Achromatic, mean-modulated flicker (wherein luminance increments and decrements of equal magnitude are applied, over time, to a test field) is commonly used in both clinical assessment of vision and experimental studies of visual systems. However, presenting flicker on computer-controlled displays is problematic; displays typically introduce luminance artifacts at high flicker frequency or contrast, potentially interfering with the validity of findings. Here, we present a battery of tests used to weigh the relative merits of two displays for presenting achromatic, mean-modulated flicker. These tests revealed marked differences between a new high-performance liquid-crystal display (LCD; EIZO ColorEdge CG247X) and a new consumer-grade LCD (Dell U2415b), despite displays' vendor-supplied specifications being almost identical. We measured displayed luminance using a spot meter and a linearized photodiode. We derived several measures, including spatial uniformity, the effect of viewing angle, response times, Fourier amplitude spectra, and cycle-averaged luminance. We presented paired luminance pulses to quantify the displays' nonlinear dynamics. The CG247X showed relatively good spatial uniformity (e.g., at moderate luminance, standard deviation 2.8% versus U2415b's 5.3%). Fourier transformation of nominally static test patches revealed spectra free of artifacts, with the exception of a frame response. The CG247X's rise and fall times depended on both the luminance from which, and to which, it responded, as is to be generally expected from LCDs. Despite this nonlinear behaviour, we were able to define a contrast and frequency range wherein the CG247X appeared largely artifact-free; the relationship between nominal luminance and displayed luminance was accurately modelled using a causal, linear time-invariant system. This range included contrasts up to 80%, and flicker frequencies up to 30 Hz.