Profile validation with ISO 12646 from ColorNavigator got CIE2000 deltas 0.29 (mean value) / 0.80 (max) / 0.09 (white). This is better as the values from the Spyder. The exact numbers are gone with the old Windows installation.
Those reports are not all that useful! If you're getting a good screen to print match, that's key.
The reports are more a feel good experience. Such tests are
usually designed by the calibration/profile software to make themselves look good. First off, how many colors and where in color space are the patches? Dark, saturated colors are difficult to hit so we rarely see them used. Next, you're using the same software and instrument to conduct the test which isn't ideal. It's far better to use a known, better reference instrument to do the measurements because if the instrument you use for the profile is the same used to test the accuracy, how do you know the report is Kosher? If there are errors in the instrument, it's not going to tell you.
Analogy: You need to measure a foundation for a garage and it needs to be exactly 21 feet, 5 inches. You believe your foot is 12 inches so you use it to figure out the distance for the foundation. It doesn't matter how many times you remeasure, you get the same results. You feel good about this. Then a contractor shows up with a ruler and we find out your foot isn't 12 inches, it's 11.3 inches in length. Having a known reference (the ruler) who's accuracy is sound tells us the first set of measurements is off. Now how accurate the reference measurement device is plays a role of course. Does the foundation have to be correct within 1 inch, 1/10 of an inch? 1/1000 of an inch? If someone measures your foot with a super-duper laser that cost $25K who's accuracy is within 1/10000 of an inch and we find the ruler is inaccurate by 1/100 of an inch, is that important? Probably not. But the ruler that was off 1/100 of an inch is far more accurate than your foot. And using your foot over and over again provides the same, inaccurate report. So how useful is that?
Then we are measuring one area in the center of the display. What about each corner? Again, the dE reports provided by the software is probably useful when you see a really large dE (well over say 6). That could indicate something went sour when you were calibrating/profiling. The screen saver came on, the software barfed, the instrument fell off the screen of some large amount of ambient light was measured. If the dE report is that high, you'd probably notice it anyway. So take the report with a grain of salt.
Now what IS useful is trending! That's where the same product reports the results over the course of a year. It tells you how often the display has changed if you calibrated every two weeks and by how much. It could be useful in deciding that instead of having to recalibrate every two weeks, you can get by once a month, or maybe you need to do this every few days. The inaccuracy of the device compared to a reference isn't a factor as long as the consistency in it's measurements is good.