Displays Around £150 mid-range budget for a gaming monitor....

Yeah if it's IPS it'll say it somewhere. It's something that stands them out from the otherwise bloated TN crowd.

I worded something slightly wrong, you would see a difference between the Dell U2311H and the LG IPS231P, in whites mostly. But it wouldn't be a difference worth an extra £70, nowhere near.

Oooo ta for the rep

Edit: Jesus ninjad twice lol As sb1991 said some Benqs do use MVA panels but I wouldn't recommend them in a gaming environment, unless you really love true to life shadows more than anything else that is.

 

Yeh thats cool.

Didn't know that LG were a main supplier of panels....I only knew about Samsung. Dell do make good monitors though from the panels and do make the good use of them...though Samsung was doing an awesome job a few years back with the SB22W and etc models (the one I have at present for my brother). I thought LED provided brighter backlight then the CCFL version...damn I need to re-read the info on LEC vs CCFL then cos I must have misread something.....

Aren't MVA faster response than IPS? (Relatively not there will be much discernible if any difference)

This brings me onto my next question...if I was to spend a little extra on a monitor for my own for my new gaming rig I'm soon to build...and I had the liberty of spending a little extra cash for more quality and perhaps a bigger screen what would you guys then recommend? Having said the Dell U2412 is around £300 on scan....I have a feeling buying two smaller (hence cheaper) models of the similar quality as the Dell would be far more beneficial....?

 

Then get two of these: http://www.scan.co.uk/products/23-lg-ips231p-ips-led-monitor-full-hd-dvi-vga-1920x1080-8ms-250cd-m-50000001

 

For gaming you either want one monitor or three. Two isn't a good thing when gaming as the bezel sits right in the centre of your vision. Either get three LG IPS231Ps, or 1 of them, or possibly the U2412M if you really want the added vertical resolution.

MVA panels are now slower response wise than IPS panels.

And CCFL backlights give a brighter white, a more pure white if you will. And generally is brighter. However LED can give a more uniform backlight (I think) and though they don't have the pure whites or the sun like brightness, put in a damn good show. And I know a lot of people who turn the brightness way down on CCFL lit screens so brightness is a moot point a little bit as it can be too bright.

 

He may not be gaming on both though, I will have a second monitor soon but I only plan to game on one...

 

Dude, vexatious post!

 

There is also the Dell U2312H.

It's like the U2311H, but not as good, should be similar the the LG IPS236V.
The difference between the U2311H and the U2312H, is that the back light is white LED instead of a high grade CFL lamp. The look is different, and the stand of lower quality but still good.

What I particularly like about the U2412H is the inputs, it feature DVI, VGA and Display Port. Having Display Port allows you to already have a monitor that support this new input technology, which is replacing DVI. You can find it on more and more laptops over HDMI (as there is no royalty fees), and better than HDMI and DVI. And on supported graphic cards, can support daisy chaining up to 4 monitors at 1920x1200, all from 1 port from graphic card, and can carry Video, Audio and something else.. like Thunderbolt in the case of Apple, or you can pass USB or wtv you want really.

Display Port is backward compatible down to HDMI, DVI and VGA.

Don't plug your computer on VGA.. 1920x1080 on VGA is REAALLLY pushing VGA (text less sharp, possible interference visible on the screen, based on where you are).

Check prices, and see if it's worth it. If you can go with 16:10, I would suggest to get the U2412H.
The vertical space increase is very welcome, especially if you do more than just web surf and gaming.

If your are not on0 a tight budget: of course, the best for your money (despite the high price tag), and is reeeeaaally going to make you droll, is to get the U2410. Especially if you plan to connect stuff to your money.. the U2410 is unbeatable.. you have all the inputs, and even side-by-side picture-in-picture and 1:1 pixel mapping so that nothing stretches stupidly. It is also a faster panel, and the least ghosting than any other lower end models.

 

I was feeling quite intelligent until GoodBytes showed up lol

And shirty, please keeping vexatious, non streetwise, data protection act breaking comments to the relevant thread

 

HAHA! Sorry.

 

I recently bought a Benq EW2420 the input lag isn't really noticeable but the thing which really gets me is that in comparison to my old 22" noname thinger I find after 10 or so hours working I notice my eyes aren't as tired with the LED back light.

The reasoning is that the LED's emit a flatter light which covers all of the spectrum instead of the UV and IR spikes of CCFL which is more like daylight, not to mention the efficiency boner. I will be getting another one next month and put a crossbow bolt through the cheapo noname and then recycle it. The crossbow bolt is mearly to decommission it.

 

Yes I know, but you try Street Fighter/Mortal Kombat/Need for Speed/FIFA on a PC, either it doesn't work/exist or it's a crappy experience!

 

Yeah, but seriously dude, your monitor knowledge is quite awesome. We approve.

 

Actually the CFL lamp provides a stable light (unless something is busted, circuit wise), while LED's flickers. The reason why CFL lamp don't flicker despite going at 60Hz like LED lamps, is that they have a phosphor in it, which keep the light. That is why CFL lamps are preferred and used in class rooms.

The only reason why you see it as "smoother/easier to the eye", is because:
1- The monitor that you got is using a new MVA panel which provides sharper text and image.

2- Because your previous monitor was probably a TN panel, you had, and not a great one, you had sever back light bleeding. back light bleeding on TN panels affects colors, so everywhere there was a CFL lamp, it made the color and image brighter than the rest, affecting colors (mixed with a poor light defuse, it really does not help). I am noticing that many people that buy CFL low TN panel, you can see really on a black screen, that all 4 edges are bright and the center is dark. Probably because the sides of the monitor is where there CFL lamps are. This results in causing eye strain and even headaches for some.

3- "White LED's" aren't white... it's blu'ish white. Our eyes find it more confortable with blue light in dark or low light environment, rather than a string yellow/orange white. Put a red background, and see how you feel after an hour. Ideally you want a perfect white which doesn't hurt your eyes and see everything correct, like day light, which our eyes have no problem with (else you don't go out much, lol). In any case, monitors has the option to adjust the colors. High grade CFL provides a nice white, which doesn't cause eye strains. Sadly most monitors (TN) as they are made for the low end budget market, uses the cheapest CFL lamp possible, or close to it.

4- The only difference in term of color between white LED's and CFL lamp, is that CFL lamp are able to provide a wide gamut of color range, while white LED's follows the "normal" gamut.
For a professional, it really maters and is really important choice, and require proper software configuration (color profile). For you and me, it's slight increase in color vividness (not to be confused with saturation).

 

Thanks Goodbytes, nice information. +Rep

I guess that means that generally speaking CFL lamps are 'better' than LED monitors. Then why are quite a few monitor manufacturers switching to LED or even exclusively LED? (Like viewsonic)

IS it the reduced power consumption?

Or is it so they can develop LED technology from the current WLED to RGB LED? (Which I do believe is better than the current CFL lamp)

 

A lot of it seems to be a marketing gimick - TV manufacturers in particular have become very good at convincing people that an 'LED TV' is a quantum leap in image quality (or something), when in reality the only advantages are lower power consumption and thinner screens. They're playing the same trick they did with 'HD' business, selling a downgrade (1366x768 or 1920x1080 vs 1280x1024 or 1920x1200) as a great step forwards in technology, again mainly because 16:9 works for TVs and panel manufacturers don't want a different aspect ratio for PC monitors.

Power consumption is a factor, but even the most power-hungry monitor doesn't use that much power. Most use less than a couple of proper incandescent light bulbs (BUT THE *******S KILLED THOSE TOO).

If there's any benefit to the average user, it's that the huge number of very similar 'Full HD LED' monitors being churned out means that prices have fallen quite a bit - it's probably cheaper to make and ship an LED backlit monitor than one with a high-grade CCFL backlight, so in the end there are benefits (to the consumers who can find the good monitors in a sea of terrible ones).

I rather doubt that RGBLED backlights are coming to consumer monitors any time soon - while they are very good, they're also relatively expensive, power hungry and bulky; and the ultra wide colour gamut isn't really an advantage for normal content.

 

I completely agree sb1991, very well said. +rep

I am essentially repeating sb1991 said bellow, as he nija'ed me

Because white LED's a lot cheaper. Good ones (the very white one, but still not there, today), are expensive. Apple iMacs uses them.. which is a must in their case, as the LCD panel is in the computer, and with the CFL lap, it would make too much heat. But most computer monitors, ESPECIALLY TN panels, uses the low end white LED's, which the last thing they are, is white.

Also, some manufacture can make their "super thin" LCD's panel with it. I say "super thin" in quotes, because it really either has a large stand to house the rest of the monitor, or a big power adapter set externally, and with a DVI or VGA cable connected to it, it pokes out like no tomorrow, as they have no choice to put the display connector horizontally and not vertically to consume less space. So at the end, it consumes just as much space.
People buy them. That is why they make them.

Also, white LED's are better than low end CFL lamps... and when you sale a monitor aimed at the budget market, it's a big plus. Costs less, and provides better color, and better white... but not as good as a high grade CFL lamp.

Computer monitors where never dirt cheap, it's the TN panel that made this illusion, and mixed with the average consumer looking for the lowest price POINT. (And not after sale service quality, warranty, build quality, features), It created, this ultra budget market, which is what big chain store have the most of. Remember the days where you buy a TV or a computer and you had 3 year warranty to start with.. well costs money... so now we have 90day to 1 year, and as people seek for lower and lower prices, descent monitors like the Dell U2410 seams more and more expensive compared to the rest (not considering that it's already ridiculously low prices.. I mean a few years back a 17inch 1280x1024 85Hz monitor was 450-500$, and only had VGA input and nothing fancy) and I won't be surprised if they are produce with only 6 month warranty with them.

The way I see things, for the average consumer, they took a HUGE step back with LCD technology. We used to have (and even the low end models), nice displays with beautiful rich colors, true 8-bit monitors. Now, for TN panel owner: washed out colors, set to over saturated settings to compensate, glossy film to also try and compensate, on a 6-bit panels, with no color processor.

They are other factors, like demand by consumers, who don't know any better, plus the manufacture that wants to merge TV LCD panels with computer monitor panels, so that they can use the same machines to reduce costs, and make cheaper monitors.

Of course, marketing will say that white LED's are energy efficient, even though that the end of the year, will only translate in a 1-2$ saved on your energy bill compared to CFL lamp, to make an added sale point.
Oups I am sorry, marketing will say "LED monitor" (there you go), as it sounds more futuristic, and "technology of tomorrow" type of thing, even though it's really LCD monitor with white LED back light.

Yes RGB LED is better than high grade CFL.. it even allows you to adjust the red, green and blue set of the RGB LED set, to really calibrate the monitor in providing the best white (which also will link in providing better colors). But sadly, this technology is very expensive today.