High End TN Monitor?

[Draehl]

Looking to upgrade my Samsung 997df 19" CRT. It's a great monitor with a rather nice picture, but I'm looking to go larger and widescreen...

-Mostly for gaming so I definitely don't want to deal with ghosting, but I'm not doing online shooters either, so it's not 100% paramount. (Skyrim, GW2 when it comes out, Diablo III, LoL, etc.)
-Perfect color isn't a requirement as I'm not doing any design work, but I don't want terrible color either. Very black blacks are a priority, however.
-24" 1920x1200 is my ideal size. I know most monitors are 1920x1080, but I'd like the added pixels for games.
-A huge viewing angle isn't at all necessary, but I also don't want to have to sit perfectly dead even to get a good picture.
-The red line on most of the Asus monitors is gaudy and likely distracting. No Asus
-No preference for LED or CCFL.

Reading back over my own requirements I feel that a lot of the supposed strong suites of IPS monitors might almost be wasted on me, compounded on the fact that many state there isn't as large a difference as everyone makes it out to be. So that got me thinking- why not go for a high end TN panel? Otherwise I keep coming back to the Dell U2410 or HP ZR24w but reading the reviews on these bring up their own downsides.

Are there any good higher quality TN monitors that might split the difference between standard trash TN and IPS? Especially if I could drop 2-3 bills rather than 4-5...

 

[LokutusofBorg]

When people ask me this question I point them at the U2412M and run down the benefits of IPS, which your bullet list almost perfectly describes. The U2412M is standard gamut, has very rich color, is LED backlit so blacks are awesome, has no viewing angle issues, and is relatively cheap.

If people insist on TN then I point them at Asus. Since you're rejecting them out of hand, I'd suggest either Dell or BenQ.

I'd suggest you give the U2412M a hard look though.

 

[birthdaymonkey]

Seconded on the U2412M. I just bought one a few weeks ago and am very pleased so far.

 

[blackened23]

Some people say get IPS just because. I use IPS/PLS monitors and while I love them, thats not necessarily the case. What you buy depends on how you use your computer. I use various IPS Panels and the benefit you get is the following:

1) Better color accuracy/reproduction
2) Better viewing angles
3) Greater than 1080p resolution at 27" or higher
4) Big drawback - every model 2010/2011 IPS panel uses "thick" AG coating, versus the light AG coating that most monitors use. White backgrounds with text will look grainy, i've seen this on the u3011 that I bought, the u2711 and HP ZR2740w. Its super annoying but i've gotten used to it. All IPS panels made in the past 2 years use the same LG screen with the same AG coating. The AG is far too thick and it detracts from otherwise fantastic monitors.

For text sharpness TN and IPS are equal - colors can be close depending on build quality of TN.

#2 viewing angles- doesn't matter if you're viewing dead on. If you're viewing dead on viewing angles do not matter, unless you're doing eyefinity.

#3 greater than 1080p---Thats the clincher for me. Thats why I went IPS/PLS. I refuse to run 1080p at 27" or 30", it looks terrible.




With all this said, if you're gaming there is no question - you should get 120hz. If you value other stuff and do a lot of productivity work -- and desire a greater than 1080p resolution (as I do) then get an IPS or PLS panel that is 27" or greater. If you DO NOT Care about viewing angles , a TN is fine. Some people here make IPS out to be the second coming. They are indeed nice but its really not needed if you're only gaming - the difference again is color accuracy and viewing angles. If you're not a professional autocad type of person it shouldn't matter to you.

If you decide to go IPS - give the samsung PLS screens a hard look. I've used the 27" 850D and it is fantastic and doesn't have the horrible thick AG that other IPS panels have. Subjectively, the samsung has better colors than the u3011 while having *way* better white uniformity / text quality (due to the crappy AG on the 3011)

 

[BathroomFeeling]

-24" 1920x1200 is my ideal size. I know most monitors are 1920x1080, but I'd like the added pixels for games.

1080 is better for games as it offers a larger gaming area compared to 1200, you need to compare aspect ratio rather than resolution. (Link)

1200 is better for program real-estate (like web browsing, etc...) however.

 

[blackened23]

1080 is better for games as it offers a larger gaming area compared to 1200, you need to compare aspect ratio rather than resolution. (Link)

1200 is better for program real-estate (like web browsing, etc...) however.

For gaming i've found more immersion by gaming at high res (2560x1600). Once you try it its tough to go back.

But I sway back and forth on this though, the difference with 120hz TN panels is amazing. I was very impressed by the 27" 120hz Acer panel, it is VERY nice. Its a hard call, high res IPS or 120hz....

Now we just need a company to combine both IPS/PLS color/viewing angles with 120hz

 

[Phynaz]

1080 is better for games as it offers a larger gaming area compared to 1200, you need to compare aspect ratio rather than resolution. (Link)

1200 is better for program real-estate (like web browsing, etc...) however.

That is only the case assuming your game doesn't support 19x12 resolution.

 

[BathroomFeeling]

You lose horizontal areas with games that support 1200 properly don't you? If a game doesn't support 1200, it could sort of squeeze, so you don't lose area that way *(but it looks weird).

 

[nitromullet]

1080 is better for games as it offers a larger gaming area compared to 1200, you need to compare aspect ratio rather than resolution. (Link)

1200 is better for program real-estate (like web browsing, etc...) however.

2560x1440... the best of both worlds, 1440 vertical pixels for productivity real estate plus a 16:9 aspect ratio.

 

[BathroomFeeling]

2560x1440... the best of both worlds, 1440 vertical pixels for productivity real estate plus a 16:9 aspect ratio.

Yea!!1

 

[ElFenix]

1080 is better for games as it offers a larger gaming area compared to 1200, you need to compare aspect ratio rather than resolution. (Link)

1200 is better for program real-estate (like web browsing, etc...) however.

that's laziness on the developer's part. why hold the vertical field of view constant?

 

[Spikesoldier]

if your primary role is gaming, i would go for the 120Hz panel instead of an IPS.

the 120Hz monitor will be my next upgrade. the only drawback is that your system has to be able to put out 120FPS to max out the capabilities of the new display.

that means a GPU upgrade for me at the same time. i'm gonna have to be saving my pennies for a minute.

 

[Magic Carpet]

1080 is better for games as it offers a larger gaming area compared to 1200, you need to compare aspect ratio rather than resolution. (Link)

1200 is better for program real-estate (like web browsing, etc...) however.

Thanks for the SC2 link. That explains why I suck so hard at it at 4:3, lmao.

 

[ljtatej]

I'm going to try the new BENQ XL2420T, which mine is on backorder right this second. Seems like it should be a good monitor. Anyway, I wanted to know with 120Hz, is it imperative that fps should be above 120 to be smooth? I have 2 7970s on the way in hopes that I won't have to upgrade my system for a good while.

 

[SithSolo1]

1080 is better for games as it offers a larger gaming area compared to 1200, you need to compare aspect ratio rather than resolution. (Link)

Maybe I'm stupid but this doesn't make sense to me.

1920x1080 fits inside 1920x1200 doesn't it? How does it offer more gaming area?

 

[amenx]

Maybe I'm stupid but this doesn't make sense to me.

1920x1080 fits inside 1920x1200 doesn't it? How does it offer more gaming area?

Agreed. 1920 = 1920 horizontally. Imperceptible vertical stretch from 1080 to 1200 is only thing that occurs.

 

[BathroomFeeling]

Maybe I'm stupid but this doesn't make sense to me.
1920x1080 fits inside 1920x1200 doesn't it? How does it offer more gaming area?

Agreed. 1920 = 1920 horizontally. Imperceptible vertical stretch from 1080 to 1200 is only thing that occurs.

Because as ElFenix stated, developers make the vertical field of view constant. It makes sense for certain game types like FPSs, as you need moar horizontals. But it's not as necessary for games like Starcraft and so forth.

If developers instead make the horizontal field constant, then 1200 screens would offer more screen space and be the awesum! But no.

 

[Draehl]

My only worry going to 1920x1080 is I'm currently running 1600x1200 so I'll actually be losing vertical resolution on a vertically larger screen with a 1080.

 

[brencat]

Another vote here for the Dell U2412M IPS panel... for $317 shipped when they go on sale, it's hard to beat. If you're not playing FPS, this is likely the best all around choice for the money.

Moot point, but I'd recommend the TN panel in my sig if it was still made (19x12, 4ms, zero input lag, and awesome color accuracy). I play shooters like BF3 exclusively fyi.

 

[ElFenix]

Because as ElFenix stated, developers make the vertical field of view constant. It makes sense for certain game types like FPSs, as you need moar horizontals. But it's not as necessary for games like Starcraft and so forth.

If developers instead make the horizontal field constant, then 1200 screens would offer more screen space and be the awesum! But no.

if you have proper 1:1 pixel rather than stretching for non-native resolutions it won't matter, you can run starcraft on 1920x1080 on your 19x12 monitor. and if you play in a window it don't matter anyway.

 

[BathroomFeeling]

you can run starcraft on 1920x1080 on your 19x12 monitor

The black bars make my chest hair itchy.