VESA Announces DisplayHDR Specification: Defining HDR Capabilities In Performance Tiersby Nate Oh on December 11, 2017 12:00 PM EST
Today, VESA is announcing the first version of their DisplayHDR specification, a new open standard for defining LCD high dynamic range (HDR) performance. Best thought of as a lightweight certification standard, DisplayHDR is meant to set performance standards for HDR displays and how manufacturers can test their products against them. The ultimate goal being to help the VESA's constituent monitor and system vendors to clearly display and promote the HDR capabilities of their displays and laptops according to one of three different tiers.
The core of the DisplayHDR standard is a performance test suite specification and associated performance tiers. The three tiers have performance criteria related to HDR attributes such as luminance, color gamut, bit depth, and rise time, corresponding to new trademarked DisplayHDR logos. Initially aiming at LCD laptop displays and PC desktop monitors, DisplayHDR permits self-certification by VESA members, as well as end-user testing, for which VESA is also developing a publicly available automated test tool.
For consumers, the three new logos of DisplayHDR-400 (low-end), DisplayHDR-600 (mid-range), and DisplayHDR-1000 (high-end) represent discrete and publicly defined levels of HDR capabilities. Broadly speaking, each level has higher minimum requirements for luminance, contrast, and color gamut. Compliant devices of all levels must be capable of processing HDR10 video, must utilize true 8-bit drivers without dithering, and must incorporate global or local dimming.
In terms of the first two luminance tests, the minimum 400, 600, and 1000 nit (cd/m2) requirements give the respective DisplayHDR tiers their namesake. At the base level is DisplayHDR-400, which for AnandTech-level enthusiasts is likely to come off as a bit disappointing/unaggressive. To the credit of the VESA, the standard tightens things up over budget LCD monitors and laptops; in particular it requires much higher luminance levels and true 8bpc color support (6+2 is explicitly disallowed). This is coupled with the previously mandatory support for HDR10, and black-to-white response time requirements. However it does not require any "advanced" features such as the DCI-P3 color space – instead allowing 95% of sRGB – and both the max and min brightness requirements are still quite tame for HDR. Based on the VESA's guidance, it sounds like this is primarily aimed at laptops, where displays are historically power-limited and anything better than global dimming is unlikely to be used.
Moving things up a notch are DisplayHDR-600 and 1000. These two standards are quite similar outside of their maximum luminance, and both are much closer to the requirements many would expect for an HDR specification. In particular, these two tiers require 10-bit color (8-bit native + 2-bit dithering permitted), much lower minimum black levels, as well as having color gamut coverage a minimum of 99% Rec. 709 and 90% DCI-P3. Gamut-wise, VESA mentioned that minimum coverage was essentially tolerance metrics by another name. Of particular note here, while the VESA does not require local dimming for any of the DisplayHDR standards, they note that they don't believe these tiers to be achievable without local dimming, at least not with current LCD technology.
Meanwhile, a requirement for all tiers of the standard is a maximum response time for black-to-white transitions, i.e. the rise time. The particular latency requirement applies to the number of frames it takes for the backlight to fully respond after receiving the power signal. Typically, latency in this area is mostly a result of smoothening algorithms that are in place to reduce display flicker, and excessively high rise times would translate to a noticable latency in brightness. For all three tiers the requirement is 8 frames at 60Hz, or 133ms. The VESA is recommending the same 8 frame standard for other refresh rates as well, including 144Hz and 24Hz.
Going forward, VESA stated that they plan to add higher DisplayHDR tiers as needed, along with support for non-LCD technologies like OLED. DisplayHDR is also agnostic to resolution and aspect ratio, as both elements are explicitly excluded from the specification, as opposed to a standard like the UHD Alliance’s 4K specific “Ultra HD Premium.” And on that note, VESA commented that any specification compliant device, including TVs, is eligible to use the DisplayHDR logo.
Along with certification via DisplayHDR authorized test centers, devices may be self-certified by vendors in their own factory manufacturing environments, as mentioned earlier. The results are submitted to VESA and after the requisite paperwork and agreements, vendors receive the right to use the compliance logos, with the devices being added to the Integrators List. This self-certification is subject to a VESA auditing process that is invoked if necessary, and VESA noted that this may also be triggered if reviewers and end-users encounter discrepant results with the public test tools, planned for release in Q1 2018. With the open compliance test specification, end-users may utilize consumer-grade devices in testing the displays, even though they lack the stricter tolerance specifications necessary for official self-certification.
VESA members and partners have had access to a beta version of the test suite for several weeks, and with that a number of manufacturers are exhibiting new products complying with the DisplayHDR specification at CES 2018, January 9-12, at the Las Vegas Convention Center South Hall, DisplayPort booth #21066. If not production-ready by CES, it appears that manufacturers expect to begin rolling out DisplayHDR certified equipment during Q1 2018.
The full High-performance Monitor and Display Compliance Test Specification (DisplayHDR CTS) is available as a free download on the VESA site.
Source: VESA DisplayHDR
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
yasamoka - Thursday, December 14, 2017 - linkHow about personal experience with burn-in on several generations of a device? If you're in doubt, I can show you photos of my own S8+, my brother's S7, and my dad's S6 Edge+ ALL with burn-in (to various degrees of course).
I don't get this denialism I keep seeing on the Internet of OLED's inherent issues for the last few years. How about trusting people's experiences when they actually get burn-in and report it? It's not an isolated issue - almost every Samsung Galaxy flagship that I've seen over the years with family, friends have various degrees of burn-in - some of them extreme (keyboard). And not only the old devices.
mode_13h - Friday, December 15, 2017 - linkBurn-in for OLED is a very real problem, and one of the main reasons it hasn't yet dominated the professional PC monitor segment. Dell has such a product on the market, but with numerous aids and features to help you keep from burning it in.
Manch - Friday, December 15, 2017 - linkI love the arguments in here.
Burn in is an issue.
No it's not
Counter argument accepts original premise but dismisses it while still arguing against it.
Manch - Friday, December 15, 2017 - linkConsidering manufacturers implement a lot of features to prevent it means its still very relevant and very possible which multiple tests, users experience has shown. Burn in and IR are just something you have to deal with when using emissive displays of any kind.
StevoLincolnite - Tuesday, December 12, 2017 - linkWho the hell wants to go through all that trouble?
Manch - Tuesday, December 12, 2017 - linkYeah, OLED is a no go for me. Image is great but not worth the IR issues or burn in.
imaheadcase - Tuesday, December 12, 2017 - linkI've had mine on for a month now, play games on it with steam link, watch netflix, etc. Zero worries about it. People just get scared cause they hear a buzzword. No different than someone saying a certain game sucks don't play it...while majority have zero issues.
Manch - Friday, December 15, 2017 - linkWhile anecdotal, I've had two displays from two manufacturers burn in on me. Both were taken back and replace under warranty. I then sold them and got an LCD. Picture quality is amazing but not worth it to me. It's not a buzzword. ALL emissive displays have this issue. Either you're willing to deal with whats required to preserve the display or your not. I'm in the latter. I like to game for hours on end or leave my TV running with the news on it so I can watch/listen while doing other things. OLED just aint a good solution for me. The screens have gotten much better no doubt but the issue is still there, it can still happen.
06GTOSC - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - linkI'm still using a plasma TV from 2010. No burn in. Haven't used it as a PC display either. But plenty of gaming.
yasamoka - Thursday, December 14, 2017 - linkYes, they burn in. Please stop repeating the myth that they don't. When you own or are in the immediate vicinity of several devices with OLED displays, and you see that all of them have burn-in that does not go away, you cannot conclude that this is merely image retention.