EPTTeamliquid Monitor Thread - Page 52
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
| ||
|
Honeybadger
United States821 Posts
Hanns-G is my current first choice for monitors these days - the HH281 was the same price as my 24 inch samsung syncmaster T240HD, and the quality is vastly superior. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824254093 For the price, I'd say this one probably can't be beat in its size range (I get real eye-strain on monitors under 24 inches these days, so I use a 28 inch primary and 24 secondary) | ||
|
Mr.Bimbles
Iceland457 Posts
| ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
On June 20 2013 12:20 Mr.Bimbles wrote: Hey guys thinking about buying the FORIS FS2333 monitor,is there a better monitor in the same price range or even cheaper? Asus VG23AH is better in that it offers maybe 72 / 75 Hz support with custom timings and passive 3D support (but apparently if you wear glasses, passive 3D filter may cause visible gray lines), but it loses some display option features that probably aren't really useful. Consider it mostly similar for most people except that it's usually significantly cheaper. | ||
|
Honeybadger
United States821 Posts
Just because it says "gaming" and offers a bunch of fancy sounding features, doesn't mean that it will offer you any noticeable improvements for your money. You want quality, no light bleed, a solid refresh rate (i'm not sensitive enough to notice anything above a 120hz refresh rate) and a clear picture with good customer service. Unless you're one of the best progamers on this planet, dropping your input lag a few thousandths of a second is going to do absolutely nothing to make you a better gamer. Your mechanics have to be beating out your hardware, and I genuinely don't think anyone on earth is capable of doing that with a monitor. | ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
| ||
|
Celeritas
Australia52 Posts
What I'm Looking For Size 24" (I don't want something any smaller than what I have, but going bigger won't fit on my desk). Screen IPS/PLS Refresh Rate 60Hz Use I primarily use my computer to play games, watch movies, fairly standard stuff. Price Range Nothing higher than AU$250. Other Preferences Height adjustable would be nice, but not required. Obviously as little input lag as possible (I've heard some IPS panels can be bad with this). The best image quality I can get in this price range. The lighting in my room is only partially controllable, so a screen that is anti-glare is also somewhat important. The main questions I have are: is it worth me shelling out for a new IPS screen (would the improvement justify the cost)? Would I be better off getting a 120Hz TN panel, or is that out of my price range? Any help is greatly appreciated! | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
If the Philips isn't some relatively poor, older TN model, there isn't all that much to be gained except the much better viewing angles—no significant color shifting between the top and bottom of the screen, for instance. e.g. solid color pages here should look closer to actually being one color rather than a gradient. I would expect better but not miracles. Probably not worth it if you're just replacing the old one. 120 Hz is not available in that kind of price range. On the other hand, if you were to get a new monitor so that you would be using two monitors (make the old one the secondary), that could well be worth it. If you don't have space on the desk, then maybe a VESA desk-mount or wall-mount stand would work? Does the old monitor have VESA mounting holes? | ||
|
Honeybadger
United States821 Posts
On June 20 2013 14:43 skyR wrote: The Hanns-g is half the price because its lacking so many things. It's a regular 60Hz TN panel, has terrible PPI, lacks an adjustable stand, lacks the additional two years of warranty, and I believe the Eizo is 10-bit colour. Yes all of this probably doesn't matter to you or the person asking but it does matter a whole lot to some individuals. The hanns G was an offhanded suggestion. I know some people really want 75/80+hz (and the warranty and stand are also valid, though custom stands can be had for pretty cheap from rosewill) But the PPI on a 24 inch panel and 10-bit? really? Those are specs for people with more money than sense. If you're going to really push the PPI to extremes as an issue (beyond the basics, I know the HG is very low, but again, it was an offhanded remark,) you really should be looking for a bigger monitor, and if you don't have space for one, you should be investing that money in a bigger apartment :D and 10-bit color is really frivolous. Once you're beyond truecolor, you've already blown past the number of recognizable colors to the human eye. All you really benefit from 10bit is better definition of individual pixel color accuracy, which is of zero use to anyone that isn't a graphical designer/digital artist. Games are designed to be displayed within the 8 bit output, so any potential benefit is lost there (hence the pointlessness of the term "Gaming monitor".) I know I'm never going to dissuade some people, and If they buy something overpriced but are still happy with it, who am I to argue? I'm an idiot with a $280 keyboard :D besides, that's the reason people buy new cars and new phones, too, so I can only be thankful that people with too much money are pushing technology trends. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
PPI on 24" 1080p is not that great; it's more that on 27" 1080p it's maybe low for many tastes. But what's it mean to "push the PPI" to extremes? I don't get it in this context? Those 1440p or similar 10" tablets and 13" laptops are a different matter, though those are arguable depending on usage and not necessarily excessive. But the bigger problem is TN gamma shifting when you get to the large sizes, as unless you're sitting far away the angles to the top and bottom will be large. But if PPI and viewing angles aren't big issues due to far viewing distance, why not move the monitor closer and get a smaller one? FS2333 is really not that expensive compared to even the prosumer monitors, but certainly it seems overpriced compared to what most people want or need, given what you get, hence my other suggestion. | ||
|
Celeritas
Australia52 Posts
On June 20 2013 23:05 Myrmidon wrote: It's only the expensive pro-oriented models with a lot of specific hardware image correction features that tend to have worse input lag. Maybe you're thinking of the pixel response times? IPS and PLS are slower on pixel transitions, yeah, so you can have more noticeable blurring on fast motion. If the Philips isn't some relatively poor, older TN model, there isn't all that much to be gained except the much better viewing angles—no significant color shifting between the top and bottom of the screen, for instance. e.g. solid color pages here should look closer to actually being one color rather than a gradient. I would expect better but not miracles. Probably not worth it if you're just replacing the old one. 120 Hz is not available in that kind of price range. On the other hand, if you were to get a new monitor so that you would be using two monitors (make the old one the secondary), that could well be worth it. If you don't have space on the desk, then maybe a VESA desk-mount or wall-mount stand would work? Does the old monitor have VESA mounting holes? The monitor I have now is the Philips 24IE. Googling it doesn't even return any results. It came with my computer back at the end of 2011. I was considering upgrading to a slightly nicer monitor so my mum could use the Philips (she's currently running a really old 4:3 LCD monitor). That being said, if I'm not going to get much of a quality increase within that specified price range, I'll give it a miss. EDIT: Should I consider a VA panel instead? BenQ seem to have quite a few available in Australia and within my price range. EDIT 2: Currently thinking of going with this BenQ VA monitor. It has a matte coating, good response time, and will have much better blacks than anything I'm used to. Obviously I'd like to go for the model without speakers or a HDMI port to save money, but it doesn't appear to be available in Australia. I've heard it takes a bit of time to calibrate, but that doesn't really bother me. Thoughts? | ||
|
Celeritas
Australia52 Posts
| ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
I think the U2713HM is having QA issues otherwise I would have picked one up a few days ago for myself but ended up just getting another U2312HM. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20345 Posts
"This is the best deal I've found, asus VS229H-P $139 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236205 From the very, very little I know, I 'want' IPS and faster response time is better." above 150 is over budget (unless "it's some monitor that's a steal at $300+ and it's on some insane sale right now") and he said he's comfortable with ebay or craigslist | ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
| ||
|
Celeritas
Australia52 Posts
On June 22 2013 17:02 skyR wrote: No reason to consider the higher-end more expensive U2713H unless you need wide-gamut for professional work. I think the U2713HM is having QA issues otherwise I would have picked one up a few days ago for myself but ended up just getting another U2312HM. Yeah been reading a bit more (random forums and TFTCentral), it seems like the U2713HM is what I want, but there are so many reported issues with it that I don't want to lay down ~$600 for it if I'm not going to get a fault-free product. A pity really, I'm ready to make the jump to a 27" 2560x1440 IPS monitor, but they're just making it too hard to part with my money. | ||
|
Celeritas
Australia52 Posts
| ||
|
Chaoz
United States507 Posts
So, is there an actual proper answer? | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
On June 25 2013 04:18 Chaoz wrote: What's the correct height to set the monitor at? I've read some different answers while searching: 2" above eye level, 2" below eye level, center of monitor at eye level? So, is there an actual proper answer? Raising your neck is definitely bad. Usually the default working position should have the head slightly tilted downwards. So center at eye level is too high. Really, this should depend on the size of the monitor and viewing distance. Some or most guidelines you see may be assuming smaller monitors than many users have these days. OSHA is OSHA, but it's also OSHA, if you get my drift.  http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/computerworkstations/components_monitors.html | ||
|
Terakahn
Canada49 Posts
I'm looking for just generally a high quality display, vibrant colors, no problems with high motion games, wall mountable is a plus, but not necessary. Input lag is a deal breaker I imagine, given that it's gaming focused. HDMI would be nice as well, as I can then use it with consoles, but not required. Budget isn't a big concern. If it's worth the cost, I'm willing to shell out a little extra for a noticable difference. 22-24" is ideal. The only reason I'm really looking for a new monitor, is because the secondary one I have now has a max resolution of 1366x768. Which is absolutely awful, because when I switch the stream to the second monitor, it shows a huge black border in the bottom right corner. This is my primary: Acer AL2016W (I'm satisfied with this, but it is fairly old, so an upgrade wouldn't be a bad thing.) And my secondary I'm looking to replace: HP w1858 (It was gifted from a friend who didn't need it anymore.) Advice/Recommendations? | ||
| ||
