[ad_1]
![Fujitsi P27-8 TS UHD © Fujitsu]( "Fujitsi P27-8 TS UHD © Fujitsu")
An (almost) perfect mix: super sharp thanks to 4K resolution (3840×2160 pixels), beautifully bright and rich in contrast, the whole thing combined with high color fidelity and good features – many connections and many adjustment options. Also great: the low power consumption.
![Acer Predator XB273KP © Acer]( "Acer Predator XB273KP © Acer")
The Acer Predator XB273KP is pretty expensive! There is an extra-bright monitor with almost perfect color reproduction and an extra-high refresh rate: the monitor can display up to 144 images per second – ideal for gaming when the appropriate super-fast graphics card is in the computer. Good: The Predator has plenty of connections and can be adjusted in many ways. It only has two small weaknesses: the screen illumination is not perfectly even and the power consumption is generous at almost 68 watts
The Philips offers a screen diagonal of around 102 centimeters for PC monitors. But the 4K Philips is not only big, but also beautiful: in the test, it offered brilliant image reproduction with high color fidelity. In addition, its features are unrivaled thanks to the USB hub and many connections.
![AOC U2777PQU © AOC]( "AOC U2777PQU © AOC")
The shiny exterior takes some getting used to: the AOC’s display and frame are reflective. The picture quality is top, however, only with the maximum brightness the AOC does not quite reach the values of the 4K competition.
[ad_2]
ZGranted, an Excel spreadsheet doesn’t look any more exciting on a 4K monitor. But such a high-resolution screen has other advantages. It gives columns, diagrams, but of course photos and films more sharpness. Because the screens are often slightly larger, 4K monitors also offer more space on the desktop. The best news, however, is that you no longer have to spend a fortune to get one of the sharp displays in your home office. Cheap models start at 300 euros. A comparison is still worthwhile, because there are differences not only in terms of price but also in terms of equipment.
content
4K monitors in the test: that’s what 4K, 8K or HDR stand for
Cheap monitors are mostly full HD models. They show 1920×1080 pixels. A 4K monitor shows four times as many pixels (3840×2160 pixels). The designation 4K is derived from the number of pixels in an image line: 3,840 is rounded up to full thousands (4), K stands for the prefix kilo (thousand). The abbreviation UHD (for Ultra High Definition) is used less often for 4K monitors than for televisions, but it also stands for a resolution of 3840×2160 pixels.
8K has so far mainly been used on more expensive televisions like this Samsung Q950R or the LG OLED Z9. An 8K television shows 7680×4320 pixels. There are also more expensive monitors with more pixels, they mostly show 5K or 6K, like the Apple Pro Display XDR with 6K resolution (6016×3384 pixels). HDR stands for high dynamic range. Monitors with this addition can often display larger contrast ranges – i.e. display very light and very dark image areas at the same time. It looks great with corresponding videos or photos, and some games can also deliver images in HDR. However, HDR is not needed to work with office programs.
4K monitors in the test: This is how much the monitors cost
A 4K monitor does not have to be expensive: The cheapest monitors tested by COMPUTER BILD are around 300 euros, most models between 400 and 600 euros per equipment. The Standard size for 4K monitors is 27 in (Image diagonal 68 centimeters).
Smaller monitors with 4K are rather rare. These models (21.5 inches, 24 inches or 25 inches) are also rarely cheaper than a 27-inch monitor in 4K. Larger 4K monitors are available in 31.5 in, 32 inches or 40 inches. Some manufacturers also offer 43 inches and more – but these are often televisions in which the TV receiver has been omitted. Larger 4K monitors are often equipped with special technology and can quickly cost 1,000 euros or more.
4K monitors tested: the picture is great!
The good news first: all candidates achieved a good grade in the test discipline image quality. Not surprising when you look at the technical data of the monitors: Only a few 4K monitors come with one TN panel, with the monitors tested, the more complex IPS– or VA technology for the picture. This is the case with the Color fidelity noticeable: it received “very good” grades across the board, even the weakest in this discipline, the Fujitsu P27-8 TS UHD, narrowly missed the top grade. In addition, the 4K monitors score with a very natural white rendering. Perfect for watching videos or editing photos.
Fujitsu P27-8 TS UHD
Good picture, good equipment – the Fujitsi P27-8 TS UHD is the best in the test.
4K monitors in the test: nice and bright
Good news: the 4K monitors are often clear more luminous as inexpensive Full HD models. The brightest monitors in the test create 454 candelas per square meter (Acer Predator XB273KP) and 379 candelas per square meter (Fujitsu P27-8 TS UHD). The LG 27UD59-B (242 candelas per square meter) and the Philips Brilliance BDM4037UW (266 candelas per square meter) are noticeably darker and only slightly brighter than a common Full HD model, and they boast a top contrast of 4,286: 1 could. The 4K monitors are on their toes when creating the image, and there were no annoying jerks or wipers in the test. The Fujitsu P27-8 TS UHD reacted the fastest, the average only 7.2 milliseconds needed for the image build-up.
4K monitors put to the test: speed at image construction
The Acer Predator XB273KP shows the most frames per second, it manages up to 144 frame changes per second (with reduced resolution), in 4K there are up to 120 frames per second possible. This is only worthwhile when gaming, for office programs and when watching videos, the usual 60 frames per second are sufficient (and you don’t need an extra graphics card for this). A higher speed requires an extremely fast graphics card, even top models like that Geforce RTX 2080 Super break a sweat. For conventional 4K monitors, on the other hand, much cheaper graphics cards, such as the Geforce 2060 Super or the Radeon RX 5700 XT, are sufficient.
Acer Predator XB273P
Pretty expensive, but also pretty fast – the Acer Predator XB273KP is a dream monitor for gamers.
4K monitors put to the test: not always economical
The elaborate display technology in the 4K monitors can be quite noticeable in terms of power consumption: The Acer Predator XB273KP consumes just under 68 watts. The Fujitsu P27-8 TS UHD, on the other hand, is satisfied with 26 watts. Little more than full HD monitors, which in the current test by COMPUTER BILD for the 20 watts in operation consumed. Almost all tested 4K monitors are economical in standby: they consumed less than 0.4 watts in standby mode. Only Acer Predator XB273KP should be disconnected from the mains (e.g. with a switch socket strip) if it is not used for a long time. He swallowed a full 28 watts in standby.Philips Brilliance BDM4037UW
4K monitors put to the test: there is often a lack of operation
A 4K monitor is (almost) self-explanatory, apparently many manufacturers think and usually only pack one quick start Guide in the box. The outlined instructions may often suffice to connect the stand to the screen part and to connect the cables correctly, but help in printed form for the operating menus would be desirable. Because some of them are quite nested and sometimes cause frustration during the initial setup – even with the testers! Only two of the tested 4K monitors, the LG 27UD59-B and the Philips Brilliance BDM4037UW, earned the title “comfortable”. Only the Fujitsu P27-8 TS UHD achieved a “very comfortable” rating.4K monitors put to the test: the image signal comes digital
With 4K monitors, the image transmission is digital and therefore loss-free. Older, analog connections such as VGA are not suitable for 4K. Usually they are used Display port and HDMI. Displayport increasingly also in the form of a USB-C socket. This often has the advantage that it also supplies electricity. Then one cable is enough for the connection to the notebook, the power supply unit is then no longer needed. With HDMI, the current version 2.0 allows 3840×2160 pixels at a maximum of 60 Hertz. HDR is also supported for a particularly photo-realistic reproduction of photos and videos. Only a few 4K monitors currently use this. Displayport is a bit faster than HDMI and in the current versions 1.3 and 1.4 it can fire 4K monitors with up to 120 Hertz. In this 4K monitor comparison, only the Acer Predator XB273KP managed more than 60 Hertz. Ambitious PC gamers should also have a look at the article “Buying a gaming monitor: What to look out for “throw: There are tips and suggestions for choosing a gaming monitor.
4K monitors put to the test: many adjustment options
Anyone who works at the screen for hours should be able to adjust the incline and height exactly to their needs. All test candidates can be adjusted in inclination, but a monitor base is better Height adjustment like the Acer Predator XB273KP, the Fujitsu P27-8 TS UHD and the LG 27UD59P-B. The Acer and Fujitsu also offer a rotatable monitor base. Frequent writers and programmers are particularly happy about one Pivot function: The Fujitsu and the LG can be rotated into portrait format.AOC U2777PQU
Affordable 4K monitor with a good picture – the AOC U2777PQU.
Conclusion: 4K monitors in the test
At the top of the test field is the Fujitsu P27-8 TS UHD for just under 600 euros. It scored points in all disciplines, regardless of whether it was image quality, equipment or energy consumption. The LG 27UD59P-B, which is hardly worse, but is significantly cheaper, has unfortunately expired and is hardly available in stores. An alternative for smaller budgets is the AOC U2777PQU (tested according to the older, less stringent test procedure). The wickedly expensive Acer Predator XB273KP is not only the best choice for passionate gamers, but also delivered the best image quality in the test. And if you want an extra-large monitor, you can use the Philips Brilliance BDM4037UW.
