NEC EA231WMi 23-inch IPS display...$280

[Winterpool]

Newegg is offering the NEC EA231WMi display (23-inch, 1920x1080, e-IPS panel) for $310 - $30 coupon (code 'EMCYRYZ62') = $280. Free UPS 3-day shipping. Tax in several states, helas. After 5-7 per cent sales tax, the final price will still be lower than most recent offers on this monitor.

Thanks be to competition (ie the HP ZR24w)!

Caveat: if I recall correctly, Newegg hasn't got the most generous policy when it comes to monitor returns.

 

[CurseTheSky]

FWIW, I have one of these and love it. The colors in general are much better than my 2408WFP, with the exception of the whites (too cool or too warm) and the blacks. MVA / PVA panels (2408WFP) are known for their black levels anyway, so I wasn't concerned.

My only complaint is the lack of HDMI port, but it does come with both DVI and DisplayPort, so an adapter is all you'll need. The built-in speakers suck of course, but they'll get you by in a pinch.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

tempting

 

[vailr]

$254.99 here:
http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/def...ME-EA231WMI-BK

 

[RaiderJ]

FWIW, I have one of these and love it. The colors in general are much better than my 2408WFP, with the exception of the whites (too cool or too warm) and the blacks. MVA / PVA panels (2408WFP) are known for their black levels anyway, so I wasn't concerned.

My only complaint is the lack of HDMI port, but it does come with both DVI and DisplayPort, so an adapter is all you'll need. The built-in speakers suck of course, but they'll get you by in a pinch.

Agree 100%. Switched from an A00 2408WFP and haven't looked back. The NEC when calibrated came out better across the board for picture quality IMO. I might just be biased to IPS panels.

Picked up a second NEC, and if I go to a Eyefinity setup, then I'll be getting a third. Only complaint is the USB ports on the side are awkward. I can access them without looking at what I'm doing. However, having DisplayPort and a base that let's you switch from portrait/landscape is totally worth it.

 

[Winterpool]

CDW charges for postage and tax (at least in my state). Depending on your location, the CDW deal could end up being cheaper.

 

[Craig234]

FYI, rated 14ms response, so not so good for gaming it seems.

 

[simonizor]

I don't understand what's so great about this monitor. It seems to me that NEC makes a lot of really expensive monitors that have the same specs as much less expensive monitors. I paid $250 for my 24.6" Hanns G about 6 months ago and it can be had for $200 now. It runs 1920x1080 and has a 2ms response time. Why is the NEC so much more expensive, even on sale?

 

[Ika]

I don't understand what's so great about this monitor. It seems to me that NEC makes a lot of really expensive monitors that have the same specs as much less expensive monitors. I paid $250 for my 24.6" Hanns G about 6 months ago and it can be had for $200 now. It runs 1920x1080 and has a 2ms response time. Why is the NEC so much more expensive, even on sale?

If you ever get the chance to look at both monitors side by side, you'll see the difference. This NEC uses an IPS-variant panel and your HannsG uses a TN panel. The main differences are color accuracy, contrast ratio, black levels, and viewing angles. TNs are known for being faster (having better response time) and being cheaper, but those are really the only edges they have.

 

[Orubasarot]

...

 

[CurseTheSky]

I don't understand what's so great about this monitor. It seems to me that NEC makes a lot of really expensive monitors that have the same specs as much less expensive monitors. I paid $250 for my 24.6" Hanns G about 6 months ago and it can be had for $200 now. It runs 1920x1080 and has a 2ms response time. Why is the NEC so much more expensive, even on sale?

The TN panels in cheap monitors like that are junk. Colors are distorted when viewing off center (poor viewing angels), and the color accuracy overall is sub-par. Black and white levels usually suffer as well.

 

[CurseTheSky]

FYI, rated 14ms response, so not so good for gaming it seems.

I game on it, and I haven't noticed any problems. I don't have a CRT or TN panel to compare it to, but it certainly doesn't cause me any grief when playing FPS's.

 

[Craig234]

It's interesting to see the posts saying 'no problem' for gaming with 14ms response.

I haven't used LCD's for gaming (apart from a 65" LCD I don't know the response time of), but the message board comments mostly say 'only CRT's are really good on lag, but the 2M are a lot better than the 5MS, which beccause they're tested differently than the 2MS are actually even worse', and they say other monitors are very visible on lag.

So many times on the net there are contradictory claims on issues like this.

The firsthand comments saying they are fine even at 14ms are interesting.

So maybe this isn't a bad gaming pick after all? (Mostly WoW, but it's nice to work in other games).

 

[Terzo]

It's interesting to see the posts saying 'no problem' for gaming with 14ms response.

Response times are usually listed as GTG (grey to grey). This 14ms time is for white to black. It's a more accurate number. I don't remember the specifics, but you can look at the lcd thread in the video card forum to read about GTG and WTB differences.

 

[kmmatney]

Response times are usually listed as GTG (grey to grey). This 14ms time is for white to black. It's a more accurate number. I don't remember the specifics, but you can look at the lcd thread in the video card forum to read about GTG and WTB differences.

I have this monitor, and sometimes notice ghosting with it. Its not too bad, but if you are really picky about that, i think you'll notice it. The one thing I don't like about the monitor is the 16:9 aspect ratio, which makes the 23" size seem too small, IMO. I also have a 24" MVA display with a 16:10 ratio, and it dwarfs this display. I'm surprised that people above are liking this better than their 2408WFP displays, as I have tio say that its overall inferior to my Soyo 24" MVA panel. That said, this is probably the best bang for buck for a non-TN panel right now.

 

[buzzsaw13]

It's interesting to see the posts saying 'no problem' for gaming with 14ms response.

I haven't used LCD's for gaming (apart from a 65" LCD I don't know the response time of), but the message board comments mostly say 'only CRT's are really good on lag, but the 2M are a lot better than the 5MS, which beccause they're tested differently than the 2MS are actually even worse', and they say other monitors are very visible on lag.

So many times on the net there are contradictory claims on issues like this.

The firsthand comments saying they are fine even at 14ms are interesting.

So maybe this isn't a bad gaming pick after all? (Mostly WoW, but it's nice to work in other games).

Response time does not equal input lag. From what I've seen IPS panels are pretty good on input lag, probably on average not as good as TN but worlds better than PVA/MVA panels.

 

[kidsafe]

Most IPS monitors have better than average response time compensation as well, so gaming on one of these will be absolutely fine...the pros of IPS outweigh the drawbacks of TN.

 

[finbarqs]

i'm still on my 2x 20WMGX2 monitors... and I love 'em! (Got 'em when they were 200 a pop!)

 

[KeypoX]

If you ever get the chance to look at both monitors side by side, you'll see the difference. This NEC uses an IPS-variant panel and your HannsG uses a TN panel. The main differences are color accuracy, contrast ratio, black levels, and viewing angles. TNs are known for being faster (having better response time) and being cheaper, but those are really the only edges they have.

So as long as the image on the screen isnt moving. The NEC will look better lol.

I had a 12ms and lag in games is very noticeable. Now a 5ms and i dont notice any lag.

 

[lothar]

Why not just get the 22" Dell IPS panel selling for $212 shipped?
How does this monitor compare to that one?

 

[s44]

Why not just get the 22" Dell IPS panel selling for $212 shipped?
How does this monitor compare to that one?

Bigger with more pixels.

 

[GoodRevrnd]

I was about to jump on this but I'm not sure I could tolerate 16:9.

 

[lothar]

Bigger with more pixels.

The Dell is 16:10, this isn't.

 

[s44]

The Dell is 16:10, this isn't.

You say that like it's an advantage.

Not only is 16:10 dated, but 1680*1050 is still fewer pixels in both directions than 1920*1080.

 

[konakona]

This particular model wasn't stellar in terms of input lag IIRC in one review I saw in the video forums.