Review Index:
Feedback

Nixeus Vue 24-in 1080P 144Hz TN 30-144Hz FreeSync Monitor Review

Subject: Displays
Manufacturer: Nixeus

Gamma, Calibration, and Viewing Angles

Gamma:

When we first fired up the NX-VUE24, the first thing to strike us was that the display just didn't seem to have as much contrast as we expected even from a TN panel. The display appeared washed out, even at the default 'Gamma Off' setting, which Nixeus claimed was tuned to what should be a very high contrast value of 2.6. Displays are typically tuned for a Gamma value of 2.2, and Nixeus told us that the 'Gamma On' setting shoots for that value. We tried it and did some quick visual tests:

View Full Size

View Full Size

Now that just seemed way off. The gamma chart showed a value *way* lower than 2.2, and the viewing angle test couldn't even be performed properly. The 'lagom' text is supposed to blend into the grey background at 'good' viewing angles, yet this display was vividly showing those words when viewed directly ahead.

We continued to tinker, viewing from different angles, and found that the viewing angle required for the display output to line up with what we expected required a very odd viewing angle:

View Full Size

View Full Size

As you can see from the trapezoidal shape of the screen border, we had to position the camera at table level to achieve these results. This is most certainly not the way a user is going to view a display, but we did note that we could view the display from a 'normal' viewing angle with the gamma setting returned to the default 'Off' (2.6) position. It seems the higher gamma was an intentional choice by Nixeus to compensate for the pixel angle of this particular panel.

To confirm what we were seeing, I ran some quick checks using HCFR:

Gamma Off (2.6):

View Full Size

Gamma On (2.2):

View Full Size

As you can see, the 'straight ahead' viewing angle of the colorimeter shows some ugly results here. While the Gamma Off setting was supposed to give better color, its measured gamma still comes in at only 1.9. The Gamma On setting which is claimed to shoot for the standard 2.2 actually comes in at 1.6. Typical TN panels don't hit 1.6 unless you are looking at them from an extreme angle.

To describe what is going on here, think about what happens when viewing a typical TN panel. As you move your head above or to the sides, the panel contrast drops and colors are washed out. You could increase the display Gamma to try and compensate for this, but then the image would not look correct when viewed straight on. Now, what if the 'straight on' angle was no longer perpindicular to the glass and was at an angle that you would never practically view the panel from? Getting a consistent / good calibration would be tricky at best since all angles are now resulting in a lower ocntrast state, but since you are looking at the display 'off axis' from most angles (straight ahead also being off axis in this case), viewing angle performance should actially *increase*. The trick is getting good colors out of a display that is fighting to be washed out.

To try and solve this problem, I first ran a calibraion using the 'Gamma On' (2.2) setting as Nixeus recommends in their review guide and product manual. Results were reasonable for a TN panel, and viewing angles were surprisingly good (based on what was described above), but when we fired up a game, colors became noticably washed out. This was because color profiles only apply to the Windows desktop and are not applied by game engines.

To solve this problem, we went against the Nixeus recommendation and calibrated the display with the 'Gamma Off' (2.6) setting chosen. We were still able to achieve a reasonable calibration even at this 'extreme' gamma setting. This is a trickier calibration, as we have the firmware pushing gamma in one direction while the display itself fights in the other direction, which makes the calibraion of darker greys far more difficult for a typical calibration profile. It should be noted that in both cases, the calibration profiles were making only small changes to color values. The more major changes were being done to correct the gamma response of this display. Also, the gamma correction with 'Gamma On' (2.2):

View Full Size

...was far more significant than what was required when calibrating with 'Gamma Off' (2.6):

View Full Size

We therefore recommend calibrating this particular display set at 'Gamma Off ' (2.6). The added bonus is that gamma will remain at reasonable levels while gaming. Here was the end result of this calibration:

View Full Size

View Full Size

View Full Size

As you can see, the 'lagom' text requires a proper gamma value for that test to be successful, and with the display calibrated, it works out quite well, even when viewed from the side.

Calibration Profile Download

The Windows color profile management interface is a bit of a mess, with the need to select and enable a profile in multiple layers of the interface. The best guide for loading and enabling a profile can be found over at TFTCentral. We used the following tools to generate our own calibration profile:

Our calibration profile was created using the lowest calibration speed in a dimly lit room. Here are the required settings if you wish to use our profile:

  • "Gamma Off" (2.6) ("Gamma On" not recommended by PCPer)
  • Brightness: 40
  • Contrast: 50
  • Preset: User Define
  • Red: 70
  • Green: 63
  • Blue: 62
  • Profile download: (HERE)

The above profile was created specifically for a color temperature target of 6500K at a luminance of 120 cd/m2 (nit). Gamma 2.2. Remember that the only way to get a correct calibration on your specific panel is by using a colorimeter on that very panel. The above settings and profile will only get *your* display to a perfect calibration if it has the exact same properties as our test sample. A perfect match is unlikely, but this should get you far closer to calibrated than just running with defaults, especially with the odd gamma issues we saw with this particular display.


August 25, 2015 | 02:48 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Allyn, you forgot one item for the "Cons" list:

"Not as cool of a name as Wasabi Mango"

August 25, 2015 | 03:20 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Am I missing something, I thought the point to Freesync was it would not come at a price premium. There are a variety of 24" 144hz 1080p TN monitors out there that cost $100 less than this and the only feature they lack in comparison is Freesync. The everything about Freesync's value has been aimed at it being a zero cost addition. If you are going to be willing to pay a premium for frame syncing technology why not get the superioir version in Gsync. I don't understand why this monitor is not $250 or less.

August 25, 2015 | 03:40 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I've said this ever since "freesync" was announced, and that is, if you think that a monitor manufacturer is going to add increased functionality to a product and give it away for free then you fooling yourself.

Yes, freesync is cheaper, but it was a dumb move on AMD's part, because they aren't reaping the rewards of their efforts, unlike Nvidia.

Say what you will about the proprietary nature of Gsync, at they're profitable.

August 25, 2015 | 04:41 PM - Posted by killurconsole

i am not advocating for AMD, but u can't take a panel and put a Freesync logo (or some other technology) on it without some engineering .

the cheapest Gsync monitor on pcpartpicker is selling for $380

August 25, 2015 | 05:24 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

There is no such thing as 'zero cost addition' when there are only some scaler parts available with adaptive sync support. In many cases, manufacturers are having to certify a new scaler *and* a panel that is on that scaler's short list of compatible glass (compatible with the wider refresh rate range). Sure they don't have to buy a module from the GPU vendor, but there is still a great deal of effort involved in creating a new display model that was not as easy as it was to design the previous generation of.

August 26, 2015 | 10:11 AM - Posted by Luthair

At first perhaps, but if its easy for scalars to integrate additional costs should become negligible, one of the benefits of a free market & competition.

August 25, 2015 | 03:26 PM - Posted by killurconsole

amazing review

Wasabi Mango and now Nixeus ,i have never heard of these brands before , next thing is cheap Korean monitors that support freesync .

unlike Gsync ,every now and then a new Freesync monitor come out

August 25, 2015 | 05:25 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

That's already happening :)

August 25, 2015 | 06:07 PM - Posted by JohnGR

It seems that what you where calling vaporware in the beginning of this year, needed only a few months to take over the market. And in less than 5 months we moved down from 48Hz to 30Hz. In 2016 not even this argument will be valid for promoting GSync.

It also seems that people who where in favor of Adaptive Sync/Freesync, those with "serious stupidity and bad intentions" as someone was saying in the comments and you where totally agreeing we him, where right from the beginning. With Intel getting ready to support it, Adaptive Sync/Freesync will become the de facto standard. Then Nvidia will have to follow, which will be in the best interest of everyone.

August 26, 2015 | 12:55 AM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

30Hz still has yet to happen on the higher resolution panels that really need it. 

I never called it vaporware, but it was *significantly* delayed, and had a lot of issues for a long time. Overdrive (in VRR mode) and pixel response time is still not as good as it is on FreeSync panels (don't take my word for it - read TFTCentral). All the while GSync panel owners have had panels that worked as they should (and with older generation GPUs as well). That alone made their solution easily worth the price premium IMO. There is still not a FreeSync panel out there that I would use daily.

 

August 26, 2015 | 01:03 AM - Posted by JohnGR

You did. And I was "desperate" back then when pointing at the Samsung 4K models that where coming in March. And no one was expecting Freesync to perform better than the one and a half year old GSync from day one.

Anyway

3rd page

Also, the gamma correction with 'Gamma On' (2.2):

NOT FOUND: files/review/2015-08-25/Calibration curves NX-VUE24 2015-08-20 120cdm² D6500 2.2 S XYZLUT+MTX.png

...was far more significant than what was required when calibrating with 'Gamma Off' (2.6):

NOT FOUND: files/review/2015-08-25/Calibration curves NX-VUE24 2015-08-21 120cdm² D6500 2.2 F-S XYZLUT+MTX (2.6).png

We therefore recommend calibrating this particular display set at 'Gamma Off ' (2.6).

August 26, 2015 | 03:59 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

I checked these and the images show properly here. Might try a force refresh of the page.

August 26, 2015 | 05:14 PM - Posted by JohnGR

Yes they do now and for a few hours. They where fixed about the time the ASUS Strix Radeon R9 Fury Review came out. I checked with another browser before posting about it here.

August 26, 2015 | 07:50 AM - Posted by rl (not verified)

On the other hand there are numerous reports in forums all over the world about ROG Swifts failing after a few months of use, and they keep on failing.

btw. have you heard about the Range mods that a guy from 3dcenter.org made for various monitors. Tested and verified by a lot of FreeSync-Monitor owners, various models and manufacturers. Some managed to get the iirc LG from like 40Hz or 48 down to at least 33 Hz, sometimes even lower.

here is the original post

http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=10737128#post10...

and here the translated post at hardocp

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1872620&highlight=

August 26, 2015 | 11:42 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Everything fails.. look at the # of people complaining about the Asus MG279Q already on Amazon. Thats why manufacturers have something called a warranty.

August 26, 2015 | 06:29 PM - Posted by rl (not verified)

Alright, I went to Amazon and saw... nothing. ROG Swift literally "die".

People complaining about dead pixels and bad quality is not the same as "monitor is dead", "won't turn on", "has graphical glitches" etc.

August 25, 2015 | 03:39 PM - Posted by James S. (not verified)

I think individuals are missing the point and concept behind Free-Sync. From my understanding and please correct me if I am wrong. Free-Sync technology is essentially license free for Vendors but requires specific chips and boards in order to work. Unlike G-Sync, it does not require a separate module made by Nvidia or AMD in order to work.

I personally do not think you can take a $230-$250 Asus 144Hz monitor and 1:1 ratio convert it into a Free-Sync platform. I don't see it happening and in aspect of engineering not possible. The components itself on the Asus needs to be able to support it. Can't pump 87 gas on a performance vehicle now can you?

August 25, 2015 | 04:44 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Still looks cheap and ugly. Plus TN? Bah!
IPS 2560x1440 is where its at.

You get what you pay for boys.

August 25, 2015 | 05:17 PM - Posted by James S. (not verified)

Ahh..the age ole comparison from TN to IPS, 1080p vs 1440p. To each their own. I see benefits from both perspective. I personally have a 1440p IPS but I specifically use that for work when I deal with graphic/video editing. I personally still use my CRT for gaming. I see this as a viable option for those who wishes for a varable refresh-rate monitor and definitely comparable to the 24" G-Sync. So to reach their own.

August 25, 2015 | 05:28 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

This cheap panel is still *way* faster at pixel color changes than IPS glass with 'perfect' overdrive. That's the advantage of TN. Sure there are disadvantages, but for twitch stype FPS gaming, it's the way to go.

August 25, 2015 | 08:49 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Allyn, I have the ASUS VG248QE and the ACER XB270HU side by side.
I played all these twitch shooters from UT, Q3 to BF series to even fucking CoD on them both always at 144fps. GTX980 Ti driving these fps. I have noticed no friggin difference in input lag of feeling moving around quick with mouse movements. I do see clear difference in colors and overall graphics fidelity on the ACER panel thnx to IPS and the higher resolution. It also seems a tiny bit better overall thnx to VRR (G-Sync). I still have them both side by side so anyone saying otherwise do you also have both TN - IPS non VRR and VRR panel side by side and doing individual testing?

August 25, 2015 | 08:52 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

TN is not really the way to go if you have the funds and want better VRR IPS 144Hz. I have it and am still same skill and feel no disadvantage at all going from TN 144Hz to IPS 144Hz VRR.
This is coming from someone that plays twitch shooters over a decade!

August 26, 2015 | 03:41 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

144 Hz is 144 Hz. Unless the IPS has bothersome artifacts from overdrive, they should offer the same experience from a frame rate perspective. TN usually looks terrible to me. A lot of people don't seem to notice it but it all depends on what you are used to. I am not really a gamer. I use a Dell U3011 30" IPS at 60 Hz. Most things look spectacular on it, but it was close to a $1500 display originally.

August 26, 2015 | 01:00 AM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

Maybe you don't realize that I personally favor IPS panels, but it's been measured and documented  that TN pixel response is faster than IPS.

August 26, 2015 | 03:27 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

If the over drive is perfect, then it should come down to the refresh rate supported. If they both support 144 Hz, then you should not notice the difference as far as refresh rate is concerned. The IPS would have better color and better viewing angles and such, but can have artifacts due to the overdrive attempting to make up for the slower response time. I do remember some reports of shimmering effects due to overdrive on LCD panels but that was a while ago. The main issue now seems to be the ghosting, but this may not be that noticeable, depending on what you play. Anyway, when comparing TN and IPS displays side-by-side, the TN usually looks terrible to me. Unless the overdrive artifacts are really bad, I would still say go with the IPS if you can afford it. If you are an fps gamer on a strict budget, then I agree that TN may still be the way to go.

I think free sync will equal g-sync eventually, but it will require a while for scaler manufactures to respond to g-sync features. They are not going to use an FPGA the way Nvidia did because of the cost, which means they need to redesign and fab actual ASICs. This will take a while. I don't know how upgraded the scalers are in these displays; is there a way to check without taking it apart? I would suspect it is a bit of a hack of existing silicon rather than completely new silicon with upgraded features. Hopefully, they will implement frame multiplication to keep the display within acceptable refresh rate limits in addition to getting the overdrive working flawlessly.

August 26, 2015 | 03:49 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I know you favor IPS Allyn, all well and good. My point is the new IPS panels with 144Hz with VRR are the best for overall gaming even twitch shooters. Its just not for every gamer because of the high price. TN should be dead by now and the industry should actually be moving towards frigging OLED by now FFS. I'm just frustrated by it soo much :/

August 26, 2015 | 02:22 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

Of course we always want the better tech out there, but TN still has a place in low cost panels. That's why I'm excited about this one, as it will get VRR in the hands of more people and make it a much more mainstream tech to have. From this point forward I'd like to see VRR to be a given / commodity thing.

August 27, 2015 | 06:53 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Great point Allyn, I definitely agree!

August 27, 2015 | 02:29 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

AFAIK, OLED can still suffer from burn in and possibly longevity issues. LG may have the longevity issues under control for their expensive TVs, but a computer display has a lot of static content that can easily cause burn in if the display is susceptible to it. Hopefully we will at least get displays with quantum dot enhanced back lighting. These could produce much better color even on a TN based panel.

August 25, 2015 | 05:24 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Allyn quote and facial expression @ 8:37

"I tried this both ways"

August 25, 2015 | 08:09 PM - Posted by Dr_Orgo

I think this segment of 1080p 144 Hz VRR panels will see a lot of market success. As nice as the 1440p panels are, the combined monitor + GPU price is simply too much for the majority of gamers. A GTX 960 (or AMD equivalent) + 1080p 144 Hz VRR panel for ~$500 is much much more reasonable.

It's even more difficult for someone coming from a 1080p 60Hz TN panel or console gaming on a TV to jump straight into the high end 1440p 144Hz VRR + GPU combo. You can't see these panels in action in stores. And it's difficult to predict if you even need VRR, IPS, 144Hz, or 1440p without seeing it in action.

I'm personally waiting until the 2nd round of 3440x1440p IPS curved G-sync monitors come out before I strongly consider making a new monitor purchase. Hopefully a single Pascal GPU will be able to drive AAA games at that resolution by then. Ideally, I'd wait for DP 1.3 to get 144Hz at that resolution. For 3rd person games or RTS/MOBAs ~70-80Hz with G-sync looks great. But a certain upcoming FPS (Overwatch) makes me not want to give up 144Hz. The fast panning in FPS is where 144 Hz really shines.

August 25, 2015 | 09:39 PM - Posted by goosegrease

Wow, that gamma setting!

How does that even happen? Sounds like Nixeus couldn't afford to hire an expert who knows how calibration works, so they just kept pushing higher and higher values in the controller until the panel looked "okay", then added gamma 2.2 in the options because "er, we don't know - everyone else says that 2.2 is the right value...."

D:

August 26, 2015 | 03:31 AM - Posted by Irishgamer01

1080p Not sure people would "upgarde"from another 1080p monitor.
Though for a first time setup it looks the perfect way to go.
So, do they do a 1440?

August 26, 2015 | 03:45 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I know some people with early LED backlights that have terrible color reproduction. These would definitely be an upgrade. A lot of people don't pay much attention to resolution though. When they upgrade, it will probably be just to a larger display at the same resolution. 24" may not be much of an upgrade for most people Though unless they are using really old displays.

August 26, 2015 | 03:54 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Exactly, everybody that already games on a pc is on 1080p TN and most that I know will be moving to 1440p IPS 144Hz. No way will they move to another 1080p TN panel again. The VRR won't matter because they want a big upgrade not a tiny one if you know what I mean.

August 26, 2015 | 07:15 AM - Posted by Ryun (not verified)

During your usage did you happen to notice significant banding? Specially, using lagom's gradient test but also with steam.

To fix it, the green levels and contrast had to be set exactly. I thought it was a little strange that green would have an effect on banding when the other colors didn't. Also it had to be tied to contrast levels. IIRC, green had to be set at 73 and contrast at 50. Contrast at 100 with green at 53 also worked.

Any ideas? I've tried using different inputs but same result.

August 26, 2015 | 04:04 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

We did not notice any when calibrated or uncalibrated (and either gamma setting). We only adjusted color far enough to cal properly. I did note that setting the colors >65 did not have a significant change on the output, so I instead moved the other colors down below the default of 70 to achieve the desired balance.

August 26, 2015 | 07:37 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

pls review samsung u24e590d

August 26, 2015 | 10:04 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

who makes the actual panel this screen is built on?

August 26, 2015 | 04:02 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

AUO

August 27, 2015 | 02:32 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Do you know if they actually are using a totally new scaler chip, or did they manage to get the functionality just by tweaking the firmware or something?

August 27, 2015 | 10:05 AM - Posted by rl (not verified)

Could you give us the exact model number of the panel. And also the scaler is of interest in order to compare between the other Adaptive Sync monitors. Often it's listed in the service menu.

August 27, 2015 | 04:07 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

EU release when?

September 4, 2015 | 04:30 PM - Posted by ashleyackley

What is a Nixeus and why are they selling a low quality display with variable refresh for $500. Is this just a test to see if people will spend an extra $350 for freesync? Or did some executive with a cigar decide to enter dip their toes in the market with a modified version of their crummy display.

September 4, 2016 | 07:37 PM - Posted by Darin (not verified)

Guys need some help with this monitor, got it the other day.

Do I calibrate the OSD with:

"Gamma Off" (2.6) ("Gamma On" not recommended by PCPer)
Brightness: 40
Contrast: 50
Preset: User Define
Red: 70
Green: 63
Blue: 62

And THEN install the ICC profile and enable it?

Because this is what I did, I am not sure if this is correct or not. I'm coming from a 27" IPS panel with great colours some I'm trying to get the best out of this monitor for regular desktop use and games...games look great on this tho.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.