Gigabyte AORUS FI27Q-P

Interlace pattern artifacts

On some monitors, particularly but not exclusively those with high refresh rates, interlace patterns can be seen during certain transitions. We refer to these as ‘interlace pattern artifacts’ but some users refer to them as ‘inversion artifacts’ and others as ‘scan lines’. They may appear as an interference pattern, mesh or interlaced lines which break up a given shade into a darker and lighter version of what is intended. They often catch the eye due to their dynamic nature, on models where they manifest themselves in this way. Alternatively, static interlace patterns may be seen with some shades appearing as faint horizontal or vertical bands of a slightly lighter and slightly darker version of the intended shade.

We did not observe static interlace patterns, but we did observe some dynamic interlace pattern artifacts under certain conditions. When viewing certain shades at specific movement speeds from a relatively close viewing distance, we could see faint vertical interlaced lines. In other words; we observed these under very artificial conditions which aren’t representative of how most users will view the monitor. So it’s not something we’d worry about during normal use or that most users will even come across at all. We observed these a lot more clearly with the ‘Aim Stabilizer’ function active, however.

Responsiveness

Input lag

A small utility called SMTT 2.0 was used alongside a sensitive camera to analyse the latency of the FI27Q-P, with over 30 repeat readings taken to help maximise accuracy. Using this method, we calculated 3.80ms (~ 2/3rds of a frame at 165Hz) of input lag. The input lag measured here is influenced by both the element you ‘see’ (pixel responsiveness) and the element you ‘feel’ (signal delay). It indicates a very low signal, which even sensitive users shouldn’t find bothersome. Note that we don’t have the means to accurately measure input lag with Adaptive-Sync active in a variable refresh rate environment or with HDR active in an HDR environment.

Perceived blur (pursuit photography)

Our article on responsiveness explores some of the key concepts surrounding monitor responsiveness. Chief amongst these is the concept of perceived blur, which is contributed to by both the pixel responsiveness of the monitor and the movement of your eyes as you track motion on the screen. This second factor is dominant on modern monitors, although slower than optimal pixel responses are still an important contributor. We also look at ‘pursuit photography’, a technique which uses a moving rather than static camera to capture motion in a way that reflects both key elements of perceived blur.

The images below are pursuit photographs taken using the UFO Motion Test for ghosting, with the UFO moving across the screen from left to right at a frame rate matching the refresh rate of the display. The test is set to run at its default speed of 960 pixels per second, which is a good practical speed for such photographs. The monitor was tested at 60Hz (directly below), 120Hz, 144Hz and 165Hz with all three ‘Overdrive’ settings; ‘Picture Quality’, ‘Balance’ and ‘Speed’. All rows of the UFO Motion Test were used, showing a range of pixel transitions between various shade grey levels. The final columns show some reference screens for comparison, where possible. The Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD, which is the predecessor to this model. And the ViewSonic XG270QG, which is a competitor to this model featuring an LG Nano IPS panel.

At 60Hz (above) the UFO appears relatively soft and unfocused, without clear internal details. This reflects a moderate level of perceived blur due to eye movement, a feature shared with the reference screens. There are also varying degrees of trailing behind the object, due to weaknesses in pixel responsiveness. This takes the form of a ‘powdery’ trailing behind the UFO, which is fairly light using the ‘Picture Quality’ setting but further reduced using the ‘Balance’ setting. The ‘Speed’ setting doesn’t exhibit this behaviour, but instead shows moderate overshoot (inverse ghosting). Bright and colourful trailing that’s distinct from the object or background colour. We consider the ‘Balance’ setting optimal here, offering a bit of an improvement when compared to the AD27QD reference and coming fairly close to the XG270QG reference. The image below shows how things look with the refresh rate boosted significantly, to 120Hz.

At 120Hz (above) the UFO is significantly narrower with clearer focus and more distinct internal detailing. This reflects a significant decrease in perceived blur due to eye movement. Varying amounts of trailing can again be seen behind the object. The ‘powdery’ trailing shown with the ‘Picture Quality’ setting is bolder and more extensive than at 60Hz, certainly for the dark background (top row) and medium background (middle row). The pixel response requirements have now been significantly increased and the pixel responses performed here are clearly slower than optimal for this refresh rate. The ‘Balance’ setting cuts down on this trailing somewhat, although some still remains including a fairly bold initial fringe. The ‘Speed’ setting offers a noticeable improvement, without introducing the sort of strong overshoot observed at 60Hz or on the AD27QD reference here. The light background (bottom row) shows just a little bright (‘halo’) trailing. We’d consider the ‘Speed’ setting optimal here, coming quite close to the XG270QG reference – particularly for the medium and light background. The image below shows things bumped up slightly to 144Hz.

At 144Hz (above) the UFO is just a touch narrower and slightly more sharply focused. Only a minor difference due to an extra 24Hz and 24fps, indicating a slight decrease in perceived blur due to eye movement. The trailing behaviour is largely similar to 120Hz. Some of the ‘powdery’ trailing extends just a little further back in places due to the increased refresh rate and higher pixel response requirements for optimal performance. The ‘Speed’ setting is again optimal here without introducing the overshoot seen with the AD27QD reference for the medium and light backgrounds. Below you can see how things appear with a further slight increase in refresh rate, to 165Hz.

At 165Hz (above) the UFO is slightly narrower again, indicating a further slight decrease in perceived blur due to eye movement. The bump up here is just 21Hz and 21fps. The trailing behaviour is again fairly similar, with a bit of extra ‘powdery’ trailing in places owing to the increased pixel response requirements. The ‘Speed’ setting is optimal here, providing the best reduction in this ‘powdery’ trailing without the side-effect of obvious overshoot. The reference screen (XG270QG) has a bit of an edge in terms of reduced powdery trailing, particularly for the dark and to a lesser extent medium backgrounds. Although not included in the comparison, the Gigabyte clearly outperforms high refresh rate VA models here. Even the fastest high refresh rate VA models, such as the LG 32GK850G, which show a much bolder trail behind the object. In practice, it introduces what we’d describe as ‘heavy powdery’ or ‘smeary’ trailing when observing motion on the VA models.

The examples above show how increasing refresh rate can help minimise perceived blur due to eye movement. The monitor also offers an alternative in the form of its ‘Aim Stabilizer’ strobe backlight feature. This causes the backlight to flicker at a frequency matching the refresh rate of the display – 120Hz, 144Hz or 165Hz can be used. Individual sensitivity to flickering varies and some users will notice this flickering and find it bothersome, with the highest potential for annoyance at 120Hz but some users still finding it noticeable at 144Hz or 165Hz. Even if the flickering isn’t consciously registered, some will experience accelerated eye fatigue using this setting. The pursuit photographs below were taken with the monitor set to 165Hz using its ‘Aim Stabilizer’ feature. Results at lower refresh rates were very similar – similar enough that we chose not to dedicate time to analysing them in this section. You can’t adjust brightness or ‘Overdrive’ with this feature active. A few reference screens have been shown for comparison, which run with their own strobe backlight settings. The references shown here run at 144Hz as we’ve reviewed more models that strobe at that frequency and offer a reasonable performance. More specifically the AOC AG251FG using ULMB (‘Ultra Low Motion Blur’) and a Samsung C24FG70 using ‘Impulsive Scanning’.

With ‘Aim Stabilizer’, you can see that the object itself appears significantly sharper with much clearer details than with the feature disabled. You can count the notches on the UFO body and segmentation is more distinct. In practice this was a bit more distinct than it appears in the photo, the relatively high brightness pulses made this very difficult to capture accurately without slight bleaching. This reflects a significant decrease in perceived blur due to eye movement. It’s also important to consider the trailing behind the object. The trailing is fragmented due to the fact the backlight is strobing, giving distinct repetitions. These repetitions are primarily due to the monitor not being able to keep up with the rigorous demands of the refresh cycle. The all-encompassing term ‘strobe crosstalk’ is used to describe this fragmented trailing around the object (behind in these examples – but it can also be in front). You can see some overshoot for the medium and light backgrounds – also seen with the ULMB reference screen. Of greater consequence to perceived blur, though, is the initial repetition that appears nearly as bold as the object itself. This takes on a magenta cast due to the phosphors used in the backlight. Because not all areas of the screen refresh simultaneously, the appearance of strobe crosstalk can differ depending on how high up or low down on the screen the movement is being observed. The image below shows pursuit photographs running from the top to bottom regions of the screen, with the monitor set to 165Hz and using ‘Aim Stabilizer’.

You can see considerable strobe crosstalk for all areas of the screen. This includes that bold initial trail for the central bulk of the screen. Further down the screen this essentially melds into the main object. Further up it is displaced to the front, with strong overshoot left in its place behind the object. Whilst this isn’t the messiest strobe backlight performance we’ve seen; it certainly isn’t the cleanest either and this has some implications for the motion clarity when using the setting. We explore this shortly with some in-game examples.

Responsiveness in games and movies

On Battlefield V the monitor provided a fluid experience, where the frame rate kept pace with the 165Hz refresh rate. The monitor is displaying up to 2.75 times as much visual information every second as a 60Hz monitor or indeed this monitor running at 60Hz (or 60fps). This has two main benefits. Firstly, it improves the ‘connected feel’, which describes the fluidity and precision felt when interacting with your character and the game world. The low input lag of the monitor aided this as well, but that alone doesn’t provide the complete experience. Secondly, the high refresh rate and frame rate combination significantly reduces perceived blur compared to a 60Hz sample and hold monitor, by the mechanisms explored earlier. This is nice in terms of viewing comfort, especially for users sensitive to blur. And it’s good from a competitive standpoint as enemies are easier to track and engage. Whilst the difference in both aspects was profound when compared to the 60Hz experience, the bump up from 144Hz (at 144fps) was less significant. It was still noticeable and we saw it as a nice bonus, but hardly revolutionary.

Perceived blur was affected by some weaknesses in pixel responses, though. Most pixel transitions were performed fast enough for a very solid 165Hz performance, with just a whiff of ‘light powdery’ trailing if any at all. Especially for medium to bright shades, common during bright daylight scenes for example. There were some slightly more pronounced weaknesses in places, particularly where darker shades were involved. So-called ‘high contrast’ transitions, for example a dark tree trunk against a twilight sky. These produced a ‘heavier’ powdery trailing, but nothing that came close to the sort of ‘smeary’ appearance you’d typically see from VA models for such transitions. The trailing was more condensed and short-lived by comparison. Nonetheless, this was sufficient to slightly increase perceived blur above levels you’d see on some of the strongest 165Hz performers. Well-tuned Nano IPS models like the ViewSonic XG270QG used in our earlier TestUFO comparison, for example. There was also a little overshoot in places, with slight ‘halo’ trailing that was brighter than the object or background shade. And a small amount of ‘dirty’ trailing that was darker than either. This was not strong or in our view particularly eye-catching overshoot, though. The section of the video review below runs through the strengths and weaknesses of the monitor’s response performance using this game title as an example.

We had a similar experience on Shadow of the Tomb Raider, in terms of responsiveness. The excellent ‘connected feel’ was not so beneficial, competitively speaking, but was still nice to have and easy for us to notice and appreciate when playing the game. This title makes heavy use of those ‘high contrast’ transitions that this model performed a bit slowly in places. Again, it distanced itself from high contrast VA models as there wasn’t obvious ‘smeary’ trailing nor was there strong overshoot from the pixel overdrive trying hard to compensate for such weaknesses. The pixel overdrive was very well-balanced in our view and there was nothing that really distracted us from the gameplay. Normally (i.e. when not specifically testing high frame rate responsiveness), we’d use higher graphics settings and struggle to get 165fps or anywhere near on this title. That’s where Adaptive-Sync comes into play, as we explore shortly. This can introduce some more noticeable overshoot if using our preferred ‘Speed’ setting, but we still enjoyed the overall balance of image quality and responsiveness offered by the monitor on this title. We also observed movie and video content at various frame rates. This included ~24 – 30fps content on platforms such as Netflix as well as 60fps YouTube content. With such restricted frame rates the pixel response requirements are greatly reduced and you don’t put the 165Hz refresh rate to good use. We didn’t observe any obvious overshoot, perhaps slight traces in places but nothing eye-catching, and didn’t notice any clear weaknesses from slower than optimal pixel responses.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases made using the below link. Where possible, you’ll be redirected to your nearest store. Further information on supporting our work.

FreeSync – the technology and activating it

AMD FreeSync is a variable refresh rate technology, an AMD-specific alternative to Nvidia G-SYNC. Where possible, the monitor dynamically adjusts its refresh rate so that it matches the frame rate being outputted by the GPU. Both our responsiveness article and the G-SYNC article linked to explore the importance of these two elements being synchronised. At a basic level, a mismatch between the frame rate and refresh rate can cause stuttering (VSync on) or tearing and juddering (VSync off). FreeSync also boasts reduced latency compared to running with VSync enabled, in the variable frame rate environment in which it operates.

FreeSync requires a compatible AMD GPU such as the Radeon RX 580 used in our test system. There is a list of GPUs which support the technology here, with the expectation that future AMD GPUs will support the feature too. The monitor itself must support ‘VESA Adaptive-Sync’ for at least one of its display connectors, as this is the protocol that FreeSync uses. The FI27Q-P supports FreeSync Premium via DP and HDMI on compatible GPUs and systems. Note that HDR can be activated (at the same time as FreeSync) via DP 1.4 or HDMI 2.0. You need to make sure ‘FreeSync’ is set to ‘ON’ in the ‘Gaming’ section of the OSD. On the GPU driver side recent AMD drivers make activation of the technology very simple and something that usually occurs automatically. You should ensure the GPU driver is setup correctly to use FreeSync, so open ‘AMD Radeon Software’, click ‘Settings’ (cog icon towards top right) and click on ‘Display’. You should then ensure that the first slider, ‘Radeon FreeSync’ is set to ‘Enabled’ as shown below.



The Gigabyte AORUS supports a variable refresh rate range of 48 – 165Hz. That means that if the game is running between 48fps and 165fps, the monitor will adjust its refresh rate to match. When the frame rate rises above 165fps, the monitor will stay at 165Hz and the GPU will respect your selection of ‘VSync on’ or ‘VSync off’ in the graphics driver. With ‘VSync on’ the frame rate will not be allowed to rise above 165fps, at which point VSync activates and imposes the usual associated latency penalty. With ‘VSync off’ the frame rate is free to climb as high as the GPU will output (potentially >165fps). AMD LFC (Low Framerate Compensation) is also supported by this model, which means that the refresh rate will stick to multiples of the frame rate where it falls below the 48Hz (48fps) floor of operation for FreeSync. The variable refresh rate range and LFC support mean this model is AMD FreeSync Premium certified, specifically. If a game ran at 36fps, for example, the refresh rate would be 72Hz to help keep tearing and stuttering at bay. This feature is used regardless of VSync setting, so it’s only above the ceiling of operation where the VSync setting makes a difference.

To configure VSync, open ‘AMD Radeon Software’. Click ‘Settings’ (cog icon towards top right) and click ‘Graphics’. The setting is listed as ‘Wait for Vertical Refresh’. This configures it globally, but if you wish to configure it for individual games click ‘Game Graphics’ towards the top right. The default is ‘Off, unless application specifies’ which means that VSync will only be active if you enable it within the game itself, if there is such an option. Such an option does usually exist – it may be called ‘sync every frame’ or something along those lines rather than simply ‘VSync’. Most users will probably wish to enable VSync when using FreeSync to ensure that they don’t get any tearing. You’d therefore select either the third or fourth option in the list, shown in the image below. Above this dropdown list there’s a toggle for ‘Radeon Enhanced Sync’. This is an alternative to VSync which allows the frame rate to rise above the refresh rate (no VSync latency penalty) whilst potentially keeping the experience free from tearing or juddering. This requires that the frame rate comfortably exceeds the refresh rate, not just peaks slightly above it. We won’t be going into this in detail as it’s a GPU feature rather than a monitor feature.



Some users prefer to leave VSync enabled but use a frame rate limiter set a few frames below the maximum supported (e.g. 162fps) instead, avoiding any VSync latency penalty at frame rates near the ceiling of operation or tearing from frame rates rising above the refresh rate. If you activate the ‘Frame Counter’ in the ‘Game Setting’ section of the OSD, this will display the refresh rate of the display and therefore indicate the frame rate if ‘FreeSync’ is active and the frame rate is within the variable refresh rate range of the display. The refresh rate listed at the top of the ‘Gaming’ section of the OSD will also reflect the frame rate of the content when you first enter the OSD under these conditions. Finally, it’s worth noting that FreeSync only removes stuttering or juddering related to mismatches between frame rate and refresh rate. It can’t compensate for other interruptions to smooth game play, for example network latency or insufficient system memory. Some game engines will also show stuttering (or ‘hitching’) for various other reasons which won’t be eliminated by the technology.

FreeSync – the experience

We used this monitor with a range of game titles with FreeSync enabled. As usual, the experience was very similar on all of these titles. If any issues were identified on one title but not another, it would also indicate an issue with the game or GPU driver rather than the monitor. We’ll therefore simply focus on a single title for this section; Battlefield V. This title offers excellent flexibility with its graphics settings, allowing a broad spectrum of refresh rates to be tested. The Radeon RX 580 used for this testing is hardly a powerhouse, so maintaining a solid 165fps at the WQHD resolution is tricky without extreme graphical compromises. Without FreeSync on, even slight dips below this would result in obvious tearing with VSync disabled and obvious stuttering with VSync enabled. Activating FreeSync removed the inconsistencies between frame and refresh rate, which for sensitive users is very welcome indeed.

Further dips in frame rate closer to 100fps provided a noticeable drop off in ‘connected feel’ and significant increase in perceived blur due to eye movement. This is purely due to the drop in frame rate and isn’t something variable refresh rate technologies like FreeSync can address. Nonetheless, the lack of tearing and stuttering from frame and refresh rate mismatches was nice to have. The technology worked all the same below this, too, down to 48Hz (48fps). Below this, LFC (Low Framerate Compensation) kicked in and the refresh rate of the monitor kept to a multiple of the frame rate to keep tearing and stuttering at bay. This worked well, but as usual there was a momentary stuttering when the technology activated or deactivated. Generally not problematic or noticeable, unless you’re frequently passing this boundary.

Another observation we made was that overshoot became more noticeable as refresh rate dropped. Some ‘halo’ trailing that was noticeably brighter than the background or object shade was observed, alongside ‘dirty’ trailing that was darker than the background or object. We wouldn’t describe this as extreme, though, and many users should find it quite tolerable. This was very different to the experience we had on the AD27QD, where overshoot became rather extreme and difficult to ignore. Having said that, some sensitive users could still potentially find it annoying. If you reduce the overdrive to ‘Balance’ (down from ‘Speed’) this as good as eliminates this overshoot. You get a bit more ‘powdery’ trailing in places, but most pixel responses were fast enough for a good experience with these lower (double digit) frame rates with the ‘Balance’ setting. Again, different to the AD27QD where the ‘Balance’ setting was far slower than optimal. It’s usual for monitors with Adaptive-Sync rather than a G-SYNC module to show increased overshoot as refresh rate decreases. They usually lack variable overdrive, which is a technology that slackens off voltage and pixel overdrive appropriately for reduced refresh rates. The increased overshoot is specifically tied to a decrease in refresh and wouldn’t be observed if you simply use a static 165Hz (or high) refresh rate without Adaptive-Sync active.

Nvidia Adaptive-Sync (‘G-SYNC Compatible’)

As noted earlier, AMD FreeSync makes use of Adaptive-Sync technology on a compatible monitor. As of driver version 417.71, users with Nvidia GPUs (GTX 10 series and newer) and Windows 10 can also make use of this Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) technology. When a monitor is used in this way, it is something which Nvidia refers to as ‘G-SYNC Compatible’. The FI27Q-P is amongst models which are specifically validated as G-SYNC compatible, which means it has been specifically tested by Nvidia and passes specific quality checks. With the FI27Q-P you need to connect the monitor up via DisplayPort and enable ‘FreeSync’ in the ‘Gaming’ section of the OSD. When you open up Nvidia Control Panel, you should then see ‘Set up G-SYNC’ listed in the ‘Display’ section. Ensure the ‘Enable G-SYNC, G-SYNC Compatible’ checkbox as well as ‘Enable settings for the selected display model’ is enabled as shown below. Press OK – the monitor should briefly flick off then on again and the technology should be active. The image of for another model, but exactly the same information is presented (aside from the model code).



As noted previously and as highlighted in Nvidia Control Panel, this model has been specifically tested and validated as ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ by Nvidia. The experience using Nvidia Adaptive-Sync (G-Sync Compatible Mode) was overall very similar to the experience using AMD FreeSync on this model. This includes HDR being supported with Adaptive-Sync active. A slight difference was that the floor of the operation was 65Hz (65fps) rather than 48Hz (48fps) with 165Hz selected. The floor of operation was 60Hz (60fps) with 144Hz selected and 55Hz (55fps) with 120Hz selected. However; an LFC-like frame to refresh multiplication technology was employed below this to keep tearing and stuttering from mismatches between the two at bay. There was again a momentary stuttering as the boundary was crossed and having a somewhat higher floor of operation makes it more likely the boundary will be crossed. On the plus side, the floor being raised to 65Hz gets rid of any further overshoot increases as the frame rate falls below 65fps. Somewhat confusingly, you’d see less obvious overshoot at 64fps (128Hz) or below than at 65fps (65Hz) in your game.

Our suggestions regarding use of VSync also apply, but you’re using Nvidia Control Panel rather than AMD Radeon Software to control this. The setting is found in ‘Manage 3D settings’ under ‘Vertical sync’, where the final option (‘Fast’) is equivalent to AMD’s ‘Enhanced Sync’ setting. You’ll also notice ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ listed under ‘Monitor Technology’ in this section, as shown below. Make sure this is selected (it should be if you’ve set everything up correctly in ‘Set up G-SYNC’).



Finally, note again that you can activate the ‘Refresh Rate’ feature in ‘Game Assist’ to show the current refresh rate. This will adjust as the frame rate of the content changes and match the frame rate if it’s in the main variable refresh rate window (65 – 165fps). The refresh rate listed at the top of the ‘Gaming’ section of the OSD will also reflect the frame rate of the content when you first enter the OSD under these conditions.

Aim Stabilizer

We’ve already introduced the ‘Aim Stabilizer’ feature, its principles of operation and how it performs using specific tests. When using ‘Aim Stabilizer’ or any strobe backlight feature, it’s vital that your frame rate matches the refresh rate of the display exactly. Otherwise you’re left with stuttering or juddering that stands out very readily. This is because there’s very little perceived blur due to eye movement to mask it. You can’t use Adaptive-Sync at the same time as ‘Aim Stabilizer’. As shown in the previous section, activating the feature brings with it some benefits in terms of motion clarity. On Battlefield V, running at a frame rate matching the refresh rate, superior detail levels were retained during movement. The difference was quite clear (pun intended) when observing the game the environment, objects within it and enemies you may be tracking or engaging. There were also some artifacts that went with this experience, though. There was moderate strobe crosstalk that was almost as bold as the object itself in places and sometimes appeared as a cyan or magenta fringe. This occurred in the central region of the screen, where you’d mainly focus when gaming, but also elsewhere on the screen. This added to perceived blur and made things look less crisp and clean than they should in places. There was a little overshoot in places, but we didn’t observe anything extreme in that respect – much less than observed on the AD27QD with the feature active.

We also observed some flashes of colour, including cyan and magenta, when looking at some lighter objects. This was most noticeable with slender light-coloured objects and is something we often observe to various degrees on models with wide colour gamuts and strobe backlight operation. It was quite obvious in this case – it can sometimes be reduced by decreasing brightness, but such flexibility is not available with this implementation. As with the general flickering from the backlight itself, sensitivity varies to such issues. We also observed some fairly noticeable dynamic interlace patterns, which were described earlier but that thankfully weren’t observed on this model with ‘Aim Stabilizer’ disabled. Overall we found this to be a potentially useful addition to the monitor for some users. A feature some will enjoy using, but not the ‘cleanest’ strobe backlight performance or the most flexible implementation we’ve used.

HDR (High Dynamic Range)

HDR (High Dynamic Range) on an ideal monitor includes the ability to simultaneously display very deep dark shades and very bright light shades. It also includes the ability to display an excellent array of shades between these extremes, including heavily saturated shades and muted pastel shades. The monitor would ideally support per-pixel illumination, perhaps with a backlight-free technology such as OLED. Or failing that have a very large number of dimming zones which can be precisely controlled, an FALD (Full Array Local Dimming) solution for example. This would allow some areas of the image to appear with brilliant brightness, whilst other neighbouring sections are displayed with excellent deep and dark shades. Colour reproduction is an important aspect of HDR, with the ultimate goal being support for a huge colour gamut (Rec. 2020). A more achievable near-term goal is support for at least 90% DCI-P3 (Digital Cinema Initiatives standard colour space) coverage. Finally, HDR makes use of at least 10-bit precision per colour channel, so its desirable that the monitor supports at least 10-bits per subpixel.

The HDR standard most commonly supported by monitors is HDR10, currently the most widely supported HDR standard used for HDR games and movies. For most games and other full screen applications that support HDR, the Gigabyte AORUS FI27Q-P automatically switches into its HDR operating mode. You’ll know HDR is active on the monitor as it will briefly display a message in the middle of the screen once it switches. If you go into the ‘Picture’ section of the OSD, you will also see ‘HDR ON’ listed towards the top left (unless you’re in the ‘Gaming’ section of the menu). As of the latest Windows 10 update, relevant HDR settings in Windows are found in ‘Windows HD Color settings’ which can be accessed via ‘Display settings’ (right click the desktop). Most game titles will activate HDR correctly when the appropriate in-game setting is selected. A minority of game titles that support HDR will only run in HDR if the setting is active in Windows as well. Specifically, the toggle which says ‘Play HDR games and apps’. If you want to view HDR movies on a compatible web browser, for example, you’d also need to activate the ‘Stream HDR Video’ setting. These settings are shown below. It’s also worth mentioning that there’s a slider there which allows you to adjust the overall balance of SDR content if HDR is active in Windows. This is essentially just a digital brightness slider, so adjusting it simply serves to reduce rather than improve contrast. When viewing SDR content with HDR active in Windows it looks richer and better balanced than on some monitors, but things also look overly sharp and bright. We’d recommend only activating HDR in Windows if you’re about to specifically use an HDR application that requires it, and have it deactivated when viewing normal SDR content on the monitor.

For this section we’ll be looking at two titles; Battlefield V and Shadow of the Tomb Raider. We’ve large range of HDR monitors with varying levels of capability using this title and know that the HDR implementation is good and performance will be limited by the monitor’s HDR capabilities. Although our testing here focuses on HDR PC gaming using DisplayPort, similar observations were made using HDMI. The observations apply more broadly to other HDR content including HDR movies and running HDR on compatible games consoles. The Gigabyte AORUS FI27Q-P is VESA DisplayHDR 400 certified. This is the lowest level of certification offered by VESA and indicates only a basic HDR experience is provided. A key area of the VESA DisplayHDR 400 requirements which is comfortably exceeded on this model is the colour gamut. We recorded a colour gamut of 95% DCI-P3 on the Gigabyte AORUS, as shown in the gamut representation below. This is taken from the colour reproduction section of the review. The red triangle shows the monitor’s colour gamut, the blue triangle DCI-P3 and the green triangle sRGB. With DCI-P3 being the near-term standard game developers and HDR movie directors usually stick to when creating HDR content, having good coverage of this colour space makes sense for HDR output. With this, the monitor provided more appropriate saturation levels. The extra yellowing to some areas of vegetation and overly strong red hue to some skin tones and wooden textures, for example, were toned down. There were some clearly vibrant elements where the developers intended there to be, though. Rich glowing orange flames, lush deep green vegetation and brightly painted objects of various colours were just some examples of this. There were shades displayed which were clearly beyond the boundaries of the sRGB colour space. When coupled with the more appropriately displayed muted shades, this gave a very natural and varied appearance to things.

Colour gamut 'Test Settings'