The Best Notebook Displays As Reviewed By Notebookcheck

[belala]

It's beauty, but where is my favorite book, the Gigabyte Aero 15 its 92% good display? Please complete this list!  :)

[nioricardo]

This whole article is wrong. Surface pro 4 i7 has one of the best screens on the market, the same alienware 13 r3, the same dell xps 15 9560 4k and the same hp specter x360 i7 7500 UHD but they are not this list.  >:(

[Gordon Dempsey]

Many of the links to purchase bring up different models than the ones reviewed. I was mostly looking for 4k computers. 

[Andrew]

I realise that the 2014 Macbook Pro is not on this list but it has got undoubtedly the worst monitor I have ever seen on a laptop. Uniformity is appalling and the factory calibration has a white point set to D65 yet the entire screen has a yellow/green/cyan tint to it.... I have had the screen replaced 3 times in as many months. I hope Apple have improved this unacceptable situation.

[Eyüp]

Guys, I love Notebokkcheck and I check the website multiple times a day and use it for my purchasing decisions etc. But the article name is wrong !!!!

This is a list of "Notebooks with Best Displays", not "Best Notebook Displays".

In this list, not even the name of reviewed notebook panel is given.  For example, what is the display model for second entry ?There are 24 columns in a line:  lots of information on the laptop model, even its CPU, RAM, GPU, HDD are given, measurements of the panel is given, but what is the name of this panel ????

To learn this, we have to click on the laptop model, go to the review and read the specs to see

Display15.6 inch 16:9, 3840x2160 pixel 282 PPI, LEN40BD, B156ZAN02.1, IPS, glossy: no

So, please rename the article accordingly; you are not listing the best displays for laptops, just laptops with best displays.

Also, I PROMISE IT WILL NOT HURT TO ADD THE MANUFACTURER AND MODEL OF THE PANEL TO THESE 24 COLUMNS, RIGHT AFTER MODEL.

[Ednumero]

@H.Y.Tan @charles

Notebookcheck is correct to leave out the Zenbook UX501 and ROG G501. These displays are PenTile RG/BW. This is a deceptive marketing practice in which the displays are produced with only RG or only BW in every other denoted pixel, instead of RGB in every pixel, so that the companies can more cheaply list high resolutions in product specifications. They make you deal with Windows scaling just the same, but they don't deliver the full sharpness in return. They also have more visual artifacts than "lower resolution" true-resolution displays such as 2880x1620. For this reason alone, the models/panels should be disqualified from the running.

But more than that, they don't necessarily meet the manufacturer-stated 100% sRGB. The ASUS UX501 has a panel lottery between a Samsung and an LG. The LG has 90% sRGB, which isn't wildly off, but the Samsung has a measly 73%, which is substantially lower. The Samsung panel, if not also the LG, exhibits the infamous "mustard yellow" issue too.

[Kedar]

Hi,

Could you not include ipad in notebook displays please?

Thanks,
Kedar

[Melas]

HI.How about Dell Inspiron 7577 4k ? a lot of people talk about 98 percent ARGB colour. Is it true?

[Valantar]

There really ought to be a reading guide for this, explaining how the different criteria are weighted - not to mention that having an "ultimate list" across radically different device categories is a bit silly. Shouldn't this list really be interactive (in a functional way, that is) so that readers can select size, resolution and other obvious/easily filtered criteria to their liking? Sorting by size (for example) ruins the whole point of having a ranked list, after all. If I come into this article while looking fo a specific class of device (as I would wager most users are), say a ~13" 2-in-1, what use is this list to me? Near zero.

Also, the ranking seems a bit weird. The Surface book 2 is #15, while the MBP is #9, yet the SB2 "wins" in PPI, white point accuracy, contrast (by almost 2x!), loses (clearly) in brightness, and ties it in pretty much every other metric. Similarly, the Razer Blade (#7) has better response times than the MBP, identical contrast, but loses in pretty much every metric beyond that.

This doesn't make sense.

[JR]

After looking over the above machines, I feel like I have just been hosed down with a lot of hype by the "bigger" companies.

I have had two SAGER machines, with 4 SSD X 250 meg, Raid 5, 64 meg of memory (the fastest made...I could get out the spec sheet but what the hell), a 17:3" LCD monitor, etc., etc. and more good stuff, and the whole thing was custom built to my specifications and in consultation with them.  They have the best tech support I have ever seen (and i was a sys prog on mainframes with IBM) and warranty, but they are not listed above.
Makes me think a fix was thrown into the pot.

[sir_c]

The Lenovo Carbon X1 2018 model seems to be missing; the one reviewed with the 500 nits panel scored 100% sRGB, 89% aRGB, 3.8 max delta RGB and no PWM. But yes, it is a shiny one.

[x264master]

So there isn't any laptop with a better contrast than 1912 ?
There's no way I can watch any movie on such a bad display... black will look gray.
I'm used to VA and OLED displays.

[danwat1234]

I have noticed that no gaming laptops get much beyond 300 nits, whereas Apple laptops are over 500 nits. Come on PCs!

Wonder how many nits the MSI GS75VR will be, coming out soon.

[puremind]

Missing the HP Spectre x360 15"

Amazing display, 1200:1 contrast (for me no display with a contrast lower than 1000:1 is a good display, since as soon as you calibrate them you loose even more contrast, you need the starting contrast to be very high so you can calibrate them to perfection and still have great contrast).

The sRGB color space is almost 100%, it doesn't cover HDR but I am always wowed by it!

[Ednumero]

A lot of great items, but this list should not include the Fujitsu LifeBook U758. The Fujitsu LifeBook U758 uses an RG/BW panel.

Refer to your article here. https://www.notebookcheck.net/Faux-K-Make-Sure-Your-Next-4K-Laptop-is-Actually-4K.289242.0.html