Dell U3415W

The 34″ 3440 x 1440 curved ‘UltraWide’ experience

We’ve already provided a detailed insight into how the 3440 x 1440 resolution and 34” 21:9 ‘UltraWide’ screen creates a compelling experience for both work and play. The overall experience here was very similar. If you’re expecting a detailed scientific analysis of how the curve revolutionises the experience, then prepare to be disappointed. It really is rather subtle – but in some ways, that’s a good thing. We didn’t find the screen alien or unusual to look at due to the curve and actually found it to provide a very comfortable and natural viewing experience. This is indeed one of the aspects that manufacturers including Dell like to promote; the edges are brought closer to your eyes (a ‘more uniform focal distance’) which reduces eye movement. We don’t generally find flat monitors uncomfortable, or it would make this job a bit tricky – but we did find this monitor very pleasing in terms of viewing comfort.

We also feel that the curve added just a bit of extra depth to the already engrossing game playing and movie watching experience. As we’ve mentioned earlier on, it also slightly reduced the perceived ‘IPS glow’ – a nice bonus. It certainly doesn’t eliminate it, though, and our sample was ‘blessed’ with backlight bleed that sort of overshadowed that a bit in some cases. We found the curve absolutely fine for general productivity tasks, including browsing the internet (which can sometimes be less productive) and editing documents and spreadsheets. We could understand how those with a keen eye that are used to indulging in creative passions such as design work and photo editing may find the curve a little different. But we would suggest people see this for themselves and judge rather than ruling it out based on what may not turn out to be a complete non-issue for them. We’ll leave you with some pictures to show the monitor in action – nothing whatsoever like seeing it first hand, but we know people like seeing it anyway.

Interpolation and upscaling

As an LCD monitor, this one operates at a fixed native resolution at which everything looks its best; 3440 x 1440. If you keep the monitor at that resolution and watch video content using PC software or a web browser that is a lower resolution (such as a 1920 x 1080 Blu-ray) then the GPU or software handles everything just fine and there is no obvious loss of sharpness. If you would like to run the monitor at a lower resolution, either because your device doesn’t support the native resolution or performance or you don’t have the graphical grunt to do so on certain games, then you may want to use a lower than native resolution for the monitor itself. If you do wish to do that then the U3415W gives you a decent range of options to choose from. These options are found under ‘Display – Aspect Ratio’ in the OSD; ‘Wide 21:9’, ‘Wide 16:9’, ‘Auto Resize’ and ‘1:1’. These options are demonstrated using the 1920 x 1080 resolution in our OSD video. The relevant section of this video is shown below for your convenience.

The ‘Wide 21:9’ option essentially causes the monitor to interpolate any non-native resolution so that it fills the entire screen. In the case of resolutions such as 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440, this makes everything look stretched horizontally (distorted) and a bit soft. Quite ugly really. For resolutions that are in the 21:9 aspect ratio things look better as they are not distorted. 2560 x 1080, for example, is actually displayed fairly well. Interpolation is still used as the display is filling up all its pixels, but the Dell handles this surprisingly well. Things look a bit softer than they would running that resolution natively, but it wasn’t a massive difference. When gaming, for example, it doesn’t look like you’re looking at things through a soft-focus lens. We do feel the 2560 x 1080 resolution is a decent fallback on this model for those game titles where you can’t comfortably drive the native resolution. It’s not perfect of course, but quite useable if you need it.

The ‘Wide 16:9’ option forces the monitor into a 16:9 aspect ratio, regardless of resolution. Non 16:9 resolutions therefore look distorted – this mode is clearly meant for 16:9 aspect ratio resolutions only. A 27” 16:9 diagonal screen space is used with large black borders flanking the image. The 1920 x 1080 resolution is therefore displayed ‘1:1’ horizontally but a vertical interpolation is used. Things look noticeably softer than they would running that resolution on a native Full HD 27” monitor. The monitor fairs better in this mode at 2560 x 1440, as the image is displayed 1:1. The sharpness is therefore excellent.

The ‘Auto Resize’ option maintains the aspect ratio of the resolution, whatever that might be. So 21:9 resolutions fill the screen and 16:9 resolutions have the thick black borders either side of the image, just like in their respective dedicated aspect ratio modes. The 1920 x 1200 resolution (16:10), for example, has the correct 1200 pixels used horizontally and is stretched vertically, so again looks a bit soft but not distorted.

Last but not least is the ‘1:1’ option. This ensures that the monitor will only use as many pixels as the monitor calls for, and no interpolation is used either horizontally or vertically. The 2560 x 1440 resolution looks as it does with the ‘Wide 16:9’ option (black borders at the side, no loss of sharpness). The 1920 x 1080 resolution has black borders all around it, filling a 20” diagonal space in the centre of the screen. The 2560 x 1080 resolution has borders all around it but fills a 25” diagonal space. So you get a little more width but no extra height compared to 1920 x 1080 in this 1:1 mode.

So when it comes to the display of non-native resolutions on this monitor, there are a few simple things to remember. If you want to maintain the best levels of sharpness, it’s best to avoid using the monitor’s interpolation process – 1:1 is the way to go. If you want to use the entire screen area and don’t mind a bit of softening (but nothing horrific) then run the monitor in ‘Wide 21:9’ or ‘Auto Resize’ with a 2560 x 1080 resolution. If you want to run the monitor at 1920 x 1080 and fill the screen, then prepare for significant image softening.

Responsiveness

Input lag

Input lag was assessed using a small tool called SMTT 2.0 and a sensitive camera. By comparing the U3415W with a number of other monitors of known latency, with over 30 repeat readings taken, it was possible to get a good idea of the latency of this screen. Using this method we calculated 22.5ms (around 1.35 frames) of input lag. This figure is influenced not only by signal delay (which is the element of input lag you ‘feel’) but also pixel responsiveness (which is the element you ‘see’). This indicates a moderate signal delay which is too low for some users to notice but that others may find noticeable. This is highly subjective, of course, so is something that must be assessed by each individual. Game mode had no effect on this value.

Pixel responsiveness

The UFO Motion Test for ghosting was used alongside a highly sensitive camera to assess pixel responsiveness of the monitor. The test was set to run at ‘3840 Pixels Per Sec’, so that the UFO crossed the screen rapidly, in under 1 second. The following image shows the results of this test with ‘Response Time’ set to ‘Normal’ (left) and ‘Fast’ (right’). The three separate rows correspond to the rows of the test which test different transitions. There is a dark cyan background at the top, medium cyan background in the middle and light cyan background at the bottom. As with input lag, the ‘Game’ preset had no observable influence on pixel responsiveness.

Trailing (various overdrive settings)

Using the ‘Normal’ response time setting, there is a very bold primary trail and faint secondary trail with the dark background. This indicates a relatively slow pixel transition. The pixel transitions are slightly more rapid for the medium background, with the primary trail weakening somewhat and the secondary trailing as good as eliminated. The light background is faster still, with the primary trail weakened again and no trace of a secondary trail. With the ‘Fast’ setting there is a moderate degree of overshoot (inverse ghosting) visible, which is actually quite noticeable in practice. On the image it appears as an inverted trace of the UFO for the secondary trail and the primary trail changing in appearance as well. For the medium background results are quite similar, although the primary trail becomes even odder-looking. For the light background there is a bright trail (halo) replacing the conventional, which is quite obvious when watching the monitor in motion but isn’t captured very well in this snapshot.

It is clear from this analysis and even clearer when using the monitor that the ‘Normal’ setting is preferable. There are some obvious discrepancies in response time based on the transition being performed, with dark backgrounds in this test revealing slower performance. It is very important to remember that our eyes don’t see things as a camera does when it takes a static photograph, however. As explored in detail in this article, the movement of our own eyes is the most significant contributor to blur on a monitor like this. The pixel transitions could be extremely rapid and performed perfectly, but there would still be an underlying blur due to this eye movement. To take this into account and consider an even broader range of pixel transitions we took a look at how the monitor performed on a range of game and movie titles.

Responsiveness in games and movies

On Battlefield 4, motion blur was quite similar to what you’d see on even the fastest 60Hz LCDs for the most part. Eye movement was the most significant contributor. There was some trailing beyond this in places, particularly where dark shades were involved. When cornering in an ATV through foliage, for example, the level of blur exceeded what you’d see on a faster 60Hz LCD by quite some margin. The dark shaded areas of vegetation move and lighter areas of vegetation caught up in the movement force the monitor to perform some of these slower transitions. The trailing isn’t a smeary mess like you see on some VA panels during similar transitions, but it is something sensitive users might notice. The same applies where buildings or other objects in the background have an intricate mix of lighter and darker regions. Although instances of overshoot (inverse ghosting) were generally few and far between, there were some instances where it was fairly noticeable. We observed moderate overshoot where some medium-dark and medium light shades were involved in the transition. For example a light wooden box with a darker wooden sheet in the background or a light wooden crate sitting in front of a medium-blue painted building. This gave a somewhat obtrusive black vapour-like trail rather than a neat blend of both shades.

The experience was similar on Dirt 3. The game was very playable, with most of the motion blur being down to eye movement and linked to the 60Hz refresh rate. There was, again, some trailing on top of this in places. This was perhaps most noticeable in the Gymkhana mode, which is dizzying at the best of times on 60Hz LCDs. With some of the slower transitions cropping up where some darker shades were involved, the experience was a little more dizzying than it had to be. Driving at night also brought with it some problematic transitions, but for different reasons. The black ‘vapour trail’ inverse ghosting was quite obvious when driving at night on the game. Objects such as trees, road signs and other cars moved against the murky grey sky and medium grey concrete of the race track, putting these ‘medium-dark’ – ‘medium-light’ transitions into full swing. It wasn’t so horrendous that you’d want to stop playing the game and is nowhere near as bad as the overshoot we’ve seen from some monitors on this title, but it is still noteworthy.

Overall, then the monitor did have some hiccups which impeded the gaming experience beyond just the 60Hz refresh rate. These hiccups wouldn’t be noticed by all users and not everyone would actually find them bothersome – it’s very subjective, of course. The good news for movie fans is that the pixel responsiveness did not impede the experience. There was no observable trailing from slow pixel responses nor any noticeable overshoot on the Blu-ray movie or ‘Amazon Instant Video’ titles that we tested. The relatively low frame rate at which these run (24-30fps) was really a key limiting factor when it came to fluidity and the monitor did absolutely fine there.

Conclusion

As we’ve explored previously, the 3440 x 1440 resolution on a large 34” ‘UltraWide’ screen provides an engrossing experience with plenty of productivity potential. A key distinction of the Dell U3415W is of course that the screen is slightly curved in a concave fashion, rather than being flat. We found this curve to be rather subtle but a nice addition nonetheless. The experience was certainly not revolutionary, but it was comfortable and natural – which is what the manufacturers are going for. Looking beyond that at key image characteristics, the monitor has some obvious strengths. The colour reproduction is excellent, with a factory calibration that really helps get the most out of the screen if high levels of colour accuracy are required. Shades are consistent and well-represented regardless of their on-screen position. We were also impressed by how well the ‘Uniformity Compensation’ mode worked in ensuring the highest level of both luminance and colour temperature uniformity. This did come at the expense of contrast and flexibility in adjusting brightness, however.

As with any monitor there were also weaknesses, however. Although static contrast was quite strong and ‘IPS glow’ was somewhat reduced compared to similarly sized models with flat screens, the black uniformity of our sample was less than stellar. Looking at user feedback more broadly, it certainly isn’t an isolated case. This wasn’t ideal for creating a good atmosphere during dark scenes in games and movies, but was generally not too obtrusive. This is of course highly subjective and something of that nature would bother some users more than others. Another area where weaknesses were apparent was when it came to responsiveness. Overall the monitor had decent pixel responsiveness, but it did struggle a bit during some transitions. The trailing was a bit beyond what you might expect from an optimally configured 60Hz LCD in places. Furthermore there were some instances of fairly obvious overshoot (inverse ghosting) on certain transitions. This wasn’t really picked up by artificial tests (Test UFO, PixPerAn etc.) but did crop up during actual use. Fortunately this didn’t affect the movie-watching experience for the Blu-rays and Amazon Instant Video titles we looked at, it just affected certain transitions when gaming.

Overall, a mixed but mainly enjoyable experience from this monitor. Having just reviewed the Samsung S34E790C it is hard not to draw some comparisons. We were pleasantly surprised by the responsiveness of the Samsung, more so given its panel type. With the Dell, though, we were left wanting a little bit more. It was by no bad in its responsiveness, but there were some weaknesses which aren’t inherent to all IPS-type monitors. The contrast performance was also stronger on the Samsung, and in particular the black uniformity was noticeably superior. Not entirely unexpected given it uses a VA panel, but again some weaknesses on the U3415W were not inherent to the AH-IPS technology used. When it comes to colour reproduction, both models are a bit different. This is difficult to summarise in a few words, and we’d certainly recommend referring to the relevant sections of each review. In short, though, the colour consistency of the Dell is superior – and with its exceptional factory calibration, it lends itself very well to colour-critical work such as photography and design. Overall we see this as a particularly strong choice for users who appreciate the highest levels of colour accuracy and consistency (be it when gaming, browsing the internet, watching films or working) but not for those who prefer atmospheric dark scenes and stronger contrast.

 

Donations are also greatly appreciated.