Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account



Photo

Choose a Monitor

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1
pointertovoid

pointertovoid

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 466 posts
  • Joined 16-January 09
Hello nice people!

Considering to buy a desktop flat monitor... They all look the same, and I won't choose the monitor in a shop. So, what are the criteria to prefer one model over an other?

a - Does the response time make any difference among recent monitors? I play Ski Challenge and some car driving video games.
b - Are LED better than older fluorescent lamps for backlighting the LCD?
c - Have plasma screens emerged for PC monitors? I see only LCD.
d - Has the 4:3 format disappeared? I want height to display Web pages and A4 documents, and a 24" 16/9 won't improve over a 19" 4/3 on that. I never watch a film on a PC, but I do play video games that need some width or don't pivot at all, so a pivot screen would let me turn it many times a day.
e - to z - plus uppercase plus figures plus Unicode - your own suggestions...

Thank you!


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#2
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,520 posts
  • Joined 27-November 10
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
Of course there are still 4:3 (5:4) LCD monitors available but they are generally directed towards more professional users (see Eizo for example). And they are much more expensive than the commonly used cheap stuff but worth it.

I'm not a specialist on monitors but generally if you're concerned about quality you should go for VA or IPS instead of TN (simple comparison here). On the other hand if gaming is your priority you may consider buying a 120 hz TN panel which will be faster than any VA/IPS one.

I use a Diamondtron CRT and there still won't be many LCD panels which are comparable in terms of quality / colour display, except the expensive ones designed for graphic designers. It's the same as everywhere - good quality is expensive ;) Still you should check some reviews because there are some interesting monitors even among the cheaper one although the majority of the cheap stuff won't be better in terms of display quality than a used 50$ CRT.

Edited by tomasz86, 08 October 2011 - 06:23 PM.

Posted Image
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#3
puntoMX

puntoMX

    n00b of Masters and Vice Versa

  • Super Moderator
  • 4,852 posts
  • Joined 28-June 04
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
I thought I'll throw in my 2 cents:

a- response time doesn't matter that much, to be honest, this ghosting an lagging people are talking about are a thing of the past, unless you real picky and like to measure it and compare screen by screen differences.

b- LED are no better than CCFL when talking about quality, but, LED uses less fuel, say a CCFL 24" screen would normally use 50W and a LED with the same size about 30W.

c- Plasma loses it "darkness", s black will get dark-grey over time and they still have a hard time to tackle that, so, LCD is still the way to until some technology like OLED is widely available.

d- I would buy an after-market stand and a IPS screen, pricey but worth it, and pivot that screen (and video card setting).

e-z Ask yourself how good the colors should be, think about Color Gamut, viewing angles, real bit-debt of a screen; I for example would go for good viewing angles so IPS is more a less a must, they have a good Gamut range and are in general 8bit. I have at the moment a Samsung TN screen that does 6bits but with a special technique to emulate higher color debt; to tell you the truth I never thought that 6bit would look that good. And CRT... well... sorry but there is just simply no compare to a LCD screen when you do design, CAD stuff and other fine pixel needed work.

But that is just me :lol: ...

#4
allen2

allen2

    Not really Newbie

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,814 posts
  • Joined 13-January 06

b- LED are no better than CCFL when talking about quality, but, LED uses less fuel, say a CCFL 24" screen would normally use 50W and a LED with the same size about 30W.

I disagree there: LED technology have a better contrast and better black rendering. But most people (like me) won't see the difference (at least about the contrast but bad black rendering are a little anonying when watching a movie). So if you are buying a high end lcd or entry level led, you might find the lcd a lot better and that will be true. Also lcd screen may need a lot more than 50W in normal operation: i have a Samsung 244T and it need a little less than the announced 100W but a bare minimum of 75W especially when surfing or reading.

#5
puntoMX

puntoMX

    n00b of Masters and Vice Versa

  • Super Moderator
  • 4,852 posts
  • Joined 28-June 04
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

I disagree there: LED technology have a better contrast and better black rendering. But most people (like me) won't see the difference (at least about the contrast but bad black rendering are a little anonying when watching a movie).

I can tell you that Dimming (dynamic) screens are way more annoying than just a constant backlight, even the edge-lid ones that have local dimming are annoying. ;)

I have the 2443bwx (I got the one with pivot) and it uses 50W max., so they say, must be a later model than yours. When this one dies I will go IPS, Dell or so :), with LED just to lower the fuel cost and by then there won't be much CCFL left :lol: .

EDIT: Is yours an VA or ISP? Those use more fuel as well indeed, nice.

#6
pointertovoid

pointertovoid

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 466 posts
  • Joined 16-January 09
Thanks, you all!

I've taken good notice of your advices, and also read website and users' opinion meanwhile.
One site gives very detailed, first-hand information, on a limited number of screens:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/
it gives independently measured colour linearity, response delay, response time...

Over time, delusions of grandeur have gripped my simple need: I consider now a 24 inch AND 16:10 AND pivotable AND with Led...
Dell's U2412M seems to fulfil this. Its IPS screen looks responsive, according to
http://www.tftcentra...dell_u2412m.htm
while other sites still claim IPS is inadequate for gaming and only TN fits...

Comments please?

#7
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,520 posts
  • Joined 27-November 10
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
IPS will be fine unless you're a hardcore gamer... if you are then 120hz TN will be better.
Posted Image
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#8
allen2

allen2

    Not really Newbie

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,814 posts
  • Joined 13-January 06
@puntoMX: mine is a VA.
@pointertovoid : Even you won't choose it in a shop, you should at least try it somewhere as sometimes good specs doesn't offer the qualities you need.
Also i would take the on site warranty if available and if you plan to buy it online and BTW some monitor makers offer this for free.

#9
puntoMX

puntoMX

    n00b of Masters and Vice Versa

  • Super Moderator
  • 4,852 posts
  • Joined 28-June 04
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Thanks, you all!

I've taken good notice of your advices, and also read website and users' opinion meanwhile.
One site gives very detailed, first-hand information, on a limited number of screens:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/
it gives independently measured colour linearity, response delay, response time...

Over time, delusions of grandeur have gripped my simple need: I consider now a 24 inch AND 16:10 AND pivotable AND with Led...
Dell's U2412M seems to fulfil this. Its IPS screen looks responsive, according to
http://www.tftcentra...dell_u2412m.htm
while other sites still claim IPS is inadequate for gaming and only TN fits...

Comments please?

You have already found the best website of LCD screens; TFTcentral.

The DELL screen that you picked ain't cheap but in my eyes worth every penny and is one of the best out there, although depending on needs and how much you like to spend, a 21.5" version could be interesting too. I have now a 24" but would also be happy with a 21.5".

#10
vipejc

vipejc

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 301 posts
  • Joined 03-February 11
  • OS:XP Home
  • Country: Country Flag

Hello nice people!

Considering to buy a desktop flat monitor... They all look the same, and I won't choose the monitor in a shop. So, what are the criteria to prefer one model over an other?

a - Does the response time make any difference among recent monitors? I play Ski Challenge and some car driving video games. Yes, you, a gamer, want a response time of 5 ms or lower.
b - Are LED better than older fluorescent lamps for backlighting the LCD? LEDs last longer.
c - Have plasma screens emerged for PC monitors? I see only LCD. No, and plasmas are prone to screen ghosting.
d - Has the 4:3 format disappeared? No, but standard-screen LCD aspect ratio is 5:4. I want height to display Web pages and A4 documents, and a 24" 16/9 won't improve over a 19" 4/3 on that. I never watch a film on a PC, but I do play video games that need some width or don't pivot at all, so a pivot screen would let me turn it many times a day.
e - to z - plus uppercase plus figures plus Unicode - your own suggestions...

Thank you!


Edited by vipejc, 15 October 2011 - 10:09 PM.

There's no such thing as a dumb computer question. Each of us interprets info differently. - Me

#11
puntoMX

puntoMX

    n00b of Masters and Vice Versa

  • Super Moderator
  • 4,852 posts
  • Joined 28-June 04
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

No, but standard-screen LCD aspect ratio is 5:4

Only if it is 1280*1024 for example ;).

#12
vipejc

vipejc

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 301 posts
  • Joined 03-February 11
  • OS:XP Home
  • Country: Country Flag

No, but standard-screen LCD aspect ratio is 5:4

Only if it is 1280*1024 for example ;).


No, I just went monitor shopping and all the LCDs have an aspect ratio of 5:4 or 16:9. I wanted 4:3, but there wasn't one. Anyway, I took home a 17" HP 1751g. Other than the bulky base, it's a nice monitor. It has a DVI port, so there's some upgradability back there. :)
There's no such thing as a dumb computer question. Each of us interprets info differently. - Me

#13
puntoMX

puntoMX

    n00b of Masters and Vice Versa

  • Super Moderator
  • 4,852 posts
  • Joined 28-June 04
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Yours 17" is 1280*1024. ;): , and there are not many left these days compared to the 16:09 screens.

#14
vipejc

vipejc

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 301 posts
  • Joined 03-February 11
  • OS:XP Home
  • Country: Country Flag

Yours 17" is 1280*1024. ;): , and there are not many left these days compared to the 16:09 screens.


Yes, it is. There's enough out there, but I just really hate the widescreen.
There's no such thing as a dumb computer question. Each of us interprets info differently. - Me

#15
pointertovoid

pointertovoid

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 466 posts
  • Joined 16-January 09
Received my Dell U2412M four days ago. It cost me 299 euros with shipping, fool me - but I use a screen so often and long.

Size is 24" 16:10 pivotable. I confirm a 5:4 format would be better, but I couldn't find one tall enough. 16:10 and 24" do improve the height, which drove the choice.
The pivoted mode is fantastic, especially for the Internet, but 24" are no better than 22" in portrait.

All details are sharp without adjusting any cable compensation. I attribute it to the DVI transmission. My eyes don't hurt as with my previous screen - but was this an effect of over-compensation, or of fluorescent back-lighting?
The U2412M can be very bright. Adjusting the brightness takes far too long, as usual - manufacturers please improve! I don't need 100 steps for brightness, and I adjust it 1000 times more often than insider tweaks!
Brightness isn't uniform. Nothing damning, but visible, and a disappointment. Could the LED be sorted and paired maybe?

IPS may bring nicer colours. I'm no photographer and didn't investigate it. A few games look prettier.
At 0.8m distance, being 0.5m offset from one location of the screen's area keeps acceptable colours there.
TN didn't achieve it, that's why I took IPS for a big screen, whose edges are offset from a central viewer.

I noticed no slow response in driving video games.
But in portrait (=pivoted) mode, when scrolling fast, horizontal features like text get slightly inclined. This effect can be explained, even with figures, by the 60Hz refresh rate made from right to left in portrait mode. I'll check if my more recent video card offers a faster refresh.

I tell you more when I use the screen on a decent computer.

#16
puntoMX

puntoMX

    n00b of Masters and Vice Versa

  • Super Moderator
  • 4,852 posts
  • Joined 28-June 04
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

My eyes don't hurt as with my previous screen - but was this an effect of over-compensation, or of fluorescent back-lighting?

Most people don't know they need glasses, or need new glasses; I would go to the local optician to check them. Eyes should in no way hurt with an LCD screen, CCFL or not.

#17
Tripredacus

Tripredacus

    K-Mart-ian Legend

  • Super Moderator
  • 9,923 posts
  • Joined 28-April 06
  • OS:Server 2012
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator


My eyes don't hurt as with my previous screen - but was this an effect of over-compensation, or of fluorescent back-lighting?

Most people don't know they need glasses, or need new glasses; I would go to the local optician to check them. Eyes should in no way hurt with an LCD screen, CCFL or not.


While this is certainly true for me, I've found that you can play with the brightness and contrast to a level that works better for you too.
MSFN RULES | GimageX HTA for PE 3-5 | lol probloms
msfn2_zpsc37c7153.jpg

#18
puntoMX

puntoMX

    n00b of Masters and Vice Versa

  • Super Moderator
  • 4,852 posts
  • Joined 28-June 04
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Or don't sit behind the screen in a too dark room. Bad or odd lighting can cause tired eyes too, but hurting as in pain under the front lobe is real bad...

#19
pointertovoid

pointertovoid

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 466 posts
  • Joined 16-January 09
Well, I know I'd need glasses, and everything about background lighting is true as well...
Having taken this into account, it stays that my new screen hurts less than the previous one.

One drawback: the power cordon sometimes disconnects from the screen when I pivot it.
I'll put something like a Ty-rap to hold it, but actually it was the manufacturer's task.

I really enjoy the huge height in portrait mode. Nice purchase.

#20
pointertovoid

pointertovoid

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 466 posts
  • Joined 16-January 09

In portrait (=pivoted) mode, when scrolling fast, horizontal features like text get slightly inclined. I'll check if my more recent video card offers a faster refresh.

Used the screen with a decent video card meanwhile, and this effect disappears. Not a flaw from the screen, hence.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users