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

[pcbugfixer]

The product range is too narrow, there are at least 3 others that are equal or better !

If you are going to do a product evaluation and test, do a better job of it, rather than appear to be selectively doing this for a commissioned paid report.

http://www.globalsources.com/manufacturers/24-LCD-Monitor.html

I make no apology for my comments ☺ ☺

 

[tlmck]

In that size range, I would rather have the HP 2511x.

 

[flong]

[citation][nom]pcbugfixer[/nom]The product range is too narrow, there are at least 3 others that are equal or better !If you are going to do a product evaluation and test, do a better job of it, rather than appear to be selectively doing this for a commissioned paid report.http://www.globalsources.com/manuf [...] nitor.html I make no apology for my comments ☺ ☺[/citation]

This is not meant to be a comprehensive review of all monitors - no one does that with one review to my knowledge. It is rare to get three monitors reviewed together. As for the "paid report" comment, did you read the reviews? Tom's Hardware did not give these monitors glowing reviews and the Dell 2412 reviewed specs line up with other similar professional reviews. Look at TFT Central's review of the 2412. A little less paranoid please.

 

[Guest]

"Compared to our previous 27" round-up, it's not a surprise to see lower response times from the smaller 24" LCDs, 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."

This doesn't make sense. Bottom line, at 60Hz, ANY size panel does a complete refresh in 1/60th of a second, right? Am I missing something?

 

[flong]

[citation][nom]bobtaro[/nom]"Compared to our previous 27" round-up, it's not a surprise to see lower response times from the smaller 24" LCDs, 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."This doesn't make sense. Bottom line, at 60Hz, ANY size panel does a complete refresh in 1/60th of a second, right? Am I missing something?[/citation]


That's what the big discussion has been about - it would seem that there would be very little difference to the human eye between a 120hz and a 60hz monitor. However, at least on poster says that there is a significant difference. Not owning a 120hz I really cannot argue from first-hand experience. There IS a difference between an HDTV at 120hz and a 60hz but I am not sure that this transfers to monitors as clearly judging from the professional reviews that I have read. There is a significant difference in video processing between computer monitors and televisions.

 

[tsnor]

[citation][nom]mcd023[/nom]Are there any full IPS 24" monitors out there? It'd be nice of there were. ....[/citation]


Umm, the above comments reference this one "Dell UltraSharp U2412M 24-in Widescreen IPS High Performance Monitor (1920 x 1200) " and an NEC. The Dell is only Price: $321.79 at amazon.

 

[tsnor]

[citation][nom]tsnor[/nom]Umm, the above comments reference this one "Dell UltraSharp U2412M 24-in Widescreen IPS High Performance Monitor (1920 x 1200) " and an NEC. The Dell is only Price: $321.79 at amazon.[/citation]

Bleep, pasted the wrong one. Try this instead. Dell UltraSharp U2410 24-inch Widescreen LCD High Performance Monitor. $492 at amazon. (I wondered why the price was so low..)

 

[Guest]

Thanks for an interesting round-up.
It would be very interesting to see the "total input lag" measurement done on a CRT monitor at a few different resolutions to compare the numbers. Faster flat screens. Then maybe for projectors and other output you can imagine, maybe a remote desktop. I love experiments.
Regards, Magnus

 

[flong]

I think that Thegreatestgrapeape poster should give us an example of a 120hz monitor that has reviewed well with professional reviewers so that we can learn from his wealth of knowledge on this subject.

 

[g-unit1111]

I love my Acer 24" monitor - after two years it's still holding up pretty strongly. That's one purchase I would definitely make again.

 

[csm101]

ok becouse i was interested in geting a LED LCD i read about it and it seems there are 2 types when it comes to internal LED arrangment. one is side monted and the other one is diret mounted. of the 2 the best color reproduction is done by the direct mounted ones.

my question is dose any of the reivewd monitors fall in to the direct mounted category?

 

[livebriand]

How about the 23" Acer S230HLAbii? That seems to be a particularly good model.

 

[livebriand]

Whoops meant the Acer S231HLbid. Pretty popular on newegg.

 

[Guest]

HP is about to release a new monitor, its called ZR2440w. Just thought i'd say

 

[Guest]

Edit: It is released, but reviews are inc.*

 

[theprov]

next time please test 23" e-ips monitors ( Asus ml239h, Dell u2312hm, Asus vs239h, LG ips231h, LG ips235v)

 

[Guest]

Andrew,
I'm looking for low input lag for HD video conferencing where we fight to minimize round trip end-to-end delay of 720p, 60 fps video so interactive conversation isn't constrained. I've seen a number blog posts (SaveFighting on shoryuken.com, for example) that talk about the availability of displays with 17 ms input lag but I wonder if they're confusing input lag with pixel response time. Are there any 20 to 60 inch display devices out there with HDMI inputs that have less input lag than the 55 ms you reported for the Dell U2412M? In addition to you, who are the two or three other authorities on input lag? Happ Wallace

 

[tgm0]

Anti-glare coating on the Dell u2412m is simply BAD!!!!
The impression I had when i first got the monitor was great, colours were vibrant and overall image quality was great.
The functionality of the anti-glare coating against reflections is appropriate, but in low ambient light it will start giving problems, especially displaying dark images/scenes.
Sitting at my desk, I started to notice what I thought to be strange reflections in the lower right corner; but after a while I realize that it was happening only on darker images.
Then just to try I loaded an 100% black image, have it displayed in full screen and all of the good thoughts I had about this monitor disappeared.
The anti-glare is so annoying at dark that I decided to post a video on Youtube to make people aware of the problem.



In the video you can see how the monitor performs in a dark room while displaying a 100% black image in full screen. It will be difficult for you to think that the video is real, in fact the monitor literally glows in the dark depending from your point of view. The closer the worst!
I use the PC most for entertaining, and I supposed this monitor was targeted toward this kind of public.
The DELL U2412M makes it impossible to enjoy movies at night. Watching the Dark Knight in HD was so annoying that it was almost painful.
I wouldn't recommend this monitor to no one, with the exception that if you use it at the office in full day light then you may enjoy it.

 

[tgm0]

http://youtu.be/r_RCYtplefA