24" LCD Round-Up: Acer S242HL, Dell U2412M, And Samsung T24A550

[acku]

Another batch of monitors just landed. This time, we're sampling 24" screens. If 27" is too big (and too expensive), and 23" is too small, this round-up is just what you need. We put three screens through the usual paces to find a definitive winner.

24" LCD Round-Up: Acer S242HL, Dell U2412M, And Samsung T24A550 : Read more

 

[austinwillis81]

kinda confused why you would be comparinig an IPS to lcd but idk

 

[fstrthnu]

I would have liked to see the older U2410 model here too, because that uses the "older" IPS technology and is apparently better enough for Dell to justify a $100 price premium over the U2412.

 

[kyuuketsuki]

[citation][nom]austinwillis81[/nom]kinda confused why you would be comparinig an IPS to lcd but idk[/citation]Uh, why wouldn't they?

I currently own an eIPS monitor, and will never go back to TN.

 

[kyuuketsuki]

[citation][nom]fstrthnu[/nom]I would have liked to see the older U2410 model here too, because that uses the "older" IPS technology and is apparently better enough for Dell to justify a $100 price premium over the U2412.[/citation]So… you didn't read the article? The whole point of eIPS is it's cheaper than other IPS panels, not that it's better.

 

[flong]

Dell's U2412 is NOT the replacement for the U2410. Dell is going to continue to produce the U2410.

Also the U2410 frequently goes on sale. I think it is a mistake to buy the U2412 when the U2410 is definitely superior to the U2412 in every benchmark.

Right now the most affordable HIPS monitors with the best performance are the Dell U2410 and the HP 2475W. I think that the HP 2475W has the edge slightly over the 2410. Asus also has put out a fairly good 24" HIPS monitor but the U2410 and the 2475W are better monitors per the professional reviews that I have read.

I own the HP 2475W and it does have beautiful picture. You have to go to NEC at twice the cost to improve on it.

 

[kyuuketsuki]

God, really need an edit function here…

Just reread your comment and my response was probably a little off-base. However, the U2412's predecessor should be better in every way (except possibly response time) since eIPS is meant to be more economical by trading off some of the quality of other IPS panels.

 

[flong]

[citation][nom]Kyuuketsuki[/nom]God, really need an edit function here…Just reread your comment and my response was probably a little off-base. However, the U2412's predecessor should be better in every way (except possibly response time) since eIPS is meant to be more economical by trading off some of the quality of other IPS panels.[/citation]

Hello , I was not referring to you. The article's writer states that the U2412 is the successor of the U2410 when actually it is a more affordable IPS monitor for those with lower budgets. BTW, the article is very good; they just got this one thing wrong.

There is a huge difference between a picture quality HIPS monitor and a TN monitor. I have not seen an eIPS monitor but they seem to be pretty good also from the reviews that I have read.

 

[Soul_keeper]

I hate touch buttons !

 

[Guest]

Hello! Could you guys review the LG IPS236v? It's also a cheap IPS panel, i don't know if it's the same technology used to make the U2412M. From my researches it dosen't seem to be sold in the US, but it already arrived in other countries (in Brazil it is being sold for about $300).
PS.: Sorry if there's any mistake with my English. =)

 

[kevith]

"...since response time and input lag usually decreases with screen size. Why? Monitors with larger screens have higher pixel density, and as the number of pixels per inch (PPI) increases there are more pixels to refresh. Therefore, at 60 Hz, larger panels take longer to complete a complete screen refresh."

Ehr, what...?

 

[stingstang]

Screens with 5 or more refresh rate... No thank you.

 

[marraco]

What a useless review from clueless writers.
Do any of those monitors are capable of 120hz? If no, they are useless for nvidia 3D. 60hz monitors look and feel ugly compared to 120hz. Vsync kills framerates on 60Hz monitors.

Blurring. That’s the feature that makes the deal for me. I hate blurring of moving images. They ruin everything from scrolling web pages, to playing videos, and playing games. The most important benchmark is response time from WHITE TO BLACK, and there is NOT A WORD on this article about it.

Response time analysis is a joke.

 

[belardo]

Blah... Show me some 26" displays with 2500x1600 resolutions.

Otherwise all the 1920x1080 monitors are nothing more than downgrades.

 

[Guest]

I can't stand 16:9 monitors. Is that Dell UltraSharp U2412M the only 16:10 monitor available these days?

 

[velocci]

I want to see the Dell U2410

 

[Mark Heath]

[citation][nom]austinwillis81[/nom]kinda confused why you would be comparinig an IPS to lcd but idk[/citation]
They're not. They are comparing 3 LCD screens, 1 with an e-IPS panel and 2 with TN panels.

 

[Device Unknown]

[citation][nom]marraco[/nom]What a useless review from clueless writers.Do any of those monitors are capable of 120hz? If no, they are useless for nvidia 3D. 60hz monitors look and feel ugly compared to 120hz. Vsync kills framerates on 60Hz monitors.Blurring. That’s the feature that makes the deal for me. I hate blurring of moving images. They ruin everything from scrolling web pages, to playing videos, and playing games. The most important benchmark is response time from WHITE TO BLACK, and there is NOT A WORD on this article about it.Response time analysis is a joke.[/citation]

I tell ya what sparky, you write up a comparable review and let us be the judge of who's is better. This article was on a particular segment of monitors. You are referring to a totally different segment.
Didn't your momma teach you, if you can't say anything nice don't say anything at all?

 

[Tamz_msc]

Great review!
Hopefully I'll get to see the Dell U2211H featured in a future review.

 

[mcd023]

[citation][nom]kevith[/nom]"...since response time and input lag usually decreases with screen size. Why? Monitors with larger screens have higher pixel density, and as the number of pixels per inch (PPI) increases there are more pixels to refresh. Therefore, at 60 Hz, larger panels take longer to complete a complete screen refresh."Ehr, what...?[/citation]
My guess is that the monitors refresh progressively, one line at a time, so monitors with more pixels take longer. I may be wrong, but that's my understanding of it.

 

[mcd023]

Are there any full IPS 24" monitors out there? It'd be nice of there were. Even better if I could afford them. But I can dream of that 5x1 setup that I don't have time to play on, can't I?

 

[Guest]

the beautiful 24" Asus displays!

 

[TeraMedia]

For a future article, how about 55" HDTVs for HTPC-connected movies and gaming? I trust reviews such as this one more than I trust some of the stuff at CNET and similar. You could pick 3 cheap CCFL-LCD models from three different manuf tiers (e.g. Vizio, Sony, Samsung or LG), and then repeat with 3 higher-end LED-LCD models. You might even be able to make marraco happy if you include a 3D assessment (which formats each supports, quality, etc.).

 

[jamie_1318]

First thing I caught was the response time chart. The eIPS pannel response time is Black to Black, the others are Grey-to-grey. Also response time and Refresh rate have nothing to do with monitor size. That makes Zero sense. 60Hz is 60Hz regardless of screen size. I'm a little surprised you used a high-speed video camera rather than the usual method of using a camera and taking a picture of a counter on a CRT and the LCD in question beside each other. Really in depth article aside from those tow points though. Like how you measured everything.

 

[AppleBlowsDonkeyBalls]

You usually make great reviews, but this one sucked. If you want a good review of the Dell U2412M, including a comparison to the U2410 read this instead:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2412m.htm

And a comparison table. In terms of performance, once both are calibrated they're nearly equal. The U2412M has better input lag, and better default color accuracy. It also has better black depth and static contrast ratio. The U2410 has a wider color gamut, viewing angles are a tiny bit better, the calibrated Delta-E is a tiny bit better, and the Dynamic Contrast Ratio is better (but if you're smart you won't use that crappy gimmick). Overall, they're pretty evenly matched. e-IPS isn't anywhere near as bad as you're making it out to be here, and it's only slightly worse than H-IPS.

If you need the wider color gamut go for the U2410. If you want better blacks and more gaming-oriented performance, go for the U2412M. For most, given the lower price, the U2412M easily seems like the better choice.