Philips 288E2UAE (288E2E)

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 either artifact type on this monitor.

Responsiveness

Input lag

A small utility called SMTT 2.0 was used alongside a sensitive camera to analyse the latency of the 288E2UAE (288E2E), with over 30 repeat readings taken to help maximise accuracy. Using this method, we calculated 4.64ms (under 1/3 of a frame at 60Hz) of input lag. The input lag measured here is influenced by both the element you ‘see’ (pixel responsiveness) and the main element you ‘feel’ (signal delay). It indicates a fairly low signal delay which most users should be happy with. Note that we don’t have the means to accurately measure input lag with Adaptive-Sync active in a variable refresh rate environment.

Perceived blur (pursuit photography)

Our article explores the key factors related to monitor responsiveness. A key concept explored is ‘perceived blur’, contributed to by both the pixel responses of the monitor and the movement of your eyes as you track motion of the screen. This second factor is generally dominant on modern monitors, although both factors play an important role. We also explore a photography technique called ‘pursuit photography’, using a moving rather than stationary camera to capture motion on a monitor in a way that reflects both elements of perceived blur.

The images below are pursuit photographs taken using the UFO Motion Test for ghosting, with the test running at its default speed of 960 pixels per second. This is a good practical speed to take such photographs at, highlighting both elements of perceived blur well. The UFOs move across the screen from left to right at a frame rate matching the refresh rate of the display, 60fps and 60Hz in this case. All three rows of the test are analysed to show a range of pixel transitions and all ‘SmartResponse’ pixel overdrive settings were tested. Reference shots are included in the final columns for comparison, with those screens set to their optimal pixel overdrive setting. The first reference is the Philips 276E8VJSB, a decent 60Hz IPS-type performer. The second reference is the Philips 328E1CA, a larger and relatively well-tuned ‘4K’ VA model.

The UFO appears soft and unfocused without clear internal detailing. This reflects a moderate amount of perceived blur due to eye movement, something also reflected in the reference shots. Varying degrees of trailing is also observable behind the UFOs, due to weaknesses in pixel responsiveness. The ‘Off’ setting shows some ‘powdery’ trailing, most noticeably for the dark background (top row) but also quite pronounced for the medium background (middle row). The ‘Fast’ setting reduces this significantly and brings things in-line with the IPS reference screen (276E6VJSB). It marks a significant improvement compared to the bolder trailing of the VA reference (328E1CA). There are slight traces of overshoot (inverse ghosting) or ‘halo’ trailing introduced for the light background (bottom row), very slightly brighter than the background. The ‘Faster’ setting removes the slight ‘powdery’ trailing for the dark and medium background but introduces more noticeable overshoot, evident for all background shades. The ‘Fastest’ setting ramps this up significantly, with bright and colourful overshoot that’s particularly extreme for the medium and light backgrounds. Based on this and indeed broader analysis, we consider the ‘Fast’ setting optimal. Some may prefer ‘Faster’ if they’re not highly sensitive to overshoot as this slightly reduces some of the conventional trailing.

Note that we will not be including a section on overclocking, as the monitor skipped frames when set much above 60Hz.

Responsiveness in games and movies

On Battlefield V there was a moderate amount perceived blur, running the game at a consistent 60fps to make the most out of the monitor. This was predominantly caused by eye movement and tied to the 60Hz refresh rate. There were some slight weaknesses in top of that from slower than optimal pixel responses, but these were certainly the more minor factor. Similar to what was observed using the UFO Motion Test for ghosting earlier on, there’s some ‘powdery’ trailing. This was most noticeable where very dark or very bright shades stood against a contrasting background. We might describe it as ‘heavy powdery’ trailing in the worst cases. But even then, it was a far cry from the sort of weaknesses you’d typically observe on competing VA models – even relatively well-tuned ones like the Philips 328E1CA. With that model there were instances of ‘smeary’ trailing, which we didn’t observe here. The weaknesses were more in-line with the Philips 276E8VJSB, so really the performance was about as good as we’ve seen from a 60Hz UHD model. Sticking with the Philips theme, the weaknesses were more pronounced on the productivity-focused 279P1 using its optimal ‘SmartResponse’ setting as well.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider provided a nice canvas of shade levels to observe as well, with plenty of dark shades involved. The weaker transitions performed by the monitor were therefore observed here, but there was nothing we’d consider major or that most users would find bothersome. In fact another nice comparison could be drawn here, this time with models like the BenQ EL2870U with 28” Innolux TN panels instead of the IPS-type panel used here. On the TN models we found the weaknesses with contrasting shades more readily apparent. For example with brighter shades such as a torch or flames against a much darker background, you’d observe heavier trailing there. Or the moon in the sky at night, which was the example we used in another game title on the BenQ. There was really nothing much to complain about in the way of overshoot using our preferred ‘SmartResponse’ setting on the 288E2UAE (288E2E). A bit of ‘halo’ trailing that was a bit brighter than the background in places, but nothing that stood out in an obvious way. Again, contrasting with the experience provided on the BenQ using its optimal response time setting.

To round things off, we also made observations using video content at a range of frame rates, including ~24 – 30fps Netflix content and 60fps YouTube content. The higher framerate content showcased the same weaknesses observed when gaming at 60fps, so nothing major. There weren’t any real weaknesses to speak of with the lower frame rate content, where the pixel response requirements for optimal performance are much lower. There was nothing noteworthy in the way of overshoot, either.

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.

VRR (Variable Refresh Rate) technology

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 Philips 288E2UAE (288E2E) supports FreeSync via DP and HDMI 2.0 on compatible GPUs and systems. There isn’t a setting to activate or deactivate the technology in the OSD, that’s handled automatically. On the GPU driver side recent AMD drivers make activation of the technology very simple. 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 is set to ‘Enabled’ as shown below. The top image shows the monitor connected by DP and the bottom image by HDMI. The setting is referred to as ‘AMD FreeSync’ in both cases, although the exact wording may depend on the driver version you’re using.

The Philips supports a variable refresh rate range of 40 – 60Hz. That means that if the game is running between 40fps and 60fps, the monitor will adjust its refresh rate to match. When the frame rate rises above 60fps, the monitor will stay at 60Hz 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 60fps, 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 >60fps). LFC (Low Frame Rate Compensation) is not supported by this monitor, as that requires the upper limit (ceiling) to be at least 2x the lower limit (floor) of FreeSync operation. FreeSync is therefore deactivated if the frame rate falls below 40fps, with the monitor then respecting your choice of VSync and presenting you with either stuttering (VSync on) or tearing (VSync off).

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. 57fps) instead, avoiding any VSync latency penalty at frame rates near the ceiling of operation or tearing from frame rates rising above the refresh rate. As a useful indicator that the technology is active, the refresh rate displayed in the OSD under ‘Setup’ – ‘Information’ updated in real time to reflect the frame rate of the content whilst within the VRR window (40 – 60Hz). 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

As usual we tested various game titles using AMD FreeSync and found the experience similar in all cases. Any issues affecting one title but not another suggests a game or GPU driver issue rather than a monitor issue. We’ll therefore simply use Battlefield V as an example for this section. This title has good graphical flexibility, allowing the full VRR range of the monitor to be tested. Some dips below 60fps weren’t uncommon on our RX 580, particularly with graphics settings turned up a bit. These dips were not accompanied by the tearing you’d get without the technology enabled (VSync off) or the stuttering (VSync on). If you’re sensitive to such things it’s very welcome having such interruptions removed. Drops in frame rate were still noticeable due to an accompanying drop in ‘connected feel’ and increase in perceived blur – VRR technologies such as FreeSync can’t counteract these effects from a drop in frame rate.

The technology worked down to the floor of operation of 40Hz (40fps in the game), below which it deactivated and the monitor returned to static 60Hz operation. With the accompanying tearing or stuttering. Because variable overdrive isn’t employed, the pixel overdrive is really tuned with 60Hz in mind and dips below that cause an increase in overshoot. This is very commonly observed on Adaptive-Sync models, to varying degrees. In this case overshoot remained quite tame even right down to the floor of operation. A bit of extra ‘halo’ trailing in places, brighter than it was at 60Hz or close to that. But far from extreme and eye-catching, so isn’t something everyone would really notice. We found sticking our preferred ‘Fast’ setting worked nicely throughout the entire VRR range.

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’. Some models are specifically validated as G-SYNC compatible, which means they have been specifically tested by Nvidia and pass specific quality checks. With the 288E2UAE (288E2E), you need to connect the monitor up via DisplayPort. There’s no OSD setting for Adaptive-Sync on the monitor, that’s handled automatically. 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 and ‘Enable settings for the selected display model’ is checked as shown below and press ‘OK’. If you’ve enabled ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ and it was previously disabled, the monitor should re-establish its connection with the system and the technology should now be active.



You will also see in the image above that it states: “Selected Display is not validated as G-SYNC Compatible.” This means Nvidia hasn’t specifically tested and validated the display, not that it won’t work. On our RTX 3090 the experience was very similar to what we described with FreeSync. With the technology getting rid of tearing and stuttering from what would otherwise be frame and refresh rate mismatches, between 40 – 60Hz (40 – 60fps). 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 that the refresh rate displayed in the OSD under ‘Setup’ – ‘Information’ updated in real time to reflect the frame rate of the content whilst within the VRR window (40 – 60Hz). This is a useful indication that the technology is active.

The ‘4K’ UHD experience

In our article on the ‘4K’ UHD experience, we look at the pros and cons of the resolution across a range of tasks – including general desktop usage, gaming and movies. A 28” ‘4K’ panel is used as an example in the article, the same screen size and resolution as the 288E2UAE (288E2E). This yields a high pixel density of 157.35 PPI (Pixels Per Inch). With such a pixel density, many users will want to use some degree of scaling. We actually found the monitor usable without scaling from our preferred viewing distance of ~70cm. Things certainly looked tiny at first, but we got used to it and actually quite enjoyed the experience. But we also consider a relatively low scaling level of 125% to be a nicely balanced alternative. With this, you retail an excellent amount of ‘desktop real estate’ with plenty of useful work space. Text and other elements which scale properly – and most content now does this – also appeared with a crispness that’s simply lacking from models with a lower pixel density. Even if you end up using a higher level of scaling or application-specific zoom, the pixel density remains important and this edge in clarity can be appreciated. The following images show the screen on the desktop natively (100%, no scaling) and a small amount of scaling applied (125%). The article linked to earlier includes further analysis over a broader range of scaling settings, but ultimately this is something you’ll set yourself and find your own ‘sweet spot’ for.

Note that these images are just for illustrative purposes and don’t accurately reflect how the monitor appears in person. Banding and patchiness on solid backgrounds are artifacts in the image, not observed in person.

The strong pixel density also benefits suitably high resolution image content, ‘4K’ UHD movie content and games running in ‘4K’. Some game titles make better use of this than others, especially if high resolution textures and detailed particle effects are a focus. But even when playing older titles or modern titles with the graphics settings dialled down, there’s a certain definition that the high pixel density still brings. This is particularly noticeable as you stare into the distance in the game, where objects or characters in the game have a distinctness from their environment and a clarity that’s simply lacking with significantly lower pixel densities. The images below show the monitor in action in a selection of game titles. Again, they’re just for illustrative purposes and don’t accurately reflect how the monitor appears in person.

Interpolation and upscaling

The 3840 x 2160 (‘4K’ UHD) resolution is a graphically demanding resolution, so it may be desirable to reduce the resolution to aid performance for gaming and other graphically intensive tasks. Or this may be required due to the use of a games console that might not run at the ‘4K’ resolution. The monitor can use an interpolation (scaling) process to map lower resolutions such as 1920 x 1080 (‘1080p’ Full HD) onto all 3840 x 2160 pixels. To ensure the monitor rather than GPU is handling the scaling process, as a PC user, you need to ensure the GPU driver is correctly configured so that the GPU doesn’t take over the scaling process. For AMD GPU users the monitor will handle the scaling by default, when gaming at non-native resolutions. Nvidia users should open the Nvidia Control Panel and navigate to ‘Display – Adjust desktop size and position’. They should ensure that ‘No Scaling’ is selected and ‘Perform scaling on:’ is set to ‘Display’ as shown below.



The monitor includes a range of scaling settings in the ‘SmartSize’ section of the OSD, accessible only if Adaptive-Sync is disabled on the system. The default setting is ‘Panel Size’ which is set to ‘28”W (16:9)’. This uses an interpolation process, using all pixels of the monitor to display the image. This is used if Adaptive-Sync is active. There are also a range of emulation settings here of various screen sizes and aspect ratios. There’s a ‘1:1’ pixel mapping setting, only using the pixels called for by the source resolution, with a black border for remaining pixels. And an ‘Aspect’ setting which will use as many pixels as possible on the screen whilst maintaining the aspect ratio of the resolution selected. This section of the OSD video runs through these settings. As shown there, some resolutions don’t display as expected using the ‘Panel Size’ and ‘Aspect’ setting. The main ones considered here (Full HD and WQHD) will full up the entire screen using the default ‘Panel Size’ setting, whilst the ‘1:1’ setting always seems to work as intended regardless of resolution.

When running the monitor at either 1920 x 1080 (Full HD or 1080p) or 2560 x 1440 (WQHD or 1440p), the interpolation process provided a fairly soft look to the image. Certainly softer than running that resolution on a screen of this sort of size natively. This could be partly offset using the ‘Sharpness’ control in the OSD. We found setting this to ‘60’ or ‘70’ optimal, but everyone will have their own preferences and it’s a nice flexibility to have – not all models offer this sort of thing. With this, the image still didn’t appear with the same detail or clarity that it would natively. But was certainly improved compared to the clearly soft look using the default setting of ‘50’. Things had a somewhat filtered effect with some elements appearing a bit soft and others oversharpened, particularly at the Full HD resolution. This was less pronounced at the WQHD resolution. Whilst some models perform better in terms of interpolation, performance here was certainly stronger than on some models we’ve seen. We consider it quite useable at non-native resolutions if you need to use it that way.

As usual, if you’re running the monitor at 3840 x 2160 and viewing 1920 x 1080 content (for example a video over the internet or a Blu-ray, using movie software) then it is the GPU and software that handles the upscaling. That’s got nothing to do with the monitor itself – there is a very small amount of softening to the image compared to viewing such content on a native Full HD monitor, but it’s slight and shouldn’t bother most users.

Video review

The video below shows the monitor in action. The camera, processing done and your own screen all affect the output – so it doesn’t accurately represent what you’d see when viewing the monitor in person. It still provides useful visual demonstrations and explanations which help reinforce some of the key points raised in the written piece.

Timestamps:
Features & Aesthetics
Contrast
Colour reproduction
Responsiveness (General)
Responsiveness (Adaptive-Sync)

Conclusion

With a 28” 3840 x 2160 (‘4K’ UHD) screen, the Philips 288E2UAE (288E2E) provides a tight pixel density. Providing strong clarity to text and giving a detailed look to suitably high-resolution image content, ‘4K’ movies and games. This combination also offers great potential for ‘desktop real-estate’ – we managed to use the screen without scaling and quite enjoyed that experience. But this took some getting used to and most people will want to use some scaling. Even with this scaling, the benefits including crisp-looking text can still be appreciated. Whilst not fully flexible in terms of ergonomics, the monitor includes the most appreciated adjustments – tilt and height. And includes VESA holes for alternative mounting. The overall design of the monitor is one of quite an unfussy home-office look. We often appreciate touches of metal on the stand, giving a more of a premium look and feel. But the matte black plastics used here were ‘sensible’, preferable to the fingerprint and dust magnet glossy plastics used on some models.

The contrast met our expectations, sitting just above the specified 1000:1 using our ‘Test Settings’ and a bit beyond that with some settings. Coupled with the usual ‘IPS glow’, the monitor doesn’t provide a deep and atmospheric look to darker scenes. This is particularly true in a dimly lit room. The excellent gamma consistency helped the monitor maintain appropriate detail across the screen, without the shifts observed on TN or VA models. The screen surface texture wasn’t as light as on some models, giving a slight graininess to the lighter shades. But this isn’t something most will find bothersome or necessarily notice in the first place. Being light to very light matte anti-glare, the image wasn’t impeded as much as it sometimes would be. With less of a layered appearance as a result and with better maintenance of clarity of vibrancy. The luminance adjustment range was a touch limited compared to some models (76 – 277 cd/m²), although the preferences of most users would sit comfortably within this range.

The IPS-type panel kept colour consistency strong, with richness maintained well throughout the screen. This was the first monitor we’ve reviewed that we were happy to leave ‘as is’ in terms brightness, colour channel balance and gamma. That’s something to be commended, but also varies between individual units. The colour gamut extended a bit beyond sRGB, but not to the extent of some wide gamut models. Enough to impart some extra vibrancy and saturation to most content, without the level of oversaturation sometimes observed. It’s more aimed at this lick of extra vibrancy than it is facilitating work within extended colour spaces. With 87% DCI-P3 and 82% Adobe RGB coverage recorded, it falls well short of fully covering both of these. An sRGB emulation mode was included, although this had locked brightness (at a moderate level), gamma and colour channels. And despite what was claimed on the factory calibration report, the gamma was off-target – averaging ‘2.4’, inviting extra depth.

Responsiveness was quite good within the confines of the 60Hz refresh rate. Fairly low input lag was combined with decent overall pixel responsiveness. There were some weaknesses for some transitions, but things were about as good as we’ve seen from a 60Hz ‘4K’ model in that respect overall. Adaptive-Sync was also supported, working as intended to remove tearing and stuttering within the given VRR range of 40 – 60Hz. With both our AMD GPU (FreeSync) and Nvidia GPU (‘G-SYNC Compatible Mode’). Overall, we feel this model offers a solid performance at a competitive price. With a nod towards vibrant but not completely overdone colour output and decent 60Hz responsiveness. In terms of pricing, the 288E2E model without USB ports and integrated speakers has an extra edge in that respect. For those targeting an even lower price, the 276E8VJSB and 278E1A are worth considering. Colour output is less vibrant due to the colour gamut sticking closer to sRGB and the feature set is cut down – with a 1” smaller screen, tilt-only stand and lack of Adaptive-Sync. But they’re also capable all-round performers.

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.