LCD Buyer's Guide

[dnyarri]

Thanks, how about the Sony ? I've heard lots of recommendations on him for his P-MVA panel compared to the others except the VS, TN panel..

Oh? I wasn't even aware it was P-MVA. (I glossed over it since I hadn't heard of the model.)

Even then, I'm a little wary of recommending something I haven't heard a single thing about. Where did you find that it was P-MVA, out of curiosity?

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/
Search for Sony SDM-X95FB
yet the response time bit concerns me..

I'm using http://www.flatpanels.dk/panels.php

Sony SDM-X95FB has a 19 inch 8 ms (g2g) P-MVA panel.

Sony SDM-X95FS has a 19 inch 8 ms (g2g) P-MVA panel.

the 8ms is the fastest response for VA panels, like the VP930 and 971P, so it should b fine as many non hardcore gamers report it to b sufficient (8ms g2g=16ms full cycle =60fps) what does makes a difference is the overdrive engine and its quality, like the reports on the 971p (advertised as 6ms) with its striking..

 

[dnyarri]

grr replied twice.. still trying to understand how to use forums..anyway another question than:

LCDs with lower dot pitch will naturally have better interpolation. So, I would suggest the HP LP2065 if you're looking for a 20" non-WS with decent interpolation quality. I don't think you will be disappointed at the quality of older games on an LCD.

For those who want a 20.1" non-WS S-IPS LCD, you may check NEC MultiSync LCD2070NX on Amazon.com. I just received my 2070NX from amazon today at $249.99 plus $9.95 shipping. The monitor looks great. Even backlight, great color, no dead pixel, and it's guaranteed to have an IPS panel. Here's link.

sadly i have neither of those monitors available..
the non TN non WS 'fast' monitors available are:
19" - VS VP930 (400$), Samsung 971P(400$), Eizo S1931(550$)
20" - VS VP2030(700$), Dell 2007FP(500$), LG L2000C(500$)

now for the old games purpose i would take the 20" as i will have to scale anyway on the 19"..
but im playing new games too, and i dont think i can play at 1600x1200, so if ill take 20" (not to mention the price diff) i will have to rescale for all games..but if i take the 19" ill get worse dot pitch that ill never dreamed of using on my CRT when i bought it (i remember we aimed for the 0.24/0.20.., 0.25 was ok, and 0.27 was terrible). and taking 17" is out of the question as its too small and its old stuff

i hope im making the right decision here not to take TN panel, as im limiting myself to very few models, even tho its a internet / gaming monitor.. when i saw the LG 1970HR at my friend i was about to puke, we compared it to my CRT, ye it was fast, but the colors and contrast..yuck, every inch u move your head the colors and brightness change and the contrast was too low (was set to 50-60) but when u tried to raise to it doesnt improve and things started to look weird. in addition the colors look washed tho vibrant and sharp compared to my CRT.

so..any advice on what i should choose?

 

[imported_Imp]

Holy mother eff. It's time.

Certain store(chee, wonder which...) has the 2407 for sale at only a low price of $649 CAN today. Crap, gotta wait till I get home to order (don't trust computer lab security). Is it a good idea to pick up the extra 2 years of warranty for $50?

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: Liran xD
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/
Search for Sony SDM-X95FB
yet the response time bit concerns me..

Hmm, I'd go for the 931C anyway. There's an almost certainty that it has a lower response time, and it also has a wider-gamut backlight.

Originally posted by: im2good4u
@xtknight, so having a smaller dot pitch mean a better LCD overall? the reason i even considered AOC is because its dirt cheap thats why im tryin to look for a review of that product but didn't find any

I agree with Matt2's comments. Getting a proven 20" over an unknown-quality 22" would be an easy choice for me.

Originally posted by: Hycron
Hi

Was just wondering what monitor you would recommend for text/internet and dvd playback. Not for gaming. I spend allot of hours in front of my computer reading, so require an lcd monitor that's easy to look at for long amounts of time. My current lcd seems to enjoy burning my eyes out of their sockets, regardless of how I play around with its settings.

What I should know first is what model your first LCD is.

Originally posted by: dnyarri
sadly i have neither of those monitors available..
the non TN non WS 'fast' monitors available are:
19" - VS VP930 (400$), Samsung 971P(400$), Eizo S1931(550$)
20" - VS VP2030(700$), Dell 2007FP(500$), LG L2000C(500$)

now for the old games purpose i would take the 20" as i will have to scale anyway on the 19"..
but im playing new games too, and i dont think i can play at 1600x1200, so if ill take 20" (not to mention the price diff) i will have to rescale for all games..but if i take the 19" ill get worse dot pitch that ill never dreamed of using on my CRT when i bought it (i remember we aimed for the 0.24/0.20.., 0.25 was ok, and 0.27 was terrible). and taking 17" is out of the question as its too small and its old stuff

i hope im making the right decision here not to take TN panel, as im limiting myself to very few models, even tho its a internet / gaming monitor.. when i saw the LG 1970HR at my friend i was about to puke, we compared it to my CRT, ye it was fast, but the colors and contrast..yuck, every inch u move your head the colors and brightness change and the contrast was too low (was set to 50-60) but when u tried to raise to it doesnt improve and things started to look weird. in addition the colors look washed tho vibrant and sharp compared to my CRT.

so..any advice on what i should choose?

It sounds like you're the type of person who's very sensitive to the image quality differences between LCDs and CRTs. I'm not sure how the scaling will sit with you.

Out of the LCDs you listed above, the VP2030b sounds like the best (bet you could have guessed that due to the price). Thing is, the L2000C is a good (and guaranteed S-IPS) panel, though it has been known to have banding issues. The 2007FP is a good monitor too, but it has been known to use both S-PVA and S-IPS panels. The S-PVA in the 2007WFP disappointed many.

Originally posted by: Imp
Holy mother eff. It's time.

Certain store(chee, wonder which...) has the 2407 for sale at only a low price of $649 CAN today. Crap, gotta wait till I get home to order (don't trust computer lab security). Is it a good idea to pick up the extra 2 years of warranty for $50?

I'd say so.

 

[Arjunne]

Just thought I would post a summation to my LCD buying experience: 3 Acers was enough to prove to me that it wasn't worth my money. 3 brand new, different panels, all with similar defects. No thanks. Instead, I went back to future shop to pick up an LG 204WT (which was the original one I purchased), and ended up buying the exact same one I returned a few weeks ago, open box, for 50 bucks less than I paid. 240.00 for the LG 204WT was a damned steal - this monitor is FAR superior to the Acer, no backlight bleed, and excellent colour rendering/black rendering, as was noted in the buyers guide. Sure, its 20, versus 22, but for the money, and the superior quality, I'll take the LG any day.

 

[Arjunne]

Just thought I would post a summation to my LCD buying experience: 3 Acers was enough to prove to me that it wasn't worth my money. 3 brand new, different panels, all with similar defects. No thanks. Instead, I went back to future shop to pick up an LG 204WT (which was the original one I purchased), and ended up buying the exact same one I returned a few weeks ago, open box, for 50 bucks less than I paid. 240.00 for the LG 204WT was a damned steal - this monitor is FAR superior to the Acer, no backlight bleed, and excellent colour rendering/black rendering, as was noted in the buyers guide. Sure, its 20, versus 22, but for the money, and the superior quality, I'll take the LG any day.

 

[cheap]

Originally posted by: Arjunne
Just thought I would post a summation to my LCD buying experience: 3 Acers was enough to prove to me that it wasn't worth my money. 3 brand new, different panels, all with similar defects. No thanks. Instead, I went back to future shop to pick up an LG 204WT (which was the original one I purchased), and ended up buying the exact same one I returned a few weeks ago, open box, for 50 bucks less than I paid. 240.00 for the LG 204WT was a damned steal - this monitor is FAR superior to the Acer, no backlight bleed, and excellent colour rendering/black rendering, as was noted in the buyers guide. Sure, its 20, versus 22, but for the money, and the superior quality, I'll take the LG any day.

But you still get the exact same desktop space, it'll be just a little grainier on 22". 22" should be good for people who have hard time reading since it'll magnify things slightly.

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

Well I just purchased a 2407wfp using my company's account. I saved an extra 8 bucks! :frown:

 

[AnotherGuy]

If any1 looking for the best 22 incher out there... here we go: And The Answer isssssssss: The Samsung Syncmaster 226BW Thnx for the recomendation a couple weeks ago XT. It beats the hell out of all the rest of em... I still cant believe my eyes.... There just is NO BackLight bleeding coming from any side or corner.... which is known for almost any LCD... amazing quality. I put a review today at Newegg about it... comparing it to my old Sceptre 22 inch it is replacing... which had so many issues... until finally the DVI input stopped working. I am never byuing Sceptre again. Review is up on newegg under my scrname.

Check a screenshot i took of my wallpaper.... see if u like the colors:

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/9613/mydeskle1.jpg

 

[NTB]

Does anybody here have any experience with Samsung's 204B Monitor? how do you like it?

Nathan

 

[zomboloid]

I've read through much of this thread, and I am leaning toward the Samsung 226BW since I am interested in a 22" and like the idea of WS. Has anybody had any experience with the Dell 22" WS? I have seen no specific reviews other than the customer reviews on the Dell site. I like the idea of the support that Dell supplies with its products, it gives me warm fuzzies, but i'm not sure of the qualities such as backlight bleed, ghosting, etc. There just isn't any of that kind of technical depth in the Dell cust. reviews.

Most of my activity is internet and MS office stuff with some low res games thrown in. No FPS or the like. I will be running whichever monitor I get from an eVGA GeForce 6200LE TC.

TIA for any help/info you can provide.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: zomboloid
I've read through much of this thread, and I am leaning toward the Samsung 226BW since I am interested in a 22" and like the idea of WS. Has anybody had any experience with the Dell 22" WS? I have seen no specific reviews other than the customer reviews on the Dell site. I like the idea of the support that Dell supplies with its products, it gives me warm fuzzies, but i'm not sure of the qualities such as backlight bleed, ghosting, etc. There just isn't any of that kind of technical depth in the Dell cust. reviews.

Order the 226BW from Dell then, you will get the same warranties/etc:

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/prod...tail.aspx?c=us&l=en&cs=19&sku=A0964719

Most of my activity is internet and MS office stuff with some low res games thrown in. No FPS or the like. I will be running whichever monitor I get from an eVGA GeForce 6200LE TC.

TIA for any help/info you can provide.

The Dell E228* is a rather poor LCD to my knowledge, I would just grab the Samsung above.

 

[NTB]

Well, I decided to pick up a 204B while I was out today. Been using it for the last hour or so - and so far, so good. Portrait mode is awesome The only problem I've seen so far is that the vertical viewing angles aren't that great, so when the monitor is pivoted into portrait mode, the lower-right corne is a little dark. Not too bad, though.

Nathan

 

[mike3uz]

Too bad my 20WMGX2-BK has DVI problems. This is my 2nd time it's been to NEC for the DVI port. Didn't had the reciept so we paid for a box. It only lasts 1 to 2 months. Just be on the lookout for this problem. It seems to be a very rare problem though. If it breaks one more time it gets replaced for free .

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: mike3uz
Too bad my 20WMGX2-BK has DVI problems. This is my 2nd time it's been to NEC for the DVI port. Didn't had the reciept so we paid for a box. It only lasts 1 to 2 months. Just be on the lookout for this problem. It seems to be a very rare problem though. If it breaks one more time it gets replaced for free .

That's odd, I've never heard of DVI problems with the NEC. Hope it works out well for you in the end. Are you sure it's not the device on the other end? (video card, set-top box, DVR, etc)

 

[QuietSt0rm]

First of all, a very nice thread!

Now then, I am thinking of replacing my good old Samsung 17" 755DFX to a bigger Lcd. The price ceiling is about $300 but I am willing to put in a little more extra money if necessary to get a very good monitor in this price range.
I will be using the lcd to surf the internet, play games (fps, strategy) and watch movies.

I was thinking about the 19" or 20" range, no widescreen, but since people say that the 19"-s look grainy because of their high pixel pitch in their native resolution and have usually low quality panels (TN, etc) then I think a 20" would be better as the pixel pitch is smaller and good Ips panels exist, right?

Here is my worrisome conf:

AMD XP 1800+
410 W Chieftec
Pc Chips M848A.
Club3D 6600GT 128mb
DDRAM 2x512MB 400 PC3200 CL2.5 AM1.
XP PRO


Is it even possible that my pc would run games at 1600x1200 which is usually the 20"-s native resolution. I truly doubt that but thought I'd ask just in case.
If it is not possible then what kind of sacrifices should I have to make for my pc to run games smoothly in this resolution?
I am a bit of a "quality freak" but would like to spend as little as possible.
Or should I just stick with the 19"-s... if my conf even supports the resolutions of those...

A quite hard case but I would really appreciate Your thoughts!

 

[mikuto]

Originally posted by: QuietSt0rm
Here is my worrisome conf:

AMD XP 1800+
410 W Chieftec
Pc Chips M848A.
Club3D 6600GT 128mb
DDRAM 2x512MB 400 PC3200 CL2.5 AM1.
XP PRO


Is it even possible that my pc would run games at 1600x1200 which is usually the 20"-s native resolution. I truly doubt that but thought I'd ask just in case.
If it is not possible then what kind of sacrifices should I have to make for my pc to run games smoothly in this resolution?
I am a bit of a "quality freak" but would like to spend as little as possible.
Or should I just stick with the 19"-s... if my conf even supports the resolutions of those...

A quite hard case but I would really appreciate Your thoughts!

I'll leave the monitor recommendations to The Expert, but in terms of what screen sizes your configuration could handle, here's my two cents:
-1600x1200: forget it, no way, unless it's a game where speed really is no issue - say, static screen-by-screen adventure games, but then again, those generally don't run at such high screen sizes anyway.
-1280x1024: depends on the game. Older ones, even FPSs, may run; think Unreal Tournament 2003, Battlefield Vietnam, something in that league. The 6600GT is known to be able to run Doom 3 reasonably well, but at 1024x768 and with 256 MB of RAM; 128 is a bit small. Newer games, especially fancy FPSs released in the last couple of years... only if you set (almost) everything to 'low'.

All is not lost, however - you can always run at 1024x768 in centered mode, 1:1 with no scaling, it's just that you'll have black bars around the screen. It's not that bad in my opinion (I'll take that over stretching any day), but it depends on your personal preference.

In terms of upgrades, I'd say the first thing would be the graphics card - go as high as you can afford . Keep in mind though that at some point the processor and chipset will become a bottleneck; there's only so much you can do on an existing system before you just have to bite the bullet and buy a new one.

 

[imported_Imp]

It's here.

My 2407wfp came today, and it only took an hour to hook up (took a while deciding on how to route wires. Made in Mexico and it's an A04, came from Ontario, CA to Ontario, Canada. All I can say is omfg... Coming from about 2 years use of a 17" 5:4 TN, I can't believe how much real estate I have (running two browsers side by side right now), and the viewing angles are unbelievable. I can actually walk around the room and only notice a tint of great while my old one would have blacked out if I even looked down an inch. Got lucky too, no dead pixels. Have only had it turned on for an hour, but will have to wait till tomorrow to really test it out (damn test/assignment). Only complaint so far is it's too bright, even at 0 brightness. Feels like when I went from a CRT to LCD all over again.

Update: Just tried out my first WS game of Company of Heroes. Absolutely beautiful, and I'm amazed at how well it runs at 1680x1050. Only turned a few details down a notch , and it barely even stutters.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: QuietSt0rm
First of all, a very nice thread!

Now then, I am thinking of replacing my good old Samsung 17" 755DFX to a bigger Lcd. The price ceiling is about $300 but I am willing to put in a little more extra money if necessary to get a very good monitor in this price range.
I will be using the lcd to surf the internet, play games (fps, strategy) and watch movies.

I was thinking about the 19" or 20" range, no widescreen, but since people say that the 19"-s look grainy because of their high pixel pitch in their native resolution and have usually low quality panels (TN, etc) then I think a 20" would be better as the pixel pitch is smaller and good Ips panels exist, right?

Here is my worrisome conf:

AMD XP 1800+
410 W Chieftec
Pc Chips M848A.
Club3D 6600GT 128mb
DDRAM 2x512MB 400 PC3200 CL2.5 AM1.
XP PRO


Is it even possible that my pc would run games at 1600x1200 which is usually the 20"-s native resolution. I truly doubt that but thought I'd ask just in case.
If it is not possible then what kind of sacrifices should I have to make for my pc to run games smoothly in this resolution?
I am a bit of a "quality freak" but would like to spend as little as possible.
Or should I just stick with the 19"-s... if my conf even supports the resolutions of those...

A quite hard case but I would really appreciate Your thoughts!

If you don't want widescreen then that eliminates the Acer AL2051W which is otherwise an 8-bit 20" widescreen.

For quality 20" 4:3 screens you have about one choice for anywhere close to $400: the HP LP2065. You will be stuck with a TN unless you are willing to go widescreen or spend $400.

There are actually a couple more choices: the ViewSonic VP930b and the Samsung 971P. I would recommend the VP930b: it is faster for gaming and cheaper. It is arguably better overall.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824116365

VP930b (~8-bit P-MVA) - $313 at Newegg currently. That is what I suggest given your current situation. Also it will minimize stress on that 6600GT. Your next upgrade should include at least a Conroe E6300 and 8800GTS and you will be good to go. Those components have extremely good value/worth today.

 

[QuietSt0rm]

Originally posted by: mikuto

I'll leave the monitor recommendations to The Expert, but in terms of what screen sizes your configuration could handle, here's my two cents:
-1600x1200: forget it, no way, unless it's a game where speed really is no issue - say, static screen-by-screen adventure games, but then again, those generally don't run at such high screen sizes anyway.
-1280x1024: depends on the game. Older ones, even FPSs, may run; think Unreal Tournament 2003, Battlefield Vietnam, something in that league. The 6600GT is known to be able to run Doom 3 reasonably well, but at 1024x768 and with 256 MB of RAM; 128 is a bit small. Newer games, especially fancy FPSs released in the last couple of years... only if you set (almost) everything to 'low'.

All is not lost, however - you can always run at 1024x768 in centered mode, 1:1 with no scaling, it's just that you'll have black bars around the screen. It's not that bad in my opinion (I'll take that over stretching any day), but it depends on your personal preference.

In terms of upgrades, I'd say the first thing would be the graphics card - go as high as you can afford . Keep in mind though that at some point the processor and chipset will become a bottleneck; there's only so much you can do on an existing system before you just have to bite the bullet and buy a new one.

Thank You very much for the answer mr mikuto
And I thought that the first thing to do would be to replace my old processor and motherboard, heh.... but as You said it will become a bottleneck sooner or later.
So graphics card first then, ok, I shall start looking for a new one.
Oh, how I would just like to replace all at once....

Originally posted by: xtknight
If you don't want widescreen then that eliminates the Acer AL2051W which is otherwise an 8-bit 20" widescreen.

For quality 20" 4:3 screens you have about one choice for anywhere close to $400: the HP LP2065. You will be stuck with a TN unless you are willing to go widescreen or spend $400.

There are actually a couple more choices: the ViewSonic VP930b and the Samsung 971P. I would recommend the VP930b: it is faster for gaming and cheaper. It is arguably better overall.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824116365

VP930b (~8-bit P-MVA) - $313 at Newegg currently. That is what I suggest given your current situation. Also it will minimize stress on that 6600GT. Your next upgrade should include at least a Conroe E6300 and 8800GTS and you will be good to go. Those components have extremely good value/worth today.

Also, thank You very much for the answer mr xtknight
I was just looking at the Lp2065 myself when comparing different monitors and it sure looks top class!
Now, that You mentioned the 8-bit acer widescreen which is suprisingly cheap and I really haven't thought of a widescreen before because of negative thoughts about them for some reason, it sounds tempting. Would You choose the acer instead of the 930b rigth away and why or why not?
I'm a bit cautious about the 930b too because I've read quite a lot of problematic concerns about it.

Also, what would be minimum requirements for a processor and a video card to run resolutions: a) 1280x1024 and b)1600x1200 pretty decently in fps and strategy games?

 

[mikuto]

Originally posted by: QuietSt0rm
Thank You very much for the answer mr mikuto
And I thought that the first thing to do would be to replace my old processor and motherboard, heh.... but as You said it will become a bottleneck sooner or later.
So graphics card first then, ok, I shall start looking for a new one.
Oh, how I would just like to replace all at once....

Something else to keep in mind is that my recommendation was for the best short-term investment. The reason I'm stressing this: I suppose your system is AGP, correct? If that's the case, then, if you only go for the graphics card, you'll have to buy an AGP one still. On the other hand, the new motherboard you'll end up buying at some stage will certainly be PCI Express, so you won't be able to keep your new card, you'll have to buy yet another one.

Also, what would be minimum requirements for a processor and a video card to run resolutions: a) 1280x1024 and b)1600x1200 pretty decently in fps and strategy games?

A pretty good source of information is the VGA Charts at
http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html

In terms of processors, I agree with xtknight's recommendation: the Core 2 Duo E6300 is pretty good value these days. Of course, as usual, the prices keep going down and new models keep coming up; take a look here:
http://www.behardware.com/news/lire/12-03-2007/#8654
The 6320 model with 4 MB of cache looks interesting; not sure what to make of it since it's at the same price as the 6300... we'll have to wait and see I guess.

Also, take a look at the next article on that page, on the GeForce 8600 - it might be a good card for a mid-range gamer's system, but we'll have to wait for the benchmarks and detailed technical info.

---------------------------------

Apologies for hijacking the thread, xtknight; I'll stop now.

 

[QuietSt0rm]

Originally posted by: mikuto
Something else to keep in mind is that my recommendation was for the best short-term investment. The reason I'm stressing this: I suppose your system is AGP, correct? If that's the case, then, if you only go for the graphics card, you'll have to buy an AGP one still. On the other hand, the new motherboard you'll end up buying at some stage will certainly be PCI Express, so you won't be able to keep your new card, you'll have to buy yet another one.

A pretty good source of information is the VGA Charts at
http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html

In terms of processors, I agree with xtknight's recommendation: the Core 2 Duo E6300 is pretty good value these days. Of course, as usual, the prices keep going down and new models keep coming up; take a look here:
http://www.behardware.com/news/lire/12-03-2007/#8654
The 6320 model with 4 MB of cache looks interesting; not sure what to make of it since it's at the same price as the 6300... we'll have to wait and see I guess.

Also, take a look at the next article on that page, on the GeForce 8600 - it might be a good card for a mid-range gamer's system, but we'll have to wait for the benchmarks and detailed technical info.
---------------------------------
Apologies for hijacking the thread, xtknight; I'll stop now.

Yes, the graphics card would be a short-term investment because of the motherboard supporting only AGP, You are correct. Thank You for the links. When the 8600 comes out I hope it'll drive some other video card prices down a bit as well. I'll wait and see for that.

Thank You, mr mikuto

 

[jzodda]

Great Guide!

Received my Dell 2407 WFP Rev A04 Made in Mexico with a manufacture date of March 2007 today and I must say I am impressed so far. First off let me say I had a RevA01 that I got rid of a few months ago and only went in on this because it was a good deal. I paid $545 shipped for it from a dealer (mass buy)

The problems I experienced before have been taken care of. No dead pixels, very little bleed. Its the brightest LCD I have ever seen and I had to lower the brightness for the first time right off the bat. The aspect Ratio of 1:1 has been fixed across the board and not works correctly for all resolutions and for DVI.

I have noticed less ghosting and blur in every game I have played so far compared to the A01. This version has improved greatly on the older models except in one area. The panel is Not S-IPS and the rumor that I read on Hard OCP is that after June people may start to get it with RevA04 but not before. Just hearsay though.....I didn't expect to get S-IPS anyway so I does not matter to me.

For the A04, Dell opted for two versions of the Samsung S-PVA panel, HN208L or HN213 and mine has a 208L

 

[imported_Imp]

Originally posted by: jzodda

The problems I experienced before have been taken care of. No dead pixels, very little bleed. Its the brightest LCD I have ever seen and I had to lower the brightness for the first time right off the bat. The aspect Ratio of 1:1 has been fixed across the board and not works correctly for all resolutions and for DVI.

Cool. It is definately insanely bright, and even at very low (zero) brightness, it's blinding in a shaded room. I can probably get used to it though.

As for ghosting, do you mean the green/red smearing/trailing that you get when dragging windows fast? I'm getting that and have read up on the issue. Looks like a LOT of people get it, and may be more of a panel/firmware issue than defect. Strangely, I can lessen the effect by turning brightness to 37 or so, otherwise it gets more green/red. I've also read that it's due to the red, blue, green settings being too high.Going to mess with those settings after the sun gets away from my window (screwing up colour perception). Regardless, I'm not exchanging it; too small a problem (only noticable surfing 50% of my regular sites) to risk a new panel with no dead pixels, barely any backlight bleed (just 2 corners, but you have to look close on a black screen).

Update: Yep, solved the trails by turning down colors. Now it's not as bright too, just wish I had a colorimeter now for something to tell me what's right as opposed to "that's blue, that's green...too blue..." dang.

 

[jzodda]

Cool. It is definately insanely bright, and even at very low (zero) brightness, it's blinding in a shaded room. I can probably get used to it though.

As for ghosting, do you mean the green/red smearing/trailing that you get when dragging windows fast? I'm getting that and have read up on the issue. Looks like a LOT of people get it, and may be more of a panel/firmware issue than defect. Strangely, I can lessen the effect by turning brightness to 37 or so, otherwise it gets more green/red. I've also read that it's due to the red, blue, green settings being too high.Going to mess with those settings after the sun gets away from my window (screwing up colour perception). Regardless, I'm not exchanging it; too small a problem (only noticable surfing 50% of my regular sites) to risk a new panel with no dead pixels, barely any backlight bleed (just 2 corners, but you have to look close on a black screen).

Update: Yep, solved the trails by turning down colors. Now it's not as bright too, just wish I had a colorimeter now for something to tell me what's right as opposed to "that's blue, that's green...too blue..." dang.

I'm going to have to mess with the colors too. Right now I left the brightness at 50 and lowered it by -25 it the catylist control center for my ATI x800 vid card. I may put that back to 0 and try and do it using only the monitor controls.

I rememeber reading that xtknight has a profile for this monitor that was calibrated by his friend. hopefully he will post it soon so we can give it a try!