Skip to content

Monitor Specs That Are Marketing, and the Ones That Matter

Five numbers on a monitor box tell you almost nothing, and three tell you nearly
everything. The marketing five: 1ms response time, dynamic contrast ratio, HDR400, refresh
rate quoted without reference to your graphics card, and “16.7 million colours”. The real three:
panel type with its native contrast, colour gamut coverage against a named standard, and the variable
refresh rate range.

None of this requires a spectrophotometer. It requires knowing which figures are measured under
conditions you will never reproduce, and that turns out to be most of the ones printed largest.

The scorecard

Spec What it looks like it means What it actually is
1ms response time Pixels change in 1ms ⚠️ One best-case transition, or MPRT — not typical performance
Dynamic contrast 100,000,000:1 Enormous contrast ⚠️ Two different scenes compared against each other
HDR / DisplayHDR 400 HDR capable ⚠️ 400 nits, no local dimming required. Often looks worse than SDR
240Hz Smoother motion ⚠️ Only if your GPU actually delivers those frames
16.7 million colours Rich colour ⚠️ Standard 8-bit. Every monitor does this
Panel type + native contrast — ✅ Predicts black level, viewing angle and motion
Gamut: % of sRGB / DCI-P3 — ✅ A measurable claim against a real standard
VRR range, e.g. 48–144Hz — ✅ Tells you where tearing is actually eliminated

1. “1ms response time”

There are two different response-time measurements and manufacturers rarely say which one
they are quoting. If it is unlabelled, it is usually MPRT — which is not a pixel speed at
all.

GtG (grey-to-grey) is how long a pixel takes to change from one shade to another. MPRT (moving
picture response time) is how long a pixel stays continuously visible, which relates to perceived
motion blur. They measure different things, and MPRT has not improved alongside GtG because it is
limited by refresh-cycle visibility and frame time rather than by the panel chemistry.

Even a genuine GtG figure is usually the single fastest transition the panel can manage —
often a mid-grey to mid-grey step — at an overdrive setting that introduces visible overshoot
on other transitions. The number is real; the conditions are not ones you would ever choose to run in.

The quieter omission is the scaler. Internal processing between the input signal and the panel
commonly adds anywhere from a couple of milliseconds to over twenty, and it is never included in the
advertised figure. Two monitors both claiming 1ms can differ by an order of magnitude in what you
actually feel.

2. Dynamic contrast ratio

A dynamic contrast figure is produced by comparing the brightest point the monitor can
display in one scene against the darkest point it can display in a different scene, with the backlight
adjusted between them. Nothing on screen ever exhibits that ratio simultaneously.

The number that matters is native (or static) contrast: brightest white and darkest black at the
same time, with a fixed backlight. That figure is unglamorous and clusters tightly by panel
technology, which is precisely why it gets buried while the eight-digit one goes on the box.

As a rule of thumb, IPS panels land around 1,000:1, VA panels around 3,000:1 and upward, and OLED
is effectively unbounded because it switches pixels off entirely. A VA panel showing genuine 3,000:1
will look visibly deeper in a dim room than an IPS advertising a hundred million to one.

3. HDR400

DisplayHDR 400 can be awarded to a monitor with roughly 1,000:1 contrast, standard sRGB
colour coverage and 400 nits of peak brightness. It requires no local dimming and no wide colour
gamut — which are the two things that make HDR look like anything.

The practical result is a monitor that carries an HDR logo and, with HDR switched on, frequently
looks worse than it does in SDR: washed-out shadows, a flat image, and sometimes worse response times
because HDR processing adds its own overhead.

DisplayHDR 600 is the first tier that requires meaningfully higher brightness, a wide gamut and
some form of local dimming. Below it, treat HDR as a checkbox rather than a feature, and do not pay a
premium for it. If a monitor’s HDR is worth having, its contrast and gamut figures will already tell
you so.

4. Refresh rate quoted without your graphics card

A 240Hz panel displays 240 distinct frames per second only if something is generating 240
frames per second. If your machine renders 70, a 240Hz monitor and a 144Hz monitor show you the same
70 frames.

This is not an argument against high refresh rates — they genuinely help, and the improvement
from 60Hz to 120Hz or 144Hz is obvious even on a desktop. It is an argument against buying refresh
rate you cannot feed, particularly when the same money buys a better panel at a lower rate.

The honest ordering for most people: get to 120Hz or 144Hz, then spend everything remaining on
panel quality and resolution rather than on the next refresh tier. The exception is competitive
gaming at low settings, where frame rates are deliberately pushed high and the panel is the
bottleneck.

5. “16.7 million colours”

16.7 million is what 8-bit colour produces — 256 levels each of red, green and blue.
It is the baseline for essentially every monitor sold, so quoting it distinguishes nothing.

Where it becomes actively misleading is “1.07 billion colours”, which is the 10-bit figure but is
frequently achieved by an 8-bit panel using frame rate control (8-bit+FRC) to simulate the extra
depth. That is not the same as a native 10-bit panel, and the spec sheet rarely distinguishes them.

For everything except colour-critical work, this matters far less than gamut coverage, which is
the next section. Bit depth affects how smoothly a gradient renders; gamut affects whether the colours
are right at all.

The three that are real

Panel type, native contrast and gamut coverage predict most of what you will actually
perceive, and none of them is a marketing invention.

  • Panel type. IPS gives accurate colour and wide viewing angles with mediocre
    blacks. VA gives much deeper blacks with some smearing on dark transitions and colour shift off
    axis. TN is fast and cheap with the weakest colour. OLED gives perfect blacks and instant response
    with a static-content burn-in consideration. This one word predicts more than the rest of the sheet.
  • Gamut coverage as a percentage of a named space. “99% sRGB” or “90% DCI-P3” is a
    claim against a defined standard and can be checked. “Vivid colour” and “1.07 billion colours”
    cannot. If a monitor lists no gamut percentage at all, assume approximately sRGB and no more.
  • VRR range. “FreeSync” alone is not a specification. The useful figure is the
    range, such as 48–144Hz, because below the floor variable refresh stops working unless the
    monitor supports low framerate compensation. A narrow range on a panel you will often drive below
    it is close to useless.

The number nobody prints

What you actually feel is total system latency — input to photons — and no
manufacturer publishes it, because most of it is not the panel. Pixel response is one
component among several, and usually not the largest.

The chain runs: input device polling, the game or OS rendering the frame, the graphics card
outputting it, the monitor’s scaler processing it, and finally the pixels changing. The advertised
response time covers only the last step. This is why a monitor with an unremarkable GtG figure and a
fast scaler can feel more responsive than a “1ms” panel with heavy processing.

Independent measurement is the only way to know, which is the honest answer: for anything where
latency genuinely matters, the specification sheet cannot tell you, and a published measured review
can.

How to use this in front of a listing

Read the sheet in this order and most decisions resolve in about a minute.

  • Panel type first. It sets the ceiling for everything else.
  • Native or static contrast — and if only a dynamic figure is given, assume the static one is
    unremarkable, because a good one would be advertised.
  • Gamut as a percentage of sRGB or DCI-P3. No percentage means no claim.
  • Refresh rate against what your machine actually produces, not against the box.
  • VRR range, including whether it has a low-framerate floor you will drop below.
  • Ignore dynamic contrast, HDR400 badging, unqualified “1ms”, and any colour count.

Resolution and screen size interact separately, through pixel density, and connectivity has its own
traps around how much power a USB-C monitor will actually deliver to a laptop. Both are covered in the
home office
monitor guide rather than repeated here.

How this page was compiled

The definitions and certification thresholds here come from published display standards and
industry technical documentation, including the DisplayHDR tier requirements and the standard
distinction between GtG and MPRT measurement. We do not claim hands-on testing of monitors, and no
figure on this page is presented as a measurement we took. Where performance depends on a specific
unit, this page says that independent measured review is the only reliable source.
Last reviewed: 8 August 2026.

Frequently asked questions

Is a 1ms response time monitor actually better than a 4ms one?

Not reliably. If the 1ms figure is MPRT it is not a pixel-transition speed at all, and if it is GtG
it usually reflects a single best-case transition at an overdrive setting that causes overshoot
elsewhere. Scaler processing, which is never advertised, can add far more delay than the difference
between the two figures.

What is the difference between GtG and MPRT?

GtG measures how long a pixel takes to change from one shade to another. MPRT measures how long a
pixel remains continuously visible, which corresponds to perceived motion blur. They are different
quantities, and an unlabelled “1ms” claim is usually MPRT.

Does dynamic contrast ratio mean anything?

Practically no. It compares the brightest point in one scene against the darkest point in another
with the backlight adjusted between them, so nothing on screen ever shows that ratio at once. Native
or static contrast, measured simultaneously with a fixed backlight, is the meaningful figure.

Is HDR400 worth paying for?

Generally not. DisplayHDR 400 requires no local dimming and no wide colour gamut, so an HDR400
monitor often looks worse with HDR enabled than in SDR. DisplayHDR 600 is the first tier that requires
meaningfully higher brightness, a wide gamut and some local dimming.

Do I need a 240Hz monitor?

Only if your hardware produces frames at that rate. A 240Hz panel fed 70 frames per second shows
the same 70 frames a 144Hz panel would. For most people, reaching 120Hz or 144Hz and spending the
remainder on panel quality is the better trade.

Which monitor specification predicts image quality best?

Panel type, because it sets the ceiling for contrast, viewing angle and motion behaviour together.
After that, native contrast ratio and gamut coverage stated as a percentage of sRGB or DCI-P3 tell you
more than any other numbers on the sheet.

Related guides