- Status
Hard_Rain
Distinguished
- Mar 13, 2011
- 25
- 0
- 18,540
How about doing a review of monitors with displayport connectivity? As more users like me go to Eyefinity technology, we need to purchase diplayport capable monitors to hook up to our AMD Eyefinity video cards. Such an article would complement your reviews of high-end gaming PCs and components.
I'd like to see a roundup of 3D LCD monitors, including the just released Acer HN274H. That would be an awesome test to find out who makes the best 3D monitor out there.
Currently I have a Samsung 2233RZ 3D monitor and I'd like a bigger one, which unfortunately let me with only one option, that one above from Acer.
Hope Samsung and others come up with bigger 3D monitors soon.
See ya.
Currently I have a Samsung 2233RZ 3D monitor and I'd like a bigger one, which unfortunately let me with only one option, that one above from Acer.
Hope Samsung and others come up with bigger 3D monitors soon.
See ya.
[citation][nom]allan_hm[/nom]I'd like to see a roundup of 3D LCD monitors, including the just released Acer HN274H. That would be an awesome test to find out who makes the best 3D monitor out there.Currently I have a Samsung 2233RZ 3D monitor and I'd like a bigger one, which unfortunately let me with only one option, that one above from Acer.Hope Samsung and others come up with bigger 3D monitors soon.See ya.[/citation]
3D monitors? No thanks!
3D monitors? No thanks!
[citation][nom]exenter[/nom]3D monitors? No thanks![/citation]
It's a matter of personal taste, I know... lot of people don't like to use those cumbersome glasses. I can't stand wearing it for more than an hour, really. But we can't deny the 3D effect is great in games that were designed to use such feature, like Crysis 2 and Resident Evil 5.
I believe we'll see glasses free monitors in less than 3 years, then 3D may become more popular.
It's a matter of personal taste, I know... lot of people don't like to use those cumbersome glasses. I can't stand wearing it for more than an hour, really. But we can't deny the 3D effect is great in games that were designed to use such feature, like Crysis 2 and Resident Evil 5.
I believe we'll see glasses free monitors in less than 3 years, then 3D may become more popular.
rekabis
Distinguished
- Apr 26, 2008
- 73
- 0
- 18,630
Where are all the 4:3 monitors? I am not a gamer. I do not watch HD movies on my computer (that is why I have a TV, after all). I am a programmer and a designer. I do NOT need 1920 pixels wide, what I *DO* need is as much vertical room as possible. Give me a 1600x1200 monitor, and I (along with millions of other office workers) will be much happier than with any sort of “wide screen” monstrosity that is released.
rekabis:
You need to get a LCD with pivot function, so you can turn it 90 degrees and have 1080x1920 pixels of work area.
TN monitors have relatively poor view angles, though, usually about 160-170 degrees when turned, so maybe you should look at PVA/IPS panels for the best of both worlds.
I actually do have a Samsung T240 (1920x1200) and also a Samsung 2494HM
(1920x1080) that can be rotated 90 degrees. While I do appreciate the extra 120 pixels on the first monitor, it's not that much benefit when programming, honestly.
Seems like companies now are focused on making 3d monitors but that's all pointless imho - customers would benefit more from seeing 25.5-27" panels with 2560*1600 or something like that more common and cheaper.
You need to get a LCD with pivot function, so you can turn it 90 degrees and have 1080x1920 pixels of work area.
TN monitors have relatively poor view angles, though, usually about 160-170 degrees when turned, so maybe you should look at PVA/IPS panels for the best of both worlds.
I actually do have a Samsung T240 (1920x1200) and also a Samsung 2494HM
(1920x1080) that can be rotated 90 degrees. While I do appreciate the extra 120 pixels on the first monitor, it's not that much benefit when programming, honestly.
Seems like companies now are focused on making 3d monitors but that's all pointless imho - customers would benefit more from seeing 25.5-27" panels with 2560*1600 or something like that more common and cheaper.
rekabis
Distinguished
- Apr 26, 2008
- 73
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]mariushm[/nom]rekabis: You need to get a LCD with pivot function, so you can turn it 90 degrees and have 1080x1920 pixels of work area.TN monitors have relatively poor view angles, though, usually about 160-170 degrees when turned, so maybe you should look at PVA/IPS panels for the best of both worlds.I actually do have a Samsung T240 (1920x1200) and also a Samsung 2494HM (1920x1080) that can be rotated 90 degrees. While I do appreciate the extra 120 pixels on the first monitor, it's not that much benefit when programming, honestly. Seems like companies now are focused on making 3d monitors but that's all pointless imho - customers would benefit more from seeing 25.5-27" panels with 2560*1600 or something like that more common and cheaper.[/citation]
The problem with rotating a widescreen monitor is that you then end up with something only 1080 pixels wide -- way too narrow for my needs. This is especially apparent when I then launch Firefox, which nearly always has the bookmarks sidebar open - most web sites simply won’t fit in what remains of a 1080 pixel wide screen when the bookmarks sidebar is open. For that, I would need a minimum of 1200 pixels of horizontal room… which brings me right back to a 4:3 monitor at 1600x1200.
Plus, rotating a monitor that doesn’t have an internal rotation sensor is only a band-aid to the problem, as every time it boots it defaults back to a landscape format. And with a dual monitor setup on a 4-port dual-head KVM that is handling 4 machines, this can get quite laborious rather quickly.
And I really do need vertical space. Being able to see as much of my code as possible (the more lines, the better!) helps me avoid continually scrolling up and down (it’s a bird’s-eye-view thing). I have determined that 1200 pixels is the minimum vertical distance that I can handle comfortably, and therefore I am fully stuck with 4:3 monitors. That is also why I recently splurged over $300 to get a pair of reconditioned HP LP2065 monitors as backups - once my main ones go, what else could I possibly purchase to replace them? NOTHING. At least, nothing currently being produced.
And no, I cannot make use of 25-27" monitors. I don’t have enough physical space, either vertically or horizontally. My pair of 21" units barely fit in the space I have to begin with (I have a unique table-on-top-a-table setup, with my monitors hanging down from the upper table and my workstations above it). Hence another strike against anything that isn’t 4:3.
The problem with rotating a widescreen monitor is that you then end up with something only 1080 pixels wide -- way too narrow for my needs. This is especially apparent when I then launch Firefox, which nearly always has the bookmarks sidebar open - most web sites simply won’t fit in what remains of a 1080 pixel wide screen when the bookmarks sidebar is open. For that, I would need a minimum of 1200 pixels of horizontal room… which brings me right back to a 4:3 monitor at 1600x1200.
Plus, rotating a monitor that doesn’t have an internal rotation sensor is only a band-aid to the problem, as every time it boots it defaults back to a landscape format. And with a dual monitor setup on a 4-port dual-head KVM that is handling 4 machines, this can get quite laborious rather quickly.
And I really do need vertical space. Being able to see as much of my code as possible (the more lines, the better!) helps me avoid continually scrolling up and down (it’s a bird’s-eye-view thing). I have determined that 1200 pixels is the minimum vertical distance that I can handle comfortably, and therefore I am fully stuck with 4:3 monitors. That is also why I recently splurged over $300 to get a pair of reconditioned HP LP2065 monitors as backups - once my main ones go, what else could I possibly purchase to replace them? NOTHING. At least, nothing currently being produced.
And no, I cannot make use of 25-27" monitors. I don’t have enough physical space, either vertically or horizontally. My pair of 21" units barely fit in the space I have to begin with (I have a unique table-on-top-a-table setup, with my monitors hanging down from the upper table and my workstations above it). Hence another strike against anything that isn’t 4:3.
dallaswits
Distinguished
- Sep 16, 2010
- 77
- 0
- 18,630
If we are going to talk about 60Hz monitors then my Viewsonic 24" was $220, has a 2ms response time and 1k contrast.
Why on earth did you limit yourself to 23"'s?
And then pick 3 that are not exactly at aggressive price points?
Heck, that samsung monitor is a "high style/high price for its spec" model meant more for high end post industrial design offices, not a typical consumer product...
Samsun makes some of the best monitors in the world, and at a broad range of price points, coulda done better on this one.
Why on earth did you limit yourself to 23"'s?
And then pick 3 that are not exactly at aggressive price points?
Heck, that samsung monitor is a "high style/high price for its spec" model meant more for high end post industrial design offices, not a typical consumer product...
Samsun makes some of the best monitors in the world, and at a broad range of price points, coulda done better on this one.
I would like to see review about 24" monitors specialized for gaming.1920x1080
Why are most monitors today limited to this or lower?
I refuse to buy any monitor that is inferior to my existing ones, I have two 20" Dell monitors at 1600x1200. 1920x1080 just does not cut it.
Why are most monitors today limited to this or lower?
I refuse to buy any monitor that is inferior to my existing ones, I have two 20" Dell monitors at 1600x1200. 1920x1080 just does not cut it.
Why 1920x1080? Because that's the default resolution of Bluray, High Definition broadcasts and so on.
If someone plays a bluray disk on their monitor, it pops up nicely on the whole screen, without any additional black bars.
Also, this allows monitor manufacturers to use the same panels on TVs - they just have to change the electronics behind to include a TV signal decoder.
Not all monitor makers have their own manufacturing line for the LCD panel, some design and make just the circuits board behind it and the plastic casing and buy the LCD panel from other companies like Samsung or LG.
So by using the same display panels for two purposes (monitor and TVs), they can buy the actual LCD panel in a much higher volume, therefore at a much lower price, and in the end have a bigger profit.
There's also a reluctance of going to a higher resolution because on cheaper LCD panels, when a 1920x1080 picture (for example from a blu-ray) is resized to fill a higher resolution panel, there would be noticeable flaws in the picture quality.
The only easy ways to avoid such issues is to have panels that are exactly 150% or 200% the size of 1920x1080, which would mean 2880x1620 or 3840x2160, the later only useful with 36-40" monitors or you would not see the small texts in Windows.
But with so many pixels on the panel, with the best possible manufacturing process, you'd still get dead pixels - probably out of 100 3840x2160 LCD panels, you'd get 10 that have no dead pixels and from the rest of 90 panels, only half would probably be reusabled (cut down to 1920x1080 or something like that). So there would be lot of waste and low volume of these big screens, therefore the price would be very high - think 2-3000$ for a 40" LCD screen. People just won't buy it.
If someone plays a bluray disk on their monitor, it pops up nicely on the whole screen, without any additional black bars.
Also, this allows monitor manufacturers to use the same panels on TVs - they just have to change the electronics behind to include a TV signal decoder.
Not all monitor makers have their own manufacturing line for the LCD panel, some design and make just the circuits board behind it and the plastic casing and buy the LCD panel from other companies like Samsung or LG.
So by using the same display panels for two purposes (monitor and TVs), they can buy the actual LCD panel in a much higher volume, therefore at a much lower price, and in the end have a bigger profit.
There's also a reluctance of going to a higher resolution because on cheaper LCD panels, when a 1920x1080 picture (for example from a blu-ray) is resized to fill a higher resolution panel, there would be noticeable flaws in the picture quality.
The only easy ways to avoid such issues is to have panels that are exactly 150% or 200% the size of 1920x1080, which would mean 2880x1620 or 3840x2160, the later only useful with 36-40" monitors or you would not see the small texts in Windows.
But with so many pixels on the panel, with the best possible manufacturing process, you'd still get dead pixels - probably out of 100 3840x2160 LCD panels, you'd get 10 that have no dead pixels and from the rest of 90 panels, only half would probably be reusabled (cut down to 1920x1080 or something like that). So there would be lot of waste and low volume of these big screens, therefore the price would be very high - think 2-3000$ for a 40" LCD screen. People just won't buy it.
arunloveshacking
Distinguished
- Jan 17, 2010
- 79
- 0
- 18,640
Well, Atleast I got myself a good P2350 instead of Dell for gaming. I am absolutely happy with samsung's offering. Less fuss, most performance. WTG, Samsung
mdillenbeck
Distinguished
- Jun 11, 2008
- 504
- 0
- 18,980
[citation][nom]mariushm[/nom]Why 1920x1080? Because that's the default resolution of Bluray, High Definition broadcasts and so on. If someone plays a bluray disk on their monitor, it pops up nicely on the whole screen, without any additional black bars. [/citation]
You are wrong. Only new TV shows are in the 16:9 format (widescreen). Movies have a much higher width-to-height aspect ratio and you will get black bars even on 16:9 monitors.
You are wrong. Only new TV shows are in the 16:9 format (widescreen). Movies have a much higher width-to-height aspect ratio and you will get black bars even on 16:9 monitors.
vexun11
Distinguished
- Dec 17, 2009
- 719
- 0
- 18,990
Samsung FTW! I just had my samsung 22' syncmaster that I got back in 2003 go out on me and I had this thing on 14-15 hours a day. I guess it went out because it was one of many that had slightly defective power supplies, but still I can't believe it lasted so long.
The_last_dodo
Distinguished
- Apr 27, 2011
- 2
- 0
- 18,510
I miss the information about input lag, dragging the picture: as example moving a window on the desktop while the content of the window is displayed. This also affects game performance, dragging of edges.
The_last_dodo
Distinguished
- Apr 27, 2011
- 2
- 0
- 18,510
I miss the information about input lag, dragging the picture: as example moving a window on the desktop while the content of the window is displayed. This also affects game performance, dragging of edges.
Nice info. How about a review of the same brand with different models at different price ranges(all panel types-ips,tn,va,etc)...so one can see what you get..
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
News First credible report of RTX 5090 FE with melted connector appears — third-party cable likely cause- Started by Admin
- Replies: 48
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
Tested: Intel's Arrow Lake 140T iGPU mostly maintains an edge over AMD's older 880m
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 19
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram