There's only one thing where TN panels currently have an advantage. They exist in 120Hz versions. I'd never even consider buying something TN-based for that one feature, however. As for getting a monitor, if you can't afford a U2410 and want 16:10, then other options have already been presented earlier in the thread. Most notably the HP ZR24W and the Dell 2209WA. To be brutally honest, I actually believe the U2410 is a bit overrated.
Please don't misquote or misunderstand my first post - I didn't say that TN compares well to IPS (IPS is a superior quality panel); I was talking more from the perspective of your budget, since you said you had financial constraints. I have used many TN monitors, all very good screens, and even now that I use IPS I would never dismiss TN as "crap". The main gripe is viewing angle, but you get used to it. I've had the following, all good screens: BenQ FP91G+ 19" TN 1280x1024 TN Hyundai N22WA 22" 1680x1050 TN (sold it to a mate, still going strong after 4 years of use) Hanns-G HG281D 28" TN LG W2453SQ-PF 24" TN (I liked it so much I even made a video of it here ) And when I say IPS displays are primarily for professional work, I mean it - how many professionals use TN panels? None (certainly none should). Just because a consumer has an IPS monitor doesn't mean that's what it's meant for. Digital SLR cameras are also "just another" technology, and the best cameras like Nikon D3 and Canon 1Ds series (which I have) are also designed specifically for professionals. Some rich consumers have more expensive camera gear than professionals like myself...does that mean that the best gear is meant for consumers too? No, lol. It means that many consumers have more money than sense and buy things that are WAY too advanced for their needs. Honestly, if I see a kid playing games on two or three IPS monitors I just laugh. There is a niche in the market for pesudo-professional equipment which has been compromised somewhere along the line to cut production costs so the goods can be sold cheaper, hence the half-baked/watered down hardware which I mentioned in my first post in this thread. Don't overlook TN just because somebody says "TN doesn't come close to CRT" (what a delightfully ridiculous comparison to make) or because TN monitors are "just crap" (which is a baseless and prejudiced gibe). If you get a TN monitor from a reputable manufacturer, you will be fine - BenQ, Samsung, LG, Dell - they all make good displays, and many of them use the same TN panels anyway.
Well the issue with your statement is that TN panels in general are worse, in fact there is a visible difference between a TN panel and an IPS or an MVA panel. And by the way, IPS or S-PVA =/= professional or psudeo-professional, these are perfectly good consumer IPS paneled monitors and with that in mind, we can't discount them because one assumes that they're a niche. I will admit that TN panels should serve a decent stopgap and serve as a decent use as a monitor for the masses. If that jumbled mess made any sense I'd be surprised. But my point in short was this: You can't discount IPS panels on the basis that they're supposedly professional and you can't be content with just TN panels if there are better panels out there. Plus most HDTVs use S-PVA panels.
I appreciate your response; please let me clarify: I know TN panels are worse than IPS, which is why I said in the first few words of my post that IPS are superior quality panels. How on earth you got "TN is not worse than IPS" from my post is beyond me LOL. And I'm not discounting IPS because they are not for consumers; I said very clearly that the stanpoint I took was principally with regard to dave99's budget, which is too low for the Dell he wants. I would say that "most" IPS displays are not intended for consumers, nor are they marketed in that way. Whilst I agree that whoever wants IPS it can have it, I certainly wouldn't expect to find an NEC 24" Spectraview in the average consumer's home. Heck I'm a professional user, and even I don't have a Spectraview lol. IPS displays are marketed for professionals because the advantages they have over TN panels are of virtually no consequence to "non-professional-use" consumers. Where a consumer might consider the better image quality a reason to buy an IPS monitor, the reason for the better image quality is that the screen can actually be calibrated. That's not in the consumer vocabulary, nor should it be. Incidentally, we should add to the list of IPS incarnations (S-IPS, AS-IPS, E-IPS, H-IPS) the newest one: P-IPS, which stands for Professional IPS, courtesy of NEC and their PA series displays. @dave99, my vote goes to the 24" - pixel pitch is very good and the monitor sure keeps a lot of people happy!
I have the u2311h, has purple hue at wide angled viewing but dead on and at anything but the widest angle its perfect colour. I'd recommend this monitor or one of its bigger brothers. As to ghosting in games, always a concern on IPS's, with RTC impulse I personally can't see any ghosting, but then again you might see some if you had a TN set up right beside it and compared.....but then again with them side by side the colours and picture quality of the IPS would sell itself! 2209wa is ok but not full HD, why pay almost as much for it when you can have HD for a little more, plus the U2311H is thinner. If thats to much maybe check out the Viewsonic VP2365wb, same panel, can get for around £200 on Scan. There is a new Asus monitor out with an IPS panel for around £185, but I cant remember its name.... sry
I am thinking that too. The 2209WA is 1680x1050, my current screen is 1440x900 19" so not a great leap.
Even the jump to 1680x1050 is a nice one (I remember when I first made it), but 1920x1200 is enormous. Then you can start saving for a 30" screen which has 2560x1600
I think I need enormous. Like so much else in life that extra couple of inches makes all the difference. I would go for the 2209WA if it were the better screen though, despite the smaller size.
Just found another review that says that the ZR24W is not good enough for gaming as the ghosting is too much for FPS games. I hate buying monitors.
Ignore it as ********. There are lots of happy gaming-focused ZR24w owners on these very forums. I'm one of them and I can tell you, the ZR24w is fantastic for gaming and just about everything else I've been using it for thus far. I've not witnessed any ghosting at all on mine and I've been quite sensitive to ghosting on other monitors in the past.
Errr... All those screens do not have a hardware LUT at all. [edit] Before Goodbytes pedantically corrects me here... they have no PROGRAMMABLE LUT. In other words, all the above screens can only be calibrated at the graphics card level.
Yes it does, else they can't do (or emulate for the U2410) 10-bit colors. It would be like the HP LP2475W which his only 8-bit color support If you don't have the look up table, it can't get the colors, no mater what. The GPU isn't going to render stuff that it doesn't need to do. Every site that present the Dell U2410, mentions that is has a 12-bit LUT , which Dell also says on their website. Plus: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/news_archive/18.htm#dell_u2410
Which is exactly why I edited my post. Please re-read it. PROGRAMMABLE LUT When you calibrate a Dell monitor, you are doing so at the graphics card level, not at the LUT level. You can NOT hardware calibrate a Dell monitor. ALL monitors have an internal LUT processor, but if you can't program it, you can't hardware calibrate it. Instead, you load the monitor profile into the graphics card's LUT, which then adjusts the colours over a 8 bit pallete... causing gradient problems. I repeat, you can not hardware calibrate a Dell screen as it has no programmable LUT.
