EPTIt's weird that Prad got those numbers compared to TFTCentral, where it looks decent.
Teamliquid Monitor Thread - Page 23
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
|
Wabbit
United States1028 Posts
It's weird that Prad got those numbers compared to TFTCentral, where it looks decent. | ||
|
LukasG
Germany95 Posts
my monitor is dead^^, so i need a new one. Which one should i choose? I´ve got circa 100-150 Euro, it should have dvi input and should be16: 9 (1920x1080) adn a short reaction time (2ms). What do u thin about this one? http://www.amazon.de/LG-E2351VR-Monitor-Reaktionszeit-mattschwarz/dp/B005JRIPC4/ref=sr_1_3?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1340822525&sr=1-3 Thats all Thanks in advance LukasG | ||
|
ensign_lee
United States1178 Posts
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=24-260-047&SortField=0&SummaryType=0&Pagesize=10&PurchaseMark=&SelectedRating=-1&VideoOnlyMark=False&VendorMark=&IsFeedbackTab=true&Page=2#scrollFullInfo I see newegg has it for $300, but I see several reviews mentioning that they bought it for $300 as well, so it seems like the normal price? | ||
Womwomwom
5930 Posts
On June 28 2012 03:36 Wabbit wrote: I agree the design is awful and I find it hideous, but isn't that subjective? It's weird that Prad got those numbers compared to TFTCentral, where it looks decent. Well for a monitor like that, not really. Capacitive touch controls, a design that has no real ergonomic features beyond tilt, and...HDMI and VGA only? Anyway I'm also a bit surprised Prad and TFT Central are very different in results. Normally they're fairly close but in this case, they're two completely different reviews. | ||
|
Rachnar
France1526 Posts
i guess i can just buy a mini display port => normal display port? | ||
|
Womwomwom
5930 Posts
| ||
|
LukasG
Germany95 Posts
On June 28 2012 03:41 LukasG wrote: Hey, my monitor is dead^^, so i need a new one. Which one should i choose? I´ve got circa 100-150 Euro, it should have dvi input and should be16: 9 (1920x1080) adn a short reaction time (2ms). What do u thin about this one? http://www.amazon.de/LG-E2351VR-Monitor-Reaktionszeit-mattschwarz/dp/B005JRIPC4/ref=sr_1_3?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1340822525&sr=1-3 Thats all Thanks in advance LukasG Can someone help me?^^ EDIT: I just found this one http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/2012/test-dell-u2212hm.html What do u think? | ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
Appreciate any help. | ||
|
Womwomwom
5930 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/T7klF.png) | ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
On July 03 2012 19:24 Womwomwom wrote: Do you know what dual-link DVI is? Read the OP again. This picture explains everything: OH wow im such an idiot, in other words it should be fine  Thanks for the simple explanation | ||
|
nosliw
United States2716 Posts
| ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
On July 04 2012 02:19 nosliw wrote: What is the average monitor type for desktops currently? Is it 22" TN? Average? According to recent Steam users results, 1920x1080 resolution is the mode now at 25% (all other higher-res at about 4%), with lower resolutions still very common. More of those are probably 23 / 23.6" or 24" rather than 21.5" though. Not too long ago, they didn't have 1920x1080 at smaller than 23". I think those results still include laptops though. Regardless, the mean and median sizes are probably under 22", I guess? TN is definitely the most common. If this question has a "what should I get?" subtext rather than one of academic curiosity, I would suggest not caring about what the masses are using. | ||
|
RiSkysc2
696 Posts
| ||
|
nosliw
United States2716 Posts
On July 04 2012 08:27 Myrmidon wrote: Average? According to recent Steam users results, 1920x1080 resolution is the mode now at 25% (all other higher-res at about 4%), with lower resolutions still very common. More of those are probably 23 / 23.6" or 24" rather than 21.5" though. Not too long ago, they didn't have 1920x1080 at smaller than 23". I think those results still include laptops though. Regardless, the mean and median sizes are probably under 22", I guess? TN is definitely the most common. If this question has a "what should I get?" subtext rather than one of academic curiosity, I would suggest not caring about what the masses are using. Getting one as a gift ($100), but because I am still using 4:3 1280 x 1024, I don't know what is the standard. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
On July 04 2012 08:53 Lineridarz wrote: Is there any noticeable picture quality difference between an IPS and a TN monitor? Is it really worth the extra $50+ just for the better viewing angle? Which i don't think i'd use anyway.... It's very noticeable if viewing from above or below, not so much in typical desktop viewing scenarios at a desk, unless maybe you lean back a lot or at an odd angle. However, the difference in price isn't really $50+? It depends. It could be a lot more than $50. However, if you're looking at pretty much identical monitors with eIPS vs. TN being the only difference, it might be more like $164 (Asus VS229H-P) vs. $140 (Asus VS228H-P). A lot of the cheapest TN monitors are not going to be comparable in any way to any of the non-TN monitors offered. For quality TN panels, there's not going to be a big difference in calibrated color accuracy, looking straight on. On July 04 2012 09:55 nosliw wrote: Getting one as a gift ($100), but because I am still using 4:3 1280 x 1024, I don't know what is the standard. For people buying new ones, 23" 1920x1080 is probably the most common. There's not really a standard, and even if there were, why should you follow it? Many laptop manufacturers have been moving towards 1366x768, which is worse than what they used to offer. You're not going to be able to find anything decent at $100 though. | ||
|
RiSkysc2
696 Posts
It's very noticeable if viewing from above or below, not so much in typical desktop viewing scenarios at a desk, unless maybe you lean back a lot or at an odd angle. However, the difference in price isn't really $50+? It depends. It could be a lot more than $50. However, if you're looking at pretty much identical monitors with eIPS vs. TN being the only difference, it might be more like $164 (Asus VS229H-P) vs. $140 (Asus VS228H-P). A lot of the cheapest TN monitors are not going to be comparable in any way to any of the non-TN monitors offered. For quality TN panels, there's not going to be a big difference in calibrated color accuracy, looking straight on. So if i were to compare the Dell Ultrasharp U2312HM with the BenQ XL2420T in raw image quality, would there be much difference ? (other than the 120hz). | ||
|
Womwomwom
5930 Posts
You can still use viewing angle stability when viewing head on. TN monitors still suffer from gamma shifting if you look head on and IPS monitors, more or less, eliminate this problem. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
Just take a look at this with a TN monitor: http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/viewing_angle.php#angleGrey Granted, on as synthetic an image as that, you'll notice issues on IPS monitors too, just not nearly as bad. | ||
|
teknotrance
61 Posts
| ||
|
Rachnar
France1526 Posts
 and i don't feel the 120 without | ||
| ||
