[citation][nom]flong[/nom]I don't mean to be blunt but the HIPS monitors being discussed here do not have major problems with "ghosting," which you keep referring to. You obviously don't own one of these monitors. They handle fast motion extremely well. I think you may be thinking about...[/citation]
Nope I don't own them, I've used them, and it's one of the reasons I still use the P260s at work and at home for 'close work' like I said. They are getting better, although the Gamut on the 2412 is a major weakeness.
But then again I'm a bit of a stickler for what I need... but I'm not the only one who noticed it, there are many others, and even a good example shown in this review of the 2412 (which is the THG target remember) which still says "– whilst obviously no match for a 120Hz TN panel
the visual experience at these ‘medium speeds’ was very good. The trailing.. . ..became more exaggerated and the image appeared to break up in places due partly to the RTC impulse artifacts. It is worth noting that such high-speed transitions are not something any 60Hz LCD monitor will take in its stride regardless of panel technology.
So not as bad as it used to be (where it was obvious to someone with cataracts) it's still got a bit further to go.
So while you're right that I don't own them, I equally and conversely think you've never really tried a good 120hz panel or top tier CRT and may not know, or perhaps forget, what GREAT looks like after being so accustomed to 'good', kinda like folks who like 320kbps compressed audio versus CD let alone SACD/DVDA/Phono.
However, that's simply a sub point and I'm not going to bother with a 'my perception is better than yours debate', but I will question your idea that people can't perceive these differences, it's that kind of thinking that gives us the rainbow effect on single chip DLP despite the tripling of the colour-wheels to 360 hz. Very myopic to think in those terms. I hate those and prefer Plasma and 3 chip DLP because I DO notice these things, especially when watching fast moving material, like hockey which has stressful full-on white-black-white transitions.
The original point remains, there are much better examples from Samsung in the last two years, especially in the category tested
where there have been dramatic advances , which while not making them equal to IPS in many ways (as I still contend they aren't) they have greatly improved them and make those new Samsungs the best in class.... so the question is Why Not Test Those if you want an idea of the state of Onion on these monitors ?
Cheap video cards do not have the horsepower to process the signals well and can cause all sorts of problems for TN or HIPS monitors.
Yeah, that's not a problem for me. I still have Matrox cards at work that I was working on until last year because of my demand for quality, only recently having replaced a few with Quadro and one FireMV card. Not the issue either at work or at home, and especially not when you know what you're doing.
You don't need to be snide
A little hypocrisy there me thinks, unless you forget your own comments to others earlier.
No TN monitor matches up well with the HIPS monitors, but that is not a slam against Samsung or against you.
Again, you're missing the point, like I said. I'm not saying they are better/worse in every way (nothing is), but ignoring the improvements and the areas they are good/imptoved, in order to just show a 5/5 win instead of an 8/10 will because they limit the test or pick the older crippled models (to cook a 10/10) is simply bad practice. I would prefer they test current vs current, or best example vs best example or $/$ whichever is something someone would currently do for themselves, this test doesn't really represent that IMNSHO.