Discussion in 'Hardware' started by AllNight, 12 Jul 2010.
A few IPS panels I can afford.
U2410 (if its really really really worth it)
If all are within your price range, the ZR24 would be my choice. I still can't help thinking you're paying for something you don't really need, but at least you'll be future proof should your needs change.
On paper the U2311 looks great... IPS, less lag than the U2410, but unfortunately, panel illumination appears to be quite poor, with as much as 20% difference from edge to centre according to TFT central. That's utterly unacceptable in any monitor.
The U2410 has pretty poor colour accuracy out of the box. It's a killer screen once profiled, but the preset profiles are way out, with max delta-e around 8 or so. That's considered extremely poor.
These things are relative however. Unless you have another screen to compare it to, you will probably never be aware of this. Only if you are doing colour critical work would this be an issue.
For casual use, both HP and Dell are excellent, but as discussed earlier, the HP beats the dell in terms of input lag, so that would swing my vote if gaming is the primary use.
If you really must get a IPS screen, the HP would get my vote. The 2311 is woefully bad. The 2410 is a great screen, but the input lag is a little higher. Given that both the dell and hp use the same panel, and perform equally as well in most areas, the HP beats it in terms of gaming performance.
I still insist the SP2309W is a massive bargain for a budget gaming monitor, and more than adequate for your needs.. but if you wanna splash some cash... HP ZR24 gets my vote.
If you want the best of all worlds, consider the NEC EA231WMi. It's IPS, great out of the box colour accuracy, 8ms input lag, and a great price tag. The down side? Not the fastest panel at 13ms... so some slight ghosting on movement will be evident.
Do you have any other recommendations for a TN panel besides that Dell?
Thanks ALOT for giving those awesome informative posts. I really appreciate it.
And I also thought the cheaper IPS alternatives like the HP and the U23 were better for me. But the U2311 falls off now. Ill certainly put the HP on my shortlist. It would put me back 390 euro's. Another pro for me is the 16:10 resolution but that ofcourse doesn't justify the higher price.
Ok well Pookeyhead massively took over this conversation with many errors in his comments.
I don't even know where to start.
TN panel CANNOT be color accurate.. IMPOSSIBLE... That is like saying that Monochrome display are color accurate (yes, white is true white and black is true bacl.. congrads..., but that is not what is being implied here). They are 6-bit panel. 8-bit TN panels DOES NOT EXISTS. The technology doesn't allow this. Standard set today on the term 'color accurate' is a monitor that can AT LEAST output 8-bit colors who follows as close as possible to a color pallet of sort set by a standard (sRAG or Adobe RGB). If one can do more, resulting in a better match, then obviously the better.
The U2410 is color accurate, it's 8-bit and follows closely Adobe RGB and sRGB color profile, not exact exact.. as that would be even more expensive monitors. Of course you have to set the monitor (see monitor OSD menu) to Adobe RGB or sRGB profile. "Standard" (default) color profile is store shelf settings (something that Dell always does) OBVIOUSLY it will be all wrong.
The monitor provides a report on the calibration of the 2 profiles.
The U2410 provide excellent colors for a non-true-professional screen, without a color profile. If you need the profile for Photoshop and so on, one is provided on the CD it comes with, and you can see Dell web site for newer version. But if you are hard core professional (ie: your career, then obviously this monitor is COMPLETELY the wrong choice, at which point you look for the small details in true contrast ratio, gamut and all that).
IPS panel are 8-bit. It doesn't mean they are accurate in color per say, BUT they ARE 8-bit colors. Which is in my opinion a start. Games do look nicer with all the colors.
He said PRIMARILY gaming.. he did not say exclusively gaming or ONLY gaming with the company. I want him to have a monitor that is actually BETTER than what he has now... else what is the point of getting a new monitor.
If you have a 7200RPM HDD which you want to change because it's too small, will you buy the same but bigger in size, or will you get for a few dollar more (or not even), the faster 7200RPM with bigger cache?
You will obviously get the faster one with bigger cache (or at lest the faster one, if a bigger cache doesn't exists).
I never said to get the U2410. Else I would not present the comparison sheet and just say get the U2410. On that list you have several lower-end IPS panels which are very good (much cheaper too, especially if you don't care the 20 connection or so for the monitor), and they are great.
The ZR24w costs 390 euro. U2410 is 450 euro so let's remove that from the list.
The TN Pookeyhead suggests is 230 euro. Thats a difference of 160 euro.
I'm used to almost nothing now, a 15" laptop screen so any screen will be a big improvement. I'm used to almost nothing. For my laptop, this is perfect for me. I went to the shop though and decided 22~24" is good for me. I also sit quite close to the screen.
Most TN's are around 200~250 euro, they are really priced quite closely. I must say it's a big investment (that 160 euro for an IPS screen) but if I can justify it then it's ok.
The screen is ALMOST only for gaming, nothing else. I don't edit photo's or webpages so that's no problem.
The bottom line. If I go IPS, it must be a low-end IPS since I can't justify any higher costs (for example U2410, thats might be too expensive and seems useless for my needs).
You guys seem to know what you're talking about and it makes the choice even harder lol.
I'm a careful buyer so I really appreciate your comments.
Ah much clearer, usually people here have a gaming desktop, with a TN panel already and look for something better. But if you start with a low end (or old) TN panel on a laptop, than yes anything will be an improvement.
Yes, a TN panel would best fit your needs.
I recommend to get one that can at least increase or lower the screen height. This will make the monitor much more comfortable, as you can pick the best height based on your height and setup.
Glossy screen (in the case of a TN panel), will provide you with a better contrast, but at the cost of being a mirror-like, which could distract you, or plenty simply "unable" to use it properly (in other words, you can see the screen but not very well, which might make you miss stuff on the screen). This is a problem if the monitor is next to a window (or a window on the back) during the day. Anti-glare, a.k.a matte, screen finish will solve the problem, but at the cost of a slight reduction in contrast.
My vote is on a full matte screen, so that you can focus nicely in your games, and see well the screen any time of the day, all by enjoying the sun passing through the window (no need to close the blinds shut completely (and even then)).
TN panel are very similar these days, I don't recall one that is actually drastically better or worst than another.
OK, my two penny worth...
I um'd n ar'd for ages over what monitor to get. I didn't want a TN panel because my computer sits on my desk in the lounge which means if I'm sitting on the sofa I want to see whats on the monitor just as clearly as though I was sitting in front of it, as I am now. Call me strange but I happen to think that "viewing angles" shouldn't be an issue in the 21st century! Oh and yes, my last screen was a 10 year old LG915tft+ ...monster size, monster performance!
Given I was used to proper colours and no issues with viewing angles, what was the alternative to TN? IPS. Now there where various screens available (Jan. 2010) but at the sub £300 price the choice was really between just two. The Dell 2209wa or the NEC ea231wmi.
Now, most on here will tell you, you can't go wrong with the Dell. IPS and a 5ms response time. I'm sure it's true but it is just a 22" screen. With the best part of £1400 of gear outputting the image I wanted at least a tad more than the norm!
The NEC though bigger (and yes the extra inch or so is noticeable) had a response time of 14ms. Read the Bit-Tech review and more importantly look at their office screen shots ...it's what they game on at the moment! That 14ms response time is still so fast that it is only measured/recorded by photographing it at a shutter speed so fast that if a solid object where to travel at that speed it would be the fastest traveling object every recorded. In game with a supposed response time of 14ms, no lag, no ghosting; including a favourite fps UT3, for example. The problem with sites like tft or digital versus is that they are measuring 'lag' to such a microscopic level that they often forget to step back and ask themselves if a human being can actually see the ghosting that they've photographed.
So while I'm biased I can't recommend the NEC enough... the 2010 direct equivalent of a crt. The Dell is about £70/60 cheaper which reflects it's screen size rather than it's quality.
As others have mentioned, Bit-tech really do fall down when it comes to monitor reviews. I'm sure there are technical and cost reasons why monitor reviews are not more frequent or as comprehensive as elsewhere however, if you follow B-T's recommendation in regards to July's premium player rig; what the hell display is going to make best use of all that expensive gear? No clue from B-T, unfortunately.
Both thanks (again) for the thoughts.
When I decided to go for a new gaming rig (coming from a crappy laptop with a Mobility 3470 or something) I wanted to get a nice one. I think it costs like 1100 euro.
Ofcourse there's no point in having a nice gaming desktop and having a 15" shitty screen. You want to enjoy all that graphic power from your high end graphics card.
In the store 22~24" seemed best. Preferring 23 or 24", 22 looked just a little small.
When I started reading about the 3 current panel types IPS and TN seemed to be the most interesting. I read alot of reviews about IPS screens and looked at some TN's in the store.
I also decided that it should be a 100% gaming panel for a 100% gaming PC. I use my laptop for surfing, e-mail, Word, Excel, SPSS etc.
Too bad that I couldn't see any IPS in real life and probably won't be able to.
By the way, fingerbob69, I'm not in a similar situation as you. I'll just be sitting in my nice comfy desk chair to use the PC.
I'm going to sleep over it a night and then I will search for some nice TN panels. The HP IPS is still staying on my short list.
ps. I really liked the XL2370 in the shop but I thought the stand was quite wobbly and simple, just as the most Samsungs in the shop.
pss. My gaming desktop will be assembled this week (hopefully, sucky webshops xD) and after that I'll decide on the screen.
psss. I don't have alot of problems with my current glossy laptop screen.
Oh for God sake man! You just look at numbers. If you could pass a blind test between a 6 or 8 bit panel while using every day source material like gaming, DVDs or web browsing, I will eat my own testicles! Seriously... you just look at numbers and decide the things with the biggest numbers are obviously better. Your an ad man's dream.
Colour accuracy means you that Colour A, is represented on screen as precisely the same colour, and the same for any colour you care to throw at it. The difference between 6 bit and 8 bit is how MANY colours it can realistically display. While 8 bit displays can display a significantly higher number of colours at any one time (16.7 million as opposed to 262K), in reality, for average use, it makes no bloody difference whatsoever. I would of course not recommend a 6 bit panel to anyone planning to do any colour critical work.. but the OP is wanting to GAME on his monitor. 6 bit or 8 bit won't make a damned difference for that use, as dithering techniques used on modern TN panels render the argument irrelevant for such use.
Despite this, you seem to fail to grasp the fact that this has nothing to do with colour ACCURACY! You can diplay a trillion colours on teh screen but it won't guarantee they will be accurate. Conversely, you can have a beautifully accurate rendition from a 6 bit panel.
Adobe RGB1998 is a colour space.. it maps a range, or gamut of colours, and is no measure of ACCURACY. A monitor can EXCEED Adobe 98, and still be woeful in terms of accuracy.
The U2410 is colour accurate WHEN PROFILED. Out of the box it's pretty average.. bordering on useless for critical work, as are most monitors until they are profiled.
You seem to be under the impression that MORE colours means more ACCURACY. This is not so.
No it's not... once profiled it's a perfectly fine monitor, so long as you accept that it will never be able to re-create a gradient properly due to lack of true 10bit LUT.
Contrast ratio is the most useless spec on a monitor's spec sheet. The only thing making the U2410 not a TRUE professional monitor, is that lack of LUT. Despite this, it's only going to be a problem for a graphic artist really, as in real life, you just don't get mathematically linear gradients in nature, photographs, or video.
Oh finally, you realise that 8 bit isn't a guarantee of accuracy.
Find me a game that actually NEEDS 16.7 million colours to display accurately, and I'll wash down my testicles with a cup of my own pi$$.
Yeah ok... despite saying that he wants his monitor to game with, he MAY want to do some pretty accurate colour work one day... fine. He also may not. He asked for a recommendation for a gaming monitor. That's what he got. In all honesty, are you saying that the U2410 is an ideal choice for a gaming monitor for less than 400 Euros? Because that's what he asked for! Even if you are not suggesting that, the vast majority, except perhaps 2... maybe three IPS panels under his 400 euro budget, are just not really true gaming monitors. They're trying to be all things to all men instead, but really end up just being average at everything instead of brilliant at one thing.
Yes... because the difference in price is minimal, plus, there are advantages that are apparent in ALL aspects of computing... from booting up, to loading game maps, to saving large music and video files. Seriously mate, that was a crap analogy.
There are lots of cheaper IPS panels, one of which I recommended to him, but the majority are just lacking in speed and responsiveness to be truly "gaming" monitors... which he asked for.
I give up. I bow to your superior knowledge in all things monitors. Despite being an image professional all my adult life. Despite being responsible for the colour workflow for the graphic design and photography departments of one the best respected art and design colleges in the country, and despite being a long standing consultant for the procurement of new imaging technology for the biggest portrait photography company in the world... I bow to your superior knowledge, as it's clearly based on experience, and not cobbled together from what you've read on the internet
You just regurgitate stuff you've read on the internet, and try to pass it off as first hand knowledge and experience. You've had no practical real world experience with managing professional colour work flow, you've had no experience with ACTUALLY using a range of displays for various real world tasks, and you have little understanding of what any of the stuff you type actually MEANS.
If I'm wrong... feel free to post up your résumé
I'm outa here.
I can. Thank you very much.
Do your saying that a user that plays games in 256 colors won't see any difference in 16.7 million colors? I do. And so I do from a 6-bit to a 8-bit color.
Ok let me explain better.
- If I take a picture in 8-bit camera (assuming it does a good job) and output it with a monochrom screen.. does the color represent anything close to the image that you captured? No of course not... It's all going to be black and white (no gray). You can have perfect white and perfect black, it doesn't make it accurate, you need more colors. Same applies if we change the monochrome display to 16 colors, 256 colors, 6-bit.
Yup that is what I mean't.
If you say so.
You are assuming that there are many monitors out there that output red as blue. Stop it, we all know that is not normally the case.
Gradients are fine on my end. But if you mean perfectly wat the liter term gradient, than you'll need way more than 10-bit colors panel to start with (ignoring some LUT).
Hmm no. As I recall, once you trashed the U2410 in every aspect in the world, portraying this a abysmal monitor to try and prove that this is by far a professional monitor. Now it's because it has a 10-bit LUT ONLY?!
Game textures are made in 8-bit colors. You don't need any proof of this in this day of age.
Getting something above this, would be not needed however... for now anyway.
I thought he had a TN panel already, and he did not enjoy it and wanted a new monitor. Are we clear on that.
I cannot comment on monitors I do not have. I presented my opinion on MY screen.
But you were happy with the speed? waist money on more speed. Also since when an SSD is cheap, especially if you look at large size ones?!
At what point in time I presented that I am a senior engineering working in the field in engineering display's?
Since I made that nice little comparison table to try and help people in some ways, you bad mouth on me. I am always open to make my little table better. and encourage people correcting, or improving the table. All you have been basically saying is that "I am wrong" with near to no details on why I am. You want to add something to it, go ahead I'll add it and give you credit. Simple as that, just PM me.
I've found a nice Samsung (on paper).
I know GoodBytes recommended not to buy them.
It's the p2450h, it has a matte screen but it lacks ergonomic features
They also recommend the 2494HS and the 2494HM
this should decide the argument of colour differnces in a IPS and a Tn panel in a good 100% fair test http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw0acUxMaKo&playnext_from=TL&videos=W8fX1uaJ31Q
Nice link, thanks!
Looks nice. But isn't it what you're used to?
If you're used to TN and if you see IPS its great colors (but more costs).
And if you have a new TN it's perfect for you?
I'm currently leaning to a TN panel since every panel will be a serious upgrade for me (currently on a 15" notebook screen).
i am very seriously thinking of getting one of these monitors http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/23-Dell-P2310H-Widescreen-LCD-Monitor-1920x1080-100001-250-cd-m-5-ms
as it is quite a good price and i am fed up of playing on a $#!T 17" ViewSonic VA703b for the past 3 years
problem has been i am a student so little money so been spending on other parts of pc
I mostly don't like them due to there warranty/tech support service. Their OSD is terrible to navigate.. but that is something minor.. it's not like you use it everyday (well not in your case)... you set it up the first time and that's about it.
Of course I am against anything glossy.. but that is my personal problem. The OP said that he is fine with glossy, so I think it's a good display.
If you don't care about ports, check out the Samsung 2443BW-HAS, I don't know how much it costs outside of Canada.. but it's 300-350$ here depending where you buy it.
It's all matte, full adjustable stand, it's a all plastic stand and plastic mechanical system (it will be a bit stiff to manage), but at least it's something.
The screen is pretty good, and great for gaming (my brother used to have it).
Yeah it's kinda popular on tweakers.net (at least, 2443BW, don't know if that's the same as the -HAS) but I didn't pay attention to it because it's kinda old.
On my short list right now (TN's):
I haven't had any first-hand experiences with Samsung products but I also haven't heard alot of negative experience. So the brand Samsung won't be a problem for me.
i thought my video would steer you away from samsungs and on to dells
Maybe I didn't understand it correctly. Could you explain it a little further?
well looking in the comparsion part of the vid at the end the samsung is rubish compared to the two dells the IPS dell wins easily then it is the TN panel from dell and then it is th TN panel from samsung
conclusion look at dell monitors simple
Separate names with a comma.