Best 30" monitor out there??

[Rifter]

VGA handles higher resolutions than DVI on a single connector. Which is why I still chuckle when I hear people get all hot and bothered for that awesome DVI.

This is incorrect, VGA is limited to:

2048x1536px @85 Hz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VGA_connector


DVI dual link can do:

2,560 × 1,600 @ 60 Hz

or

3,840 × 2,400 @ 33 Hz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface


EDIT TO Add:

HDMI is still the best:

v1.3 can do 2560×1600 75hz

and v1.4 can do

4096×2160 24hz

 

[RaistlinZ]

Question... is HDMI supposed to offer superior image quality than DVI? I tried hooking up my monitor to the HDMI port and it looked like crap. I quickly switched back to the DVI connection.

 

[Mark R]

Question... is HDMI supposed to offer superior image quality than DVI? I tried hooking up my monitor to the HDMI port and it looked like crap. I quickly switched back to the DVI connection.

HDMI and DVI were virtually the same, until the most recent versions of HDMI - they're just different connectors.

HDMI also has stricter specs for some features that are optional on DVI:
- DHCP anti-piracy technology is optional for DVI connections, but mandatory for HDMI (This means that not all DVI monitors/TVs support blu-ray playback, but all HDMI monitors/TVs do)
- Audio signals. HDMI connections must support digital audio signals. This is optional (and very rarely supported) by DVI.

However, over the last 3 or 4 years, a number of upgrades to the HDMI spec have been made - in preparation for higher resolutions, color depths, refresh rates, 3D, etc. As a result, these latest HDMI signals are not backward compatible with DVI. (But if you a have a DVI signal on HDMI pins, any HDMI monitor/TV should accept it).

The reason your HDMI input looked poor quality was because of processing in your monitor/TV. TV broadcasts (and therefore DVDs, etc.) are prepared so that the edges of the images are not intended to be displayed. This is called 'overscan' - this is a historical thing. The edges of a TV picture with analog broadcast were often full of artefacts and unstable - so the TVs zoomed in on the centre of the image, cutting off the edges.

This overscan isn't necessary today - but it is kept for tradition. So, a 1920x1080 TV when it gets a 1920x1080 HDMI signal will tend to treat it like a TV signal. It will cut the image down to 1720x980 and then scale up to 1920x1080 - causing loss of edges and lots of scaling artefacts (as the image is no longer native resolution). Because DVI ports tend to be used for computers, this is unacceptable, so most TVs don't overscan on DVI ports. Even so, most TVs should have an option to disable overscan and force native resolution (1:1 pixel mapping) mode.

 

[Rifter]

for HDMI i have found it very important to put the TV or LCD to 1/1 pixel mapping or if it has a PC mode then also turn that setting on.

 

[Rubycon]

TV is 1920x1080 and once you go over 22" the dot pitch increase becomes very apparent. I tried using a 32" HDTV as a monitor and found it caused too much eyestrain looking at text. Now for games it's fine. (and fun!)

You definitely want to turn off any kind of image processing too as it adds ridiculous input delay. Moving the mouse felt like I was under water pushing on it! If you ever scuba dive you know what I'm talking about.

Did Dell discontinue the 3007/3008 series?
Not sure if I want an LED monitor. All the notebooks are going LED and the white has a really bleak blue-green cast to it. Reminds me of DLP projectors using metal halide bulbs. At least there is no rainbow effect.

The best 30" is made by Eizo. NEC makes a good one too. These are for color critical work and cost several times the OP upper budget.

 

[George Powell]

I've been using a Dell 3007WFP-HC since it was released a few years ago and have found it to be remarkably good. I'm not a fan of FPS games - favouring more RTS and RPG type games, for these the monitor is excellent.

From my experience of using it I have found it is essential wherever possible to run the game at the native resolution of the monitor.
As far as brightness goes I have found no real issues at all, I don't use the monitor at high brightness settings anyway (I've no need to in the room I use it in).

For normal office type use it is superb, you can work on A3 sized documents with ease and viewing technical drawings is absolutely brilliant.

My only complaints are is uses quite a bit of electricity - newer LED backlight monitors should be more conservative in their power use and the power button light is far too bright - I put a bit of black electrical tape over it and it's still visible.

 

[SamurAchzar]

I don't care for the 30" too much, it gives that "great wall o' LCD" feeling which is nice but depending on usage, a multi-monitor setup can be much superior for productivity, and for the same price. Gaming is another matter though.
I'm using 2x 24" in portrait and a 27" in landscape (24-24-27) and that doesn't cost much more than the 30" but works infinitely better for my use (programming).

CAD, graphics work or gaming, 30" can be awesome. Programming, office work - multi monitor is better, in my opinion.

 

[RaistlinZ]

I couldn't see myself gaming on a multi monitor setup until they come out with bezel-less monitors. I like one large uniterrupted visual space for gaming.

 

[yhelothar]

This is incorrect, VGA is limited to:

2048x1536px @85 Hz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VGA_connector


DVI dual link can do:

2,560 × 1,600 @ 60 Hz

or

3,840 × 2,400 @ 33 Hz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface


EDIT TO Add:

HDMI is still the best:

v1.3 can do 2560×1600 75hz

and v1.4 can do

4096×2160 24hz

He mentioned SINGLE LINK DVI and you posted dual link DVI specs.
And I was able to do 2304x1536 @85Hz via VGA when I had a 24" Sony FW900

 

[Baasha]

I have the Dell U3011 and it is a fantastic monitor. It is an IPS panel and has many upgraded features from its predecessor and so, IMO, it is the best 30" monitor out there right now.

 

[Rifter]

He mentioned SINGLE LINK DVI and you posted dual link DVI specs.
And I was able to do 2304x1536 @85Hz via VGA when I had a 24" Sony FW900

But he thinks dual link is dual cables which is incorect He specifically said VGA is better because it is a single connector which is also incorrect. Dual link is one cable just like single link, you just need a dual link cable.

 

[Rubycon]

And I was able to do 2304x1536 @85Hz via VGA when I had a 24" Sony FW900

I hope you were using the BNC input on that monitor. :biggrin:

 

[bunnyfubbles]

This is incorrect, VGA is limited to:

2048x1536px @85 Hz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VGA_connector


DVI dual link can do:

2,560 × 1,600 @ 60 Hz

or

3,840 × 2,400 @ 33 Hz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface


EDIT TO Add:

HDMI is still the best:

v1.3 can do 2560×1600 75hz

and v1.4 can do

4096×2160 24hz

Display Port destroys them all as it has enough bandwidth to drive 3840 × 2160 × 30 bpp @ 60 Hz or even 4 simultaneous 1080p60 displays from a single connection or even a theoretical 2560x1600x30bpp @ 120Hz

 

[bunnyfubbles]

dp

 

[Rifter]

Display Port destroys them all as it has enough bandwidth to drive 3840 × 2160 × 30 bpp @ 60 Hz or even 4 simultaneous 1080p60 displays from a single connection or even a theoretical 2560x1600x30bpp @ 120Hz

This is true, but out of alot of people price range to get a monitor that supports that res/refresh rate.

 

[solaris54]

Samsung 305t

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824001098

They can be found on Ebay at good real good prices if you keep looking.