AOC C4008VU8 UHD Monitor Review

Brightness & Contrast

To read about our monitor tests in depth, please check out Display Testing Explained: How We Test Monitors and TVs.  Brightness and Contrast testing is covered on page two.

Loading...

Uncalibrated – Maximum Backlight Level

The largest displays we normally review are 32” diagonal, but one other 40” panel has passed through our labs: the Philips BDM4065UC. We’ve also included the BDM3270. Both are VA-based monitors. Remaining displays include Acer’s XB321HK, and BenQ’s PV3200PT and PD3200U.

AOC claims 300cd/m2 for the C4008VU8, but our sample could only manage 266.3735. For most applications, it isn’t a big deal, but it does mean there’s less headroom for the uniformity compensation feature. You’ll see in the calibrated test below how that affects brightness and contrast. It should be noted that a panel this large will likely be run at a lower output level anyway. We found 200nits to be painfully bright in actual use.

As always, VA rules the black level test with numbers far below what’s possible from IPS technology. This results in fantastic contrast, 4788.4:1 in AOC’s case. It’s a third-place finish but almost five times greater than the next-best PV3200PT.

Uncalibrated – Minimum Backlight Level

We’d like to see a lower minimum backlight level than 74.8738cd/m2, but at least that means precise brightness control. Each click is less than 2cd/m2, making it easy to precisely tailor light output. The black level remains in third place, but contrast jumps up to second and remains consistent at 4702.6:1.

After Calibration to 200cd/m2

After calibration, we measured luminance with and without uniformity compensation. Our adjustments cost almost nothing in contrast, but uni-comp will reduce the white level almost 50%. Since there is little change in black level, sequential contrast drops by roughly the same amount. If the C4008VU8 had serious uniformity issues we might use it, but our sample posted top marks in our tests, which you’ll see on page five.

ANSI Contrast Ratio

ANSI contrast is a bit below the sequential value but not enough to be noticeable. Uni-comp reduces the number further, but the AOC is still well above the IPS panels here. The panel part used is of high quality with no bleed or glow issues that we could see or measure. This level of contrast is well beyond the norm and significantly elevates image quality. We only wish the C4008VU8 had HDR support. Perhaps AOC will add it in a firmware update.

MORE: Best Gaming Monitors

MORE: Best Professional Monitors

MORE: How We Test Monitors

MORE: How To Choose A Monitor

MORE: All Monitor Content

This thread is closed for comments
23 comments
    Your comment
  • RobertGru
    Why not just buy an LG 43" 4K TV for $400.
  • venelin.mihaylov
    PWM?
  • sargentchimera
    I have a 43in Sony Bravia X800D TV I bought for ~$650, I bought it specifically for its size and HDR capability. If this had been out 8 months ago I think I would of bought it instead. The review mentioned not all HDR TVs fully benefit from their HDR, I wonder if mine is in that boat... I do notice a difference with it on but perhaps the effect is not as strong as it could be. I wonder if the picture would be better on this monitor.
  • JonDol
    When I saw the title I hoped for a second that the first 4K monitor that is worth the money has arrived. Too bad it isn't it.
  • Zerstorer1
    40" Samsung KU6300 HDR 4K 4:4:4 60 fps gaming for 399. Been using it for year as my personal desktop screen.
  • Zerstorer1
    I've been using a Samsung KU6300 for year now. Got it for 399. Heal of deal. Supports 4:4:4 and HDR 60 fps at 4k gaming.
  • hannibal
    Why so? This monitor is very well worth of its money!
    It is big and picture quality is nice!
    Even 27" 4K monitors cost almost 600-1000$
    And if it is any better... it is even more expensive.

    Hopefully we will get HDR and freesync version below 1500$ sooner than later. That would be bargain!
  • Brian_R170
    I bought a Samsung UN40KU6290 40-inch 4K TV last November from Costco for $289 to use as a monitor for my gaming system. There are usually a lot of trade-offs when using a TV as a monitor, and I agree that using a purpose-built computer monitor should always be better. Still, if you can find a TV that meets your own minimum requirements, you can save a LOT of money.
  • Brian_R170
    Zerstorer1, +1 on the KU6300. Reviews said it's the same as my KU6290 but has a fancy remote. The only thing I miss that a purpose-built computer monitor would have is auto-sensing the inputs to automatically power-on from standby. The KU will automatically go to standby after it senses all inputs are lost for a few minutes, but it doesn't power-on automatically.
  • Max_x2
    I'm wondering in the warm whites are often a problem with AOC. I returned one couple years because of that, and, you know, it kinda left a bad aftertaste.
  • AnimeMania
    I was hoping you would have included a close-up photo of the connection ports on the back, they look interesting.
  • WINTERLORD
    a 800$ monitor without HDR yea right
  • ahnilated
    I was tempted until I saw "curved". I am so sick of the curved crap.
  • irtehyar
    Please let curved finish dying already. :(
  • photonboy
    RobertGru,
    Why not 4K HDTV? They literally answer that question in the first paragraph.

    I don't think you can select resolutions like 2560x1440 either so it can be problematic for gaming.
  • bksk1932
    Hi ..Buy a Sony Bravo TV like $3.5k in 2007 ...print this article and then eat it....
    or rewrite it....
  • 10tacle
    Decent price for such a large 4K 10-bit monitor, but no HDR support and no Freesync is a deal killer. I'd have been willing to pay $200 more for HDR10 and Freesync support. Like many, I have an Xbox One X on pre-order and am in the market for a 4K HDR monitor to take advantage of it. Looking to replace the 32" 1080p desktop HDTV used for my PS4. I do not game in my living room where my 4K HDR10 TV is.
  • hannibal
    4K tv is not a monitor, even you can use it like monitor. There is big difference in there...
  • rwinches
    If you buy a large expensive monitor like this you are going to use a VESA mount that gives wide range of adjustment and stability.
    If there is no 'perfect monitor' then there is no point in the mention.
    Like their excellent 144Hz 1080p 24" monitor at $200 that they followed up with a same spec Freesync monitor for $220-$250 street (both favorably reviewed by Toms) I believe AOC will offer an improved version of this 4K for a reasonable price.
    Wow, what a weak list of cons and no recommendation?
    No gaming impressions? Is it only good for productivity SW?
    No pic of a bunch of apps open on the screen or a full screen spreadsheet or split screen?
  • zodiacfml
    The introduction is quite misleading leading me to think that this goes beyond 60Hz. This is no different from Philips' 40inch and above 4K monitors.
  • 10tacle
    191196 said:
    The introduction is quite misleading leading me to think that this goes beyond 60Hz. This is no different from Philips' 40inch and above 4K monitors.


    If you are referring to this opening paragraph comment:

    Quote:
    It’s not too hard to find a 40” or larger Ultra HD TV at the local wholesale club for less than $1000. But going this route can have a few downsides. First off, you won’t find a consumer TV with DisplayPort. And more importantly, most sets won’t accept signals above 60Hz, even if they refresh at a higher rate.


    They are referring to the extremely limited availability of 4K HDTVs <$1K with >60Hz refresh rate capability, and this one is no exception. That's the way I read it initially, but I now see where it can be interpreted that this set does run higher than 60Hz and is an ambiguous statement.
  • Zerstorer1
    Well that is debatable to a degree. My Samsung KU6300 has an option to specify that a PC card is hook up to it. Once it has done that, the 4:4:4 text mode kicks in for super crisp text and also enables full HDR for vivid deep color as well as 60 FPS / refresh at 3840x2160. My 1080 TI runs all my games at 4K at 60 FPS. Now obviously its capped at 60 FPS, but for $400 at a 40" screen with HDR. Plus I get to use 4K Netflix, 4K Hulu, 4k Amazon with multiple additional inputs. Kinda sinks the battle ship of these $1000+ dollar 28"-32" monitors they are hustling in my opinion. Now get this I have been reading that Samsung is bringing free-sync to their TV line up at the end of the year, although that's only good for AMD cards. So might switch to Vega next year and get another $400-500 Samsung that will have access to 144 refresh, plus all the previous mentioned goodies. Just my 2 cents.
  • photonboy
    2536519 said:
    Hi ..Buy a Sony Bravo TV like $3.5k in 2007 ...print this article and then eat it.... or rewrite it....


    I bought a Sony Bravia 32", 768p HDTV probably about 2007 and it's still going strong. Paid $3,500 (CDN) for the 768p as it was 5K for the 1080p version. Still pretty good picture.

    In fact, it has way better speakers than any HDTV today from what I can see (probably not much proportionate cost to use good speakers when the TV was so expensive).