Philips Evnia 34M2C7600MV

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.

In this case we observed some extremely faint static interlace patterns at ~144Hz and above, with some shades (including some greys, blues and oranges) appearing with very fine lines of a very slightly darker and lighter variant of the intended shade. As faint as we’ve seen them whilst still being able to observe them. We also observed slight dynamic interlace patterns. More specifically, a fine polygonal mesh could be observed during movement at lower refresh rates. These were difficult to spot rather than obvious, even at relatively low refresh rates such as 60Hz and not observed above ~120Hz. They occurred regardless of VRR status. Neither artifact type was obvious on this monitor and aren’t something most will notice or find eye catching from a normal viewing distance at any refresh rate – but we like to note their existence for completeness.

Responsiveness

Input lag

A sensitive camera and a utility called SMTT 2.0 was used to analyse the latency of the Evnia 34M2C7600MV, with ‘Low Input Lag’ enabled in the ‘Game Mode’ section of the OSD. Similar values were recorded with Adaptive-Sync enabled, which greys out the ‘Low Input Lag’ setting. Over 30 repeat readings were taken to help maximise accuracy. Using this method, we calculated 3.11ms (around ½ a frame at 165Hz) of input lag. This figure is influenced by both the element of input lag you ‘see’ (pixel responsiveness) and the main element you ‘feel’ (signal delay). It indicates a low signal delay which most users should find acceptable. Note that we don’t have the means to accurately measure input lag with VRR technology active in a VRR environment or HDR active in an HDR environment.

Perceived blur (pursuit photography)

In our responsiveness article, we explore the key concepts surrounding monitor responsiveness. One of these is the concept of ‘perceived blur’, contributed to by both the movement of your eyes as you track motion on the screen and the pixel responses of the screen. This first factor is dominant on modern monitors, but both elements are important. A photography technique called ‘pursuit photography’ is also covered, using a moving rather than stationary camera to capture motion performance in a way that reflects both aspects 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 and highlights 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. All three rows of the test are analysed to highlight a range of pixel transitions. The monitor was tested at 60Hz (directly below), 120Hz and 165Hz using all ‘SmartResponse’ settings. The two final columns show reference screens, set to what we consider their optimal response time setting for a given refresh rate. The AOC CQ32G3SU, which is another 165Hz VA model. This one provides quite an average pixel response performance for the panel type. And the Gigabyte M27Q, which is an IPS model offering a decent but not outstanding pixel response experience – one which most are perfectly happy with.

At 60Hz, above, the UFO appears soft and unfocused without clear internal detailing. This reflects a moderate amount of perceived blur due to eye movement. Significant weaknesses are observed related to pixel response behaviour, including some clear ‘smeary’ trailing for the dark background (top row) in particular and less extensive but still ‘smeary’ trailing for the medium background (middle row). Performance for the light background (bottom row) is somewhat stronger. The ‘Fast’ setting reduces this trailing slightly compared to ‘Fast’, mainly for the dark background, with another slight improvement using the ‘Faster’ setting. The ‘Fastest’ setting replaces most of this ‘smeary’ trailing with overshoot (inverse ghosting), with a bold and inky appearance and some bright ‘halo’ trailing – this is unsightly and very eye-catching in practice. We therefore consider the ‘Faster’ setting optimal for 60Hz – though both reference screens offer superior performance here. If comparing to the ViewSonic XG341C-2K using its optimal ‘Faster’ setting, it appears that the Philips has reduced (less extended) ‘smeary’ trailing for the dark background. Below you can see what things look like with refresh rate doubled to 120Hz.

At 120Hz, above, the UFO appears significantly narrower with clearer internal detail. This reflects a significant decrease in perceived blur due to eye movement. To the eye the black lines which separate the segments of the UFO are less blended than they appear in the photos, so segmentation is more distinct – though the white notches still blend together. There’s a significant increase in the pixel response requirements for a strong performance here. The ‘smeary’ trailing is more distinct now, bolder and extending further back. The relative improvement with the various overdrive settings is slightly subtler, but there’s still slight improvement (mainly for the dark background). The ‘Fastest’ setting exhibits very obvious and colourful overshoot, so we again consider ‘Faster’ optimal here just like at 60Hz. The reference screens again outperform, particularly the IPS reference. Even the VA reference shows less extended and bold ‘smeary’ trailing, however. Below you can see things with a further boost in refresh rate up to 165Hz.

The M27Q IPS reference runs at 170Hz, but this makes a negligible difference compared to 165Hz.

At 165Hz, above, the UFO appears a bit narrower with improved definition. To the eye the segmentation is quite distinct now, though the white notches still appear blended together as they appear in the photos. This reflects a further reduction in perceived blur to eye movement – less significant than the initial doubling from 60Hz to 120Hz. The pixel response requirements for a strong performance are also increased with this boost in refresh rate, with the ‘smeary’ trailing a bit bolder and extending slightly further back. There’s now marginal improvement for these transitions moving from ‘Off’ to ‘Fast’ and just slight further improvement moving up to ‘Faster’. In practice, observing a broader range of transitions, ‘Faster’ did offer some improvement without introducing unsightly overshoot. Unlike the ‘Fastest’ setting – so we again consider ‘Faster’ optimal here. Performance is again a fair bit weaker than the VA reference and significantly weaker than the IPS reference, particularly for the dark and medium backgrounds. Remember that these references are far from the fastest examples for their respective panel types. It’s very much in-line with what we observed on the XG341C-2K at 165Hz for the transitions shown here. Unlike on the ViewSonic, we found the ‘Faster’ setting optimal under HDR as well as SDR without obvious overshoot being introduced.

Responsiveness in games and movies

On various Battlefield titles, at a frame rate keeping pace with the 165Hz refresh rate, the monitor gave a fluid feeling. Compared to a 60Hz monitor or this monitor running at 60Hz (or 60fps), up to 2.75 times as much visual information is presented every second. This significantly improves the ‘connected feel’, describing the precision and fluidity felt when interacting with the game world. This is also aided by the low input lag. The high refresh rate and frame rate combination also decreases perceived blur due to eye movement. This was demonstrated earlier using pursuit photographs – but these also highlight significant pixel response time weaknesses which significantly increase perceived blur. Not all transitions show distinct weaknesses – where brighter and medium shades dominate, you can observe a slight mask of additional perceived blur due to ‘powdery’ trailing. The more distinct weaknesses occur where darker shades are involved in the transition, where there’s a definite ‘smeary’ look during motion. Highly saturated shades against medium shades (such as a bright red barrel against a concrete wall) can also trigger this sort of ‘smeary’ trailing. Similar to and in some cases more obvious than shown using Test UFO earlier. Dark shades may contain small amounts of colour (dark brown, purple, red etc.) rather than being pure greyscale shades, and these colours can leach out due to the weaknesses – like you’re wetting a page with water soluble ink on it.

A ‘flickering’ effect can also be observed in places where certain dark and somewhat lighter shades combine, such as a bush with leaves or branches casting internal shadows. During movement the brighter shades blend into the darker shades and they brighten back up to appropriate levels when the motion ceases. The weaknesses in pixel responses can be even more apparent under HDR, which naturally involves a lot of ‘high contrast’ scenarios with very dark shades surrounded by brighter to significantly brighter shades. Under either SDR or HDR, we have little to complain about in the way of overshoot. Slight traces in places, including a little ‘halo’ trailing that’s very slightly brighter than the background and ‘dirty’ trailing that’s very slightly darker than the background. But this was well-blended and weak rather than eye-catching overshoot. The section of the video review below highlights some of these weaknesses as they can appear both in-game and on the desktop.

We made similar observations on Shadow of the Tomb Raider, where plenty of ‘high contrast transitions’ are present which the monitor struggles with. So ‘smeary’ trailing is quite widespread. It might not be something all people find bothersome, particularly for casual gaming, but we found it rather obvious in this case and perhaps a bit weaker than average for the panel type. We also observed video content at a range of refresh rates, including ~24 – 30fps content on platforms such as Netflix and 60fps YouTube content. For the 60fps content some fairly distinct weaknesses remained where darker shades were present. The ‘smeary’ trailing here was less extreme than that observed at significantly higher frame rates, but still ‘smeary’ in appearance. There was no particularly obvious or extreme overshoot, just a touch here and there. Even for the lower frame rate content (~24 – 30fps), some weaknesses were observed where darker shades were included in the scene. The trailing here was not exactly ‘smeary’ because it stuck close to the object, but it still created a bit of a mask of additional perceived blur that ideally wouldn’t be there.

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. 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 Evnia 34M2C7600MV supports FreeSync via DP and HDMI on compatible GPUs and systems. Note that HDR can be activated at the same time as FreeSync and ‘Local Dimming’ (HDR only) can be used. You need to make sure ‘Adaptive Sync’ is set to ‘Adaptive Sync On’ in the ‘Game Mode’ section of the OSD. 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 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 ‘Adaptive Sync Compatible’ via DP and ‘VRR’ via HDMI, although the exact wording may depend on the driver version and GPU you’re using.

The Philips 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. If a game ran at 33fps, for example, the refresh rate would be 66Hz to help keep tearing and stuttering at bay. LFC usually activated at slightly higher refresh rates, typically ~55Hz (55fps) – this slightly different floor of operation makes little difference in practice. 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 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. The ‘Refresh Rate’ listed at the bottom of the OSD updates in real time to reflect the frame rate of the content, if the monitor is within the main VRR window. 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 a range of game titles using AMD FreeSync and found the experience similar on all titles. Any issues which affect one title but not others would suggest a GPU driver issue or game issue rather than a monitor issue. For simplicity we’ll just focus on Battlefield titles for this section. These games offer sufficient flexibility to allow the full VRR range of the monitor to be tested with our Radeon RX 580. Because this isn’t a powerhouse of a GPU, it was common to see dips below 165fps. Without a VRR technology like FreeSync, these dips would lead to frame and refresh rate mismatches which cause tearing (VSync off) or stuttering (VSync on). FreeSync keeps things synchronised, removing these issues – a very nice thing if you’re sensitive to tearing or stuttering. The reduced frame rate still impacts the ‘connected feel’ and increases perceived blur, however.

The monitor provided fairly low levels of overshoot as refresh rate dipped, even to ~60Hz (~60fps on the game). A touch of ‘halo’ trailing that’s a bit brighter than the background, but not so bright in comparison that it stands out too much. It’s possible a degree of variable overdrive is used, with slight re-tuning (slackening off) as refresh rate dips to avoid strong overshoot. We feel most of this can be attributed to the acceleration simply not being aggressive enough to cause significant overshoot even at lower refresh rates, however. Even at these reduced refresh rates (frame rates), the more noticeable weaknesses stemmed from pixel response times. They were somewhat less distinct given the decrease in pixel response requirements, but there was still definite ‘smeary’ trailing where darker shades were involved. This was slightly lower than on the XG341C-2K, reflecting what we saw at a static 60Hz refresh rate using Test UFO earlier. Interestingly, overshoot levels were also lower so there appeared to be some tuning differences here which were less apparent at higher refresh rates.

An issue which requires some discussion with VRR active on this model is ‘VRR flickering’. Monitors with particularly strong contrast (such as this one) are prone to flickering for some shades during heavy frame rate fluctuations. These are due to slight gamma changes at the lower end of the curve for certain refresh rate changes in a VRR environment and are not visible on models with relatively weak contrast. VA models like this are also particularly sensitive to the voltage changes that occur under VRR and particularly during heavy refresh rate fluctuation, which can cause flickering not just for darker shades but elsewhere as well. We observed some flickering with VRR active, mainly but not exclusively during heavy fluctuations in refresh rate. There was mild to moderate flickering at times if frame rate remained stable or if it there was only slight fluctuation, even for relatively high (triple digit) refresh rates. This was not as obvious or obnoxious as the VRR flickering we sometimes observe on VA models – the flickering was more minor than we observed on the ViewSonic XG341C-2K. For significant fluctuations in frame rate, the flickering became more pronounced (this was the case on both models). It was particularly obvious if the LFC boundary was crossed in either direction, for example, which involves a significant sudden increase or decrease in refresh rate. Loading screens in some games and some in-game maps or menus could trigger moderately strong flickering. Any flickering was generally easier to notice at higher brightness, including under HDR where high brightness is part of the experience. Overall, this model wasn’t the worst offender in terms of ‘VRR flickering’, but it was certainly still an issue and something to consider if you’re sensitive to flickering and like to use VRR technologies like FreeSync.

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 or later 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 validated as G-SYNC compatible, which means they have been specifically tested by Nvidia and pass certain quality checks. With the Evnia 34M2C7600MV you can connect it up using either DisplayPort 1.4 or HDMI 2.1 to use ‘G-SYNC Compatible Mode’, with the latter technically making use of HDMI 2.1’s integrated VRR functionality rather than Adaptive-Sync. You need to make sure ‘Adaptive-Sync’ is switched on in the ‘Game’ section of the OSD to use the technology via DP. 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 ‘Enab le 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, within the VRR range. Similar VRR flickering behaviour was observed, most intense during heavy fluctuations in frame rate and hence refresh rate. The floor of operation again appeared to be 55Hz (55fps) most of the time, so 55 – 165Hz. Though an LFC-like frame to refresh multiplication technology was employed below that to keep tearing and stuttering from frame and refresh rate mismatches at bay. There was again a subtle momentary stuttering and obvious flickering as the boundary was crossed, as we observed with our AMD GPU as well. Our suggestions regarding use of VSync also apply, but you’re using Nvidia Control Panel rather than AMD 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’).



The ‘Refresh Rate’ listed at the bottom of the OSD updates in real time to reflect the frame rate of the content, if the monitor is within the main VRR window. And as with AMD FreeSync, HDR can be used at the same time as ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ and ‘Local Dimming’ (HDR only) can be used.

HDMI 2.1 VRR

HDMI 2.1 includes Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) support as part of the specification. This is an integrated technology, which unlike FreeSync does not rely on VESA Adaptive-Sync to function. As such it be used by devices such as the PS5 that don’t support Adaptive-Sync. It can also be leveraged via ‘G-SYNC Compatible Mode’ on compatible Nvidia GPUs. You don’t need to have ‘Adaptive Sync’ active in the OSD of the monitor to use this technology. Based on our testing of ‘G-SYNC Compatible Mode’ using HDMI 2.1 VRR, the experience was very similar to the Adaptive-Sync experience under SDR and HDR.

HDR (High Dynamic Range)

On an ideal monitor, HDR (High Dynamic Range) involves the simultaneous display of very deep dark shades and brilliant bright shades, with an excellent range of shades between these extremes. Including highly saturated shades with strong vibrancy and appropriately muted pastel shades. Ideally the monitor would offer per-pixel illumination (e.g. self-emissive displays such as OLED), or for LCDs a very large number of precisely controlled dimming zones would be used. An FALD (Full Array Local Dimming) solution such as Mini LED with a generous zone count, for example. This sort of solution would allow some regions of the screen to remain nice and deep for inky-looking dark shades, whilst at the same time others are very bright for brilliant light shades. Colour reproduction is also a key part of the HDR experience, 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. HDR10 is the most widely supported standard used in HDR games and movies and what is supported here.

For games and other full screen applications that support HDR, the Evnia 34M2C7600MV automatically switches to its HDR operating mode if an HDR signal is provided. Some game titles will activate HDR correctly when the appropriate in-game setting is selected. Others that support HDR will only run in HDR if ‘Use HDR’ is turned on in Windows, too. Related Windows HDR settings are found in the ‘Windows HD Color settings’ (Windows 10) or ‘HDR’ (Windows 11) section of ‘Display settings’ (right click the desktop). If you want to view HDR movie content, ensure ‘Stream HDR Video’ (Windows 10) or ‘Play streaming HDR video’ (Windows 11) is active. Also note that there’s an ‘HDR/SDR brightness balance’ (Windows 10) or ‘SDR content brightness’ (Windows 11) slider that allows you to adjust the overall balance of SDR content if HDR is active in Windows. This is really just a digital brightness slider that only makes changes for SDR content, and you lose contrast by adjusting it. Image balance is upset when viewing SDR content under HDR, with a lack of depth in places – though not to the extent of some models. Adjustments are also greatly restricted in the OSD. As usual, we’d recommend only activating HDR in Windows if you’re about to use an HDR application that specifically requires it.

To keep things simple, we’ll use Shadow of the Tomb Raider as the main example in this section, though a range of games were tested. We’ve tested this title extensively on a broad range of monitors under HDR and we know it has a good implementation which is limited by the screen itself. It highlights strengths and weaknesses in a screen’s HDR capability nicely. Although our testing focuses on HDR PC gaming using DisplayPort on an RTX 3090, similar observations were made when viewing HDR video content on the Netflix app. As with games, some HDR video content makes better use of HDR than others. There are some additional points to bear in mind if you wish to view such content. We also made similar observations using HDMI, which would be used when viewing HDR content on an HDR compatible games console for example. Testing on both our Nvidia and AMD GPUs showed that the HDR implementation was similar in both cases, too. The exception was with Adaptive-Sync active on our AMD GPU via DP with 165Hz selected, which made everything appear much more muted and less vivid than it should look under HDR. Things looked correct with 144Hz or below selected or with Adaptive-Sync disabled – this could be a limitation with the port on our AMD GPU as the GPU is a few generations old now.

As usual for HDR, many of the settings are locked off – including brightness, gamma and colour temperature. There are a range of HDR presets available; ‘HDR Game’, ‘HDR Movie’, ‘HDR Photo’, ‘DisplayHDR 1400’ and ‘Personal’. The ‘HDR Game’ preset appears completely flooded with poor contrast and significant oversaturation. ‘HDR Movie’ looks flooded in places with increased dark shade visibility, with significant oversaturation also observed. The remaining presets appear similar to one another by default, with ‘Personal’ giving access to a ‘Light Enhance’ setting which can be set to ‘1’, ‘2’ or ‘3’ (or ‘0’ for disabled). Increasing this setting floods and oversaturates the image, but increases visibility. We stuck to our preferred setting of ‘DisplayHDR 1400’ for most of our testing here. Another setting of interest is ‘Local Dimming’, found in the ‘System’ section of the OSD. As explored earlier in the contrast section there are three ‘levels’; ’Weak’, ‘Medium’ and ‘Strong’. The zones were nice and reactive regardless of settings used (i.e. there weren’t clear blooming trails left behind after a transition for a zone from light to dark), but they change the dark and light biasing levels as explained earlier. ‘Weak’ sometimes failed to brighten up reasonably small bright areas as much as we’d like and ‘Strong’ tended to overbrighten some elements – but it was very scene dependent. We settled for some way between, with the ‘Medium’ setting being our preference for ‘Local Dimming’.

The Philips Evnia 34MC7600MV is VESA DisplayHDR 1400 certified. This is the highest level of certification that VESA offers for LCDs. Focusing first on the colour gamut, this certification level requires a minimum 95% DCI-P3 coverage. In this case the QD LEDs of the backlight provided 95% DCI-P3 with a fair bit of extension beyond DCI-P3 in the red to blue region – meaning a bit more encroachment onto Rec. 2020 than pure DCI-P3 would provide, but by no means full or near full Rec. 2020 coverage. This is a somewhat more generous gamut than we typically see on VA models, but falls short of some of the OLED models and moreover Mini LED IPS models (e.g. PG32UQX). The gamut is shown in the representation below, where the red triangle shows the monitor’s colour gamut, the blue triangle DCI-P3 and green triangle sRGB.

Colour gamut 'Test Settings'