EM, the two P170EMs come to within 4 euros of eachother. The UK resellers do not seem more expensive to me.

I'm not sure how you arrived at £1670. If I recreate your spec on mySN, I get the price you quote, when I do on pcspecialist (and even throw in the matte screen), I get £1398 - quite a bit less than what you claim.

 

I was planning to go with 90% gamut screen but by the sound of what u mentioned there it's pointless for me to get it, if none of the applications and games can utilize it and I have no understanding of color management , so it's a waste of 200 bucks to upgrade then?

 

I wouldn't know (just sayin') never ever heard of this.

Any source Baenwort? Would greatly appreciate it, this seems odd..

 

That's not as universally true as he lays it out. Things will not be "off", if the screen is calibrated. It's a pretty rubbish suggestion, imo, to tell people to avoid the more vivid screen. I have a 90% AUO screen, and you will never want to go back, once you've had it for a while.

Also, the 90% Matte is a brand new screen which no one has gotten hands on yet.

 

Ah thanks, thought of that, but wasn't quite sure.

Hopefully NotebookCheck will probably gets a hands on a laptop with the newest 90% matte ASAP, they tend to do that.

 

Also looking forward to the 90% on my matte screen....aaaannnnddd 5

 

Well, just guessing, it might be the same exact screen I have, meaning a variant of the AUO B173HW01 V.4, just without the glossy treatment.

Whatever it is, I want one if the specs are decent.

 

I think wide gamut is fine, provided that you calibrate and profile it (with a hardware tool like Spyder or ColorMunki) and use color-managed software like Photoshop or other image/video editing software. Otherwise colors that you adjust to look fine on your wide-gamut monitor will look hopeless on most other monitors.

The other thing is that unless the wide-gamut display has an sRGB mode, the windows desktop (and other non color managed software such as video games and internet browers besides firefox with the color management plug in) will look rather gaudy. This is because the display is only 6 or 8 bit typically which means there is a fixed # of colors that can be mapped for display. As you increase the spectrum of colors beyond what the software/system allows for(and everything game/windows/internet is set for 72% or less) the image that you see up will not be accurate to what it should be.

This is most easily seen at the far ends of the spectrum in the way colors such as reds and greens show up as neon or overly colorful. This is the opposite of the problem people complain about with low gamut displays (colors are dull, etc) as in both cases everything is not the sRGB(72%) that is standard gamut. But it's less obvious, because we're used to it.

One reference would be this site which gives examples and deals mostly with the problems of Internet and image viewing.

A more neutral reference would be this site.




Another way of thinking of this is to visualize color gamuts this way.

Draw a circle. This circle represents all colors possible (I think it’s somewhere in the neighborhood of 12 billion)

Draw a square inside the circle with the corners touching the circle. This represents the gamut of colors that can be produced using wide gamut displays.

Draw a triangle inside the circle with the corners touching the circle (but not at the points as any of the corners of the square) this represents the gamut of colors that can be produced using the sRGB color model of displays

Now, imagine that each of the two(square and triangle) have a grid inside them. When your computer wants to display the bluest blue it sends 0,255 which corresponds to the far corner of each shape.

However, the frequency of light that is put out by the display is different(the circle, or real color). Everything that is not wide gamut aware(color managed as it is often called) is expecting that triangle mapping so when they want a certain blue they send a number. However, your wide gamut display actually outputs a different frequency then they expected.

Now, some of the better wide gamut monitors have a sRGB mode where they try to correct the color that is displayed so that they match again. However, I don't know of any laptop displays that have such a mode.

What color management aware software does is use a ICC profile made by a hardware calibration to correct so that when a image wants a certain blue that used to be 10,240 in sRGB it tells the display to send out 30,200 as that is what is ment to be displayed. Unfortunately windows doesn't support this so each program has to do it itself.

Which most don't.

 

Any chance that the 90% will have the same ghosting problems as the 95%?

Also, I'm looking at replacing my 95% for the 2nd time because of the aforementioned problem. Should I get another one even though I have no specific need for the high gamut?

Or is 60% gamut going to drive me nuts?

 

Thanks for the insight, gave me basic understanding of the color spectrum and stimulated me to read more about sRGB and AdobeRGB.

I've used very good screens(95% Gamut Matte/Glossy, 112% sRGB RGBLED IPS screen), and was very thrilled with my screens - never did I know that the programs each used different color reference, screwing up whatever calibration tool I used on them for accurate colors.

I personally use Spyder 3 Express, and whenever I turned on a full-screen app, the calibration would revert back to the bluish tint. I thought it was just the loading, but now I see how the extended gamut isn't worth it for most apps..

Personally I can live with 72% Gamut - it covers the entire sRGB spectrum. I'll look more into this color gamut for consumers / gamers, and report what I can find.

 

That would be great. I'm writing off my cuff as it is crunch time around here and although I don't think included any errors I haven't researched the topic since windows 7 came out.

 

Thanks baenwort +1 rep power. I think I'll stay with standard screen after that enlightening info.

 

I guess windows 8 is going to be in the same boat, where video games will run uncalibrated?

 

Yep +1 rep power from me too. That sure was detailed!

 

Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation Baenworth. That pretty muched cleared up everything for me on whether to go standard vs upgraded screen.

 

any one know if the 9150 has 72% gamut or 60% gamut (standard)? and if the 95% gamut has sRGB mode ?

 

I don't know at this time but I intend to do some research when the consumer preview comes out. It is possible as they were working on a fix for windows vista/7 but it didn't make it in.

How do I get sRGB images to display correct in unmanaged applications - Microsoft Answers

 

I appreciate technical discussion, but at the end of the day does it not come down to the consensus on which screen actually looks better to the eye, under direct comparison? I've never encountered a person or tech site reviewer, who's seen one of the 72% options next to the AUO B173HW01 V.4, and disagreed with the judgement that the latter is the far superior screen.

In a discussion which hinges on whether a screen is worth the money, experience trumps theory.

 

Does the gamut screen affect resolution? Or viewing angle?

 

The wider gamut screens often have a greater resolution and viewing angle but there is noting inherent in the technology that makes this so. The gamut of the screen is mostly affected by the back light source and not the actual panel.

 

Is there any idea on when the 90% matte will start showing up as a configuration option on the more common vendor sites?

 

Does anyone has the brand / part # for the 90% & 95% panel? I am considering purchase one for my Sager 8170

 

Mythlogic offers a 95% matte for a $70 upgrade.

 

Just to clear some stuff up.

The 90% matte that was on Sager's site was a typo. A 17.3" 90% Gamut Matte screen doesn't exist. A 17.3" 90% GLOSSY screen does exist, and thats what they are really selling.


Also the 95% Gamut mattes/glossy only exist in 15.6"

 

This topic suddenly seems very awkward...

 

Darn those Typos

 

I'm glad Eurocom offers the 72% screen as a standard Should be very nice looking for gaming. I don't need "perfect" colors as long as they look vibrant and bright I'm happy!

 

I would love to know the answer to this question as well if anyone knows the answer.

thanks all

 

This is very concerning to me. I'm planning on getting a 17", which means a choice between 60% or 90% glossy. If I go for the 90% with calibration, I don't want to have to keep recalibrating after running games. 60% sounds low, but if the higher gamut screen causes this kind of problem it might just be better to pocket the cash.

 

72% doesn't need a sRGB mode as it IS sRGB. I know of no laptop displays that have a sRGB mode. If you can't even access the hue/tint/saturation/what ever name they give it/color temp, etc mode like you see on TVs or desktop monitors then you also have no way to activate such a mode even if the panel chip had it.

The Ability to Display Color Correctly Is Vital: Understanding the Color Gamut of an LCD Monitor | EIZO (long, detailed)
and
LCD Monitors and Color Gamuts (TL;DR)

If they are following standards and giving their gamut as a percent of the NSTC spectrum then less than 72% will typically be described as "dull" and greater then 72% as "neon".

 

See, you've been spooked by information which has been presented incorrectly. I and many others already have had the 90% screen in our NP8170/P170HM for over a year, and I can flatly tell you that there is no need to constantly recalibrate the LCD or any other nonsense such as that.

I thought about it for the first couple days then stopped caring. It's an amazing screen. You would've seen people all over the forum, complaining, if there was more to it that what I've said.

 

I think a lot of people have a misconception of thinking that 95% gamut equals higher quality screen. Now I'm not an expert, so correctly if I'm wrong, but having a higher gamut screen simply means your screen will be able to display more range of colors and it is not going to matter much unless you need to get the colors to display as accurately as possible usually important for people to does photography and printing their photographs.

Calibration should be done under the environment which your are going to be using the computer, so yes you need to constantly calibrate your monitor if the overall lighting in your environment changes in order to get the monitor to display the color accurately.

The stock screen should be fine as long as it can display nearly all (90%+) of the sRGB colors, which I think the stock screens from most resellers are. Don't be fool thinking that you are going to have a higher quality image because of the 95% gamut screen.

The color may be more saturated, more pop or whatever, but that is usually because it's not interpreting the sRGB values correctly.

 

I guess it's time to touch on the fact that there's more at play with these screens than color gamut. Assuming Clevo is still using the same panels, you actually do get a higher quality image though, because the viewing angles on the default 15.6" LCD are objectively inferior to those of the AUO screens. It also has lower brightness, contrast, and black levels.

Specific knowledge of the screens in question goes a long way here.