Microsoft Surface Pro 3 Review
by Anand Lal Shimpi on June 23, 2014 3:55 AM ESTDisplay Analysis
I published an analysis of Surface Pro 3's display shortly after receiving my review unit. For those of who you haven't seen it already, the results and analysis are reprinted below.
With Surface Pro 3, Microsoft finally accepts that while 16:9 may be a great aspect ratio for watching movies but it's not optimal for a multi-purpose tablet. The tablet features a 12" 2160 x 1440 display (RGB stripe, not RGBW/PenTile), which ends up being a 3:2 aspect ratio. The difference is immediately noticeable in notebook-style use. While the Surface Pro 2 was never quite all that comfortable to use as a laptop, Surface Pro 3's display makes it substantially more laptop-like. There doesn't appear to be a big impact to tablet use either with the larger display. Particularly with Windows 8.1's split screen mode, the larger display ends up working extremely well. The LCD continues to be laminated to the cover glass just like with previous Surfaces.
Default 150% Scaling on Surface Pro 3, the 2160 x 1440 display behaves like a HiDPI 1440 x 900 display
Color accuracy is improved out of the box as well. The original Surface Pro had a display capable of being quite accurate, if calibrated, but out of the box it was a bit of a mess. Microsoft slowly improved out of box calibration over the years, eventually culminating in what we have today with Surface Pro 3.
Max brightness drops a bit compared to Surface Pro 2, likely due to the Pro 3 having 50% more pixels to light. Black levels at max brightness are pretty good, thanks in part to Microsoft's optically bonded LCD/cover glass stack. Contrast ratio remains competitive with previous designs.
Grayscale accuracy is the biggest issue with the new display, green levels are just way too high:
Our basic sRGB gamut test paints a great picture for Surface Pro 3. Full saturation color reproduction is excellent:
The saturation sweep also looks solid:
Unfortunately Surface Pro 3 doesn't do so well on our GMB color checker test. Part of the problem is its performance in the grayscale swatches included in this test:
Overall the Surface Pro 3 display is a huge improvement over the previous two generations, but it doesn't quite meet the high standards set by some of the other competitors on the market today from both notebook and tablet spaces.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
274 Comments
View All Comments
anandbiatch - Monday, June 30, 2014 - link
Don't forget that it can also replace your desktop.Why buy 3 devices when Surface 3 is perfect.
mkozakewich - Monday, June 30, 2014 - link
Or better yet, you're like me, and you saved on whatever a good tablet is worth by not having another tablet at all.It's always seemed a bit superfluous to me, like you just need a phone with a bigger screen sometimes. (Or in this case, a laptop that can fold up flat.)
Gunbuster - Monday, June 23, 2014 - link
Oh give it up and please point out a product that covers all the bases the SP3 does and is better. If you want a tablet get an ipad or a cheap $100 android. If you want a bad-ass laptop get a 6 pound alienware or a $3000 ultra-book. (Now lug around both of those) If you want a very portable convertible with pen input and detachable keyboard you get this. It is the best at what it was designed for. All compromise? Hardly.TEAMSWITCHER - Monday, June 23, 2014 - link
Did you read the article? I don't think the SP3 "covers" any bases, it merely "touches" them.PC fan boys may have found their MacBook Pro and iPad Air killer, but in general, Windows consumers are not conditioned to the premium pricing. Without a lower cost version of the same thing, there will be no mass adoption, sparking the next great wave Windows applications. This is a niche product.
Gunbuster - Monday, June 23, 2014 - link
What exactly are you arguing? Is it "all compromises" or "expensive"?TEAMSWITCHER - Tuesday, June 24, 2014 - link
It's not all compromises - but there are some. And yes it's as expensive as Apple gear. More so if you consider OS X updates are free. Will Windows 9 be free? I highly doubt that it will.PaulC543 - Tuesday, June 24, 2014 - link
Of course there are come compromises, please show us a laptop or tablet which has none. There aren't any.As for it being as expensive as Apple gear, true, and it has every bit the material/build/design quality as Apple gear, has several superior specs - screen quality/resolution, pen, and it saves you from having to buy two devices if you want both laptop/desktop level performance AND a tablet form factor.
Will Windows 9 be free? Probably not, but even if it's the typical $100 upgrade, spread over a 3 year version cycle that's about $30 a year. And even if you never upgrade the OS, Microsoft will support it with updates for 10+ years - far longer than you're likely to be using the Surface.
You're grasping at straws and your arguments are tired and desperate.
TEAMSWITCHER - Tuesday, June 24, 2014 - link
Oh come on. If Apple had created the Surface Pro 3 there would no end to the insults sprayed toward the Mac faithful for the cost (having to buy the keyboard separately)...the term "lapability" (or lack there of) ... the colors (pink? really?).I think its kind of fun to see the MS faithful strain themselves against a few well pointed concerns. Welcome to the premium device life...where you spend a lot of money for the little extras. Hopefully this will inspire some understanding for the Mac faithful...and vice versa.
PaulC543 - Wednesday, June 25, 2014 - link
"I think its kind of fun to see the MS faithful strain themselves against a few well pointed concerns"I'll totally agree that the prices of accessories is excessive. The keyboard covers should cost maybe $40/$60 each for touch/type, and even that would be pushing it. Most docks are in the $160-$200 range, so the Surface one isn't outrageous, but for that price, it should include a few extra ports.
But let's be honest, the cost of accessories is not what the Surface is primarily criticized for. It's criticized for being a utterly failed laptop, which it's not. It's criticized for being an utterly failed tablet, which it's not. It's criticized for being good at absolutely nothing, and by and large, all these criticisms come from people who've never actually touched one.
If Apple made the surface? You can't be serious. If Apple made the Surface, the tech-press would have fawned all over themselves to praise the hybrid form factor, defended the value of the device at any price, and declared the PC was clearly doomed in the face of Apple's demonstrated unending genius.
mkozakewich - Monday, June 30, 2014 - link
Actually, the tech press has shown themselves to be pretty obstinate in the face of dramatic technological upheaval. Look for some reviews of the original iPad, back when the idea of having 'a tablet' meant one of those really stupid inch-thick convertible HP notebooks with a trimmed-down version of Windows XP.Even the iPhone got lukewarm press, from what I remember. There were lots of complaints about the lack of 3G and the terrible reception from AT&T. There were also no applications for it.
In the end, if tech journalists are bashing something that doesn't fit into a specific category, I'd watch that very carefully and make my own decisions, because it's likely something new and wonderful.