[Retired] The LCD Thread

[10e]

Response time is pretty good. Typical MVA where darker colors are a bit slower than medium or lighter colors in changing. I'm not sure if it uses overdrive. Maybe I'll do the Prad.de Pixperan test and see what the car looks like going across and if there is any overdrive artifacting.

I'm not sure about video card compatibility, but it does actually come up as an HDTV on the newer video cards with a maximum listed resoution of 1920x1200, so some older cards may have issues with the HDMI port.

I haven't had any issues on ATI HD 38x0 cards, or G80 and G92 8800GTS cards though, and I've even set it up with an HDMI switch. The only issues I've seen with the switch is on port 2 of the HD 38x0 series cards, but they are a bit strange in general.

The VGA port works very well, and has some of the best video quality I've seen over analog.

If given a choice in listing this or the L245/6WP I'd still take the LG in the recommendations section. I liked the panel on it better and the OSD was a little bit nicer. Additionally, the LG had a properly working Power save mode in HDMi, whereas the L2410NM just turns blue.

Though maybe an honorable mention, especially now that it's on special for $320 to $380 around the way.

Regards,

10e

Originally posted by: xtknight

Originally posted by: 10e


The L2410NM is actually an 8-bit MVA panel made by CMO (ChiMei Optoelectronics). Westinghouse is just a name as the entire monitor is built by CMO. It has HDMI, VGA, and component connections.

The only caveats of this display is a slight buzzing noise and some people with screen door effect on the right side. My biggest complaint is the 1 year warranty.

HDMI does not do power save, but VGA does. I have a feeling that this display was targeted as a multi-functional monitor where PC is over VGA and consumer video devices are displayed over HDMI and component.

-HDMI and component display no overscan using video sources unless you select "zoomed"

-All outputs can do 1:1 mapping of 1080p (1920x1080 over VGA) without issue.

-HDMI with a PC can do 1920x1200 perfectly and is very intelligent. It will auto-detect PC and video sources on-the-fly and adjusts the OSD accordingly.

-Has slightly crushed blacks with PC over HDMI, but not with PS3. All other ports do not crush dark details

-Has 2 to 3 frames input lag due to a MUCH better than average scaler.

-If you can get it for a good price it will exceed expectations.

- Has some (if not THE) most consistent vertical viewing angles I've ever seen on a MVA monitors. Has typical MVA horizontal contrast shift.

If you need any more information head over to HardForums and look up the L2410NM thread.

The L2610NW is the new TN-based 26" version of this monitor and is absolute garbage whereas the L2410NM has reached almost cult status due to bargain price and capability recently.

Regards,

10e

Thanks for the info. I guess I'd consider recommending it.

How is the response time on it? Also some people had issues with hooking it up with certain cards? Sorry, I really haven't been following the 30 page HF thread.

 

[10e]

Typical TN viewing angles dictate that when viewed from below, the screen will darken drastically at fairly minimal viewing angle changes, and from above will wash out.

I have a TN based G2400W that displays all of the www.lagom.nl pages (like contrast, white saturation and grey scales) as well as my MVA 8 bit panels and almost as well as my S-IPS panels. Dithering has generally been replaced by what they call HiFRC, which cycles a number of colors at super-high speeds to "approximate" another color, so often dithering is not used, and the only way you can tell that HiFRC is there is with a sharp eye. You will see a very, very slight pulse in some of those grey shades.

In regards to photo work, if you want the CRT off your desk, you should look at some MVA based 24" monitors. 22" right now only has one MVA 8-bit panel from Samsung, that is used on the Lenovo L220X and the (upcoming) Samsung 2263PW, but otherwise at that size you are stuck with 6-bit TN and their questionable vertical viewing angles.

I would move up to 24" and look at some VA panels for decent off-angle viewing and more vibrant colors.

The Benq FP241W/VW monitors come quickly to mind, though some people have had success in finding MVA panels in the very cheap Soyo DYLM24D6, though I'd extend the warranty on the Soyo due to potential issues and a 1 year warranty. It's not 100% with the Soyo. Some people are getting TN panels as well.

Some of the newer TN panels are improving in regards to viewing angles (which to me is the last remaining big issue on them) but they still have a ways to go.

Regards,

10e

Originally posted by: panfist

Originally posted by: pilafi
Take a look at this. On 6-bit panels those images will have dithering patterns. Some panels are better at dithering than others, and it's possible that you don't notice it.

That said, it doesn't matter, unless you're doing photo editing or other professional image work.

I'm not expert, but if I had to grade my monitor on dithering I would give it a B+, according to the image you showed. The big white -> black gradient looked much better than the examples they showed of how bad dithering or banding would look...maybe that's because my monitor is dithering and banding in addition to it being exaggerated in the image. Anyway, I see some pretty subtle bands and the dithering is almost not noticeable from how far my head normally is from the monitor: 30".

I also tried to test my monitor with the white saturation page. My monitor totally sucks at that. When my eyes are perpendicular to the monitor and the top of my head is even with the top of the monitor, I only see a checkerboard on ONE of the squares. If I lower my head so my cheek is flat against the desk (lol) I only see checkerboards on the top row.

That said, is it really ONLY useful for professional photo work? If I want the best picture quality for watching movies, I know my monitor can do better. It looks pretty good to me, but it's nothing compared to my parents' DLP TV, which I can notice a huge difference even though they are not side by side. I guess to answer this question I just need to read more and test displays in the store. It's probably unfair to compare LCD to DLP, but it just proves to me that there are lots of trade-offs to using a 2" thick display that maybe I won't make next time when I move out of this tiny apartment. There aren't really many alternatives available for computer monitors, though.

Here's another question, wouldn't it make more sense for the 8-bit to 6-bit conversion to take place in the video card? I'm sure that there is better hardware in the video card for that. Also, why would I bother trying to render stuff in 1680x1050x32 when I really only have 1680x1050x18 colors available to me. I definitely notice more colors when I choose to render in 32-bit over 16-bit. I'm guessing this has to do with the fundamental limitations of computer hardware, that you can only use powers of 2 for your bit-depth when 3d rendering. On the other hand, if it's possible, I could save a lot of vRAM for adding more texture detail or AA or the like.

Redlinez33: were you asking me about my budget? I haven't set a number yet, I usually don't really have a number in mind and try to find a "sweet spot" where you're not paying exorbitant top-of-the-line prices, but still getting close to top-of-the-line performance. Also, if I don't find a good value in an LCD monitor in the next couple months I'm just not going to buy one and get a new TV instead...whether that will be DLP, LCD, plasma...I don't even know at this point.

 

[nwilson]

Originally posted by: xtknight

Originally posted by: Oppear
Hello, have been reading the new and older lcd thread here and am interested in a new lcd aswell.

xtknight, If I'm not mistaken, You've had a Samsung 710T in the past, and upgraded for Nec LCD20WGX². If so , then were there some aspects You liked better on the 710T, like maybe reaction times? The reason I'm asking is because I've got one atm. Would want to know how major would be the difference.

The difference is incredible. Everything about it is better, basically.

First, the 710T has dim colors and a fuzzy anti-glare coating. The 20WMXG2 is glossy and has very vibrant colors. It also doesn't dither like the 710T does, so grays are more pure.

Response time is a good amount faster since the NEC uses overdrive.

And it has a lot more multimedia inputs.

Was thinking of getting a 20" 1600x1200 or 22" wide. If I'm not mistaken, there is no actual need for going 21" 4:3 since they have the same pixelcount, right?
As far as money goes, the cost of the 2070NX or 20WGX2 wouldn't be a big problem.

Would be using it for movies and photo images mainly.

What would be a good IPS panel these days?

Tnx.

Well your only option for any IPS panel whatsoever under $500 is the HP LP2065, even then not guaranteed S-IPS. http://www.newegg.com/Product/...16824176053&Tpk=lp2065

But it's a very decent screen and still a very nice upgrade from the 710T. I have used the 2007FP, which has the same panel as the LP2065.

Give that a try. It's a good deal. 21" panels deliver bigger font size and image, that's all, no more pixels.

 

[nwilson]

After reading this forum and elsewhere, and searching for over a week, I got a great bargain from Buy.com on a HP LP2065 for $245.99 after rebates and discounts. The model has (hopefully) a 20" LG.Philips S-IPS (LM201U05) panel, 1600x1200, 8 ms, 800:1, view angles 178 degrees H/V. The price was $345.99 less $50 HP mail-in rebate thru 4/30/08, less $50 instant discount for buying first purchase with a Revolution Card issued instantly thru Buy.com, and free shipping in the continental US. I read a user review at newegg.com dated 1 June 2007 that said he got an AMVA panel in this model. I hope I'm luckier, even though the reviewer said it was still a great monitor with the AMVA, and that panel gave richer blacks than an S-IPS would.

The Buy.com page for this monitor is http://www.buy.com/prod/HP_LP2...loc/273/202327642.html

Oddly, Buy.com fails to mention the HP $50 rebate, but you'll find the mail-in form at
http://h71016.www7.hp.com/html/pdfs/1310-1DT.pdf

The HP page for the monitor is
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc...70-444767-1815933.html

HP also offers a $30 rebate on the LP1965 monitor, which offers a 1280x1024 S-IPS panel with 6ms and 1000:1 CR, for $319 with free shipping, for a net price direct from HP of $289. At Buy.com the price is $306.99 with free shipping, so if you use the $50 Revolution Card discount and $30 HP rebate the net price is $226.99 for the 19" versus $245.99 for the 20" model with higher resolution. For a mere $19 difference, the LP2065 is the better deal.

I looked up the panel ID on http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/ and found that the same panel is used in monitors from LG, NEC, Dell, BenQ, HP and Philips, but the HP model is by far less expensive - by hundreds of dollars - than any of the others (with possible exception of Philips, which I did not find available in the US).

I welcome any comments or additional info, and I hope this helps others who, like me, are looking for the sweet spot in a photo-editing quality monitor for a low price.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: Oppear
Thank you for the advice.

Unfortunately, I can not find the LP2065 and 2007FP models in my country at all atm, there is 2007WFP though.

Still, I think I would prefer a 4:3 model with 1600x1200 pixels and was wondering, what about the NEC 2070NX or 2170NX. Lets assume I can pay more, then what would be the next choice/s up to 800-1000$?

Tnx.

Edit.Just remembered that 2070NX contrast and brightness wasn't the best in some test... so this could be a problem.

Unfortunately I'm at a loss as to what to recommend you, then.

Especially because I don't know what country you live in.

The next best H-IPSs are the DoubleSight DS-263N and Planar PX2611W. The Hazro HZ24W or HZ26W may be available in your country?

Those are all widescreen, though, but they are 1920x1200 so you get the vertical height you're looking for. I can't honestly fathom why anyone would pay over $800 for a 19" standard S-IPS (NEC 1990* series) when they could get a 26" widescreen H-IPS for less.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: ericinho
XTknight: http://www.monitorsrc.com/ (resources: blogs) doesn't work anymore (for quite some time now).

Yup, you're right. I don't know what happened to that site. Shame.

Removed the link.

 

[ericinho]

4:3 vs. widescreen 16:10

Is there actually an advantage of a widescreen compaired to a 4:3 ratio screen, besides the fact that the wide screen is ofcourse ehm, wider ;-)

An 21" 4:3 has 1600x1200 native resolution, while a 21" WS has 1680x1050...
does this have any advantages or disadvantages in dotpitch for example?
Or does a non-wide screen has less trouble with color/gamma shifting?

Thanks!

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: panfist

Originally posted by: pilafi
Take a look at this. On 6-bit panels those images will have dithering patterns. Some panels are better at dithering than others, and it's possible that you don't notice it.

That said, it doesn't matter, unless you're doing photo editing or other professional image work.

I'm not expert, but if I had to grade my monitor on dithering I would give it a B+, according to the image you showed. The big white -> black gradient looked much better than the examples they showed of how bad dithering or banding would look...maybe that's because my monitor is dithering and banding in addition to it being exaggerated in the image. Anyway, I see some pretty subtle bands and the dithering is almost not noticeable from how far my head normally is from the monitor: 30".

I also tried to test my monitor with the white saturation page. My monitor totally sucks at that. When my eyes are perpendicular to the monitor and the top of my head is even with the top of the monitor, I only see a checkerboard on ONE of the squares. If I lower my head so my cheek is flat against the desk (lol) I only see checkerboards on the top row.

That said, is it really ONLY useful for professional photo work? If I want the best picture quality for watching movies, I know my monitor can do better. It looks pretty good to me, but it's nothing compared to my parents' DLP TV, which I can notice a huge difference even though they are not side by side. I guess to answer this question I just need to read more and test displays in the store. It's probably unfair to compare LCD to DLP, but it just proves to me that there are lots of trade-offs to using a 2" thick display that maybe I won't make next time when I move out of this tiny apartment. There aren't really many alternatives available for computer monitors, though.

When it comes to 6-bit vs 8-bit it's most of the time not even useful for photography work. You could definitely get by without a true 8-bit DAC. That's assuming your 6-bit LCD has high quality dithering, which today, most do.

What you should be concerned about is the panel type (TN vs VA vs IPS) which influences viewing angle and stability. A 6-bit IPS is better for photo editing than a 6-bit TN because the viewing angles are more consistent and color accuracy is the same, regardless of viewing angle.

Here's another question, wouldn't it make more sense for the 8-bit to 6-bit conversion to take place in the video card? I'm sure that there is better hardware in the video card for that.

DVI graphics cards are TMDS/LVDS controllers; they have functionality typically exposed in laptop graphics adapter to control LCD screens. The only difference is, they send this electrical signal down the DVI port whereas in a laptop it's internal.

NVIDIA and ATI cards have registers for enabling spatial/temporal dithering in hardware. (In fact w/ Linux and NVIDIA you can force it on.)

I'm not sure that the GPU can really do any better dithering than the LCD's DSP. I doubt 3D shaders are used to accelerate it or anything; ditto for the resolution scaling.

Also, why would I bother trying to render stuff in 1680x1050x32 when I really only have 1680x1050x18 colors available to me. I definitely notice more colors when I choose to render in 32-bit over 16-bit. I'm guessing this has to do with the fundamental limitations of computer hardware, that you can only use powers of 2 for your bit-depth when 3d rendering. On the other hand, if it's possible, I could save a lot of vRAM for adding more texture detail or AA or the like.

Storing 6 bits is inefficient in binary. You need 3 places to do so. Rather than padding them with zeroes, why not just use the 8 bits?

2^1=2
2^2=4
2^3=8

The programs that run on your computer are made to use the internal format of 8-bit RGB because this is what most operating systems use. Therefore you need to be in 8-bit RGB or ARGB (8-bit with 8-bit alpha channel) to even send something across to the monitor (or GPU in case of laptops) to dither it. Otherwise you'd have game engines doing dithering and sooner or later game engines doing your LCD's overdrive, and resolution scaling. We don't want that do we?

When you send 8-bit, the LCD can downsample it yet keep some detail due to the dithering. If 6-bits was sent undithered, it couldn't do anything with it and you'd have poor color reproduction with not even an attempt at adding extra detail. 8-bit is like enabling AA for 6-bit monitors.

Using a mode under 24-bit tells Windows to let the program give it a palette, as far as I know. That palette contains the colors that the game is going to use, out of the 16.7M that are available. But it can only choose 262,144 of those 16.7M to use, or maybe only 256 if you use 256 colors.

First we have to figure out what 8-bit vs 6-bit means. It doesn't mean a brighter display, it doesn't mean a viewing angle free of grayscale inversion, and it doesn't mean a wider gamut or better default color temperature. It doesn't make your LCD any bigger either to match that huge 40" DLP, or make the backlight more uniform or black level darker. Unless you noticed the dithering why would this be the reason your TN is inferior to a DLP? 99% of the time, your DLP is not displaying the upper shades of the grayscale that your TN can't render. True, nuances might be rendered better with 8-bit, but I'm sure this is not the first thing you're noticing between the two displays. That would require quite some scrutinization.

Redlinez33: were you asking me about my budget? I haven't set a number yet, I usually don't really have a number in mind and try to find a "sweet spot" where you're not paying exorbitant top-of-the-line prices, but still getting close to top-of-the-line performance. Also, if I don't find a good value in an LCD monitor in the next couple months I'm just not going to buy one and get a new TV instead...whether that will be DLP, LCD, plasma...I don't even know at this point.

We need a definition for exorbitant, because with the sorry state of the S-IPS market, many people are perfectly willing to shell out $700 for a DoubleSight DS-263N. There's probably some upper limit you'd like to set?

The ViewSonic VX2435wm (VA std. gamut) is a pretty good deal but I think the DS-263N (IPS wide gamut) is hard to pass up for not many $$ more. I've used the VX2435 and my LCD2690 (IPS wide gamut) side by side, and the VX has some shortcomings due to its lesser gamut and viewing angle shift.

The VX2435wm dithers, by the way. But it's noticeable only on the last few dark colors, and even then, only up close. Most people call 6-bit displays with decent dithering 8-bit displays because they basically are, to our eyes. I might just change the notations in my OP to 8-bit and true 8-bit, as I've only confirmed "true 8-bit" on very few displays. Not that there's that much difference.

 

[crownjules]

Howdy folks,

There's a lot of information in this thread that I'm just not technically up to par on to make a good judgement on my own. So perhaps you can help me.

I've had a 2001FP for 5 years now. The original one broke and went in replacement and, of course, I received a refurb in exchange. I immediately noticed the difference - the monitor seemed dimmer and the colors way less vibrant. It's about time that I upgrade to some newer monitor technology. So what will it primarily be used for?

General useage. I do a fair bit of gaming and movie watching. The most important component is obviously the work I do on it. I'll be running lots of charts on the monitor, so color and clarity are of importance. I'd like to get a 24" widescreen and I am willing to spend up to $500 on one.

What do you think are my best options?

 

[Oppear]

Originally posted by: xtknight

Originally posted by: Oppear
Thank you for the advice.

Unfortunately, I can not find the LP2065 and 2007FP models in my country at all atm, there is 2007WFP though.

Still, I think I would prefer a 4:3 model with 1600x1200 pixels and was wondering, what about the NEC 2070NX or 2170NX. Lets assume I can pay more, then what would be the next choice/s up to 800-1000$?

Tnx.

Edit.Just remembered that 2070NX contrast and brightness wasn't the best in some test... so this could be a problem.

Unfortunately I'm at a loss as to what to recommend you, then.

Especially because I don't know what country you live in.

The next best H-IPSs are the DoubleSight DS-263N and Planar PX2611W. The Hazro HZ24W or HZ26W may be available in your country?

Those are all widescreen, though, but they are 1920x1200 so you get the vertical height you're looking for. I can't honestly fathom why anyone would pay over $800 for a 19" standard S-IPS (NEC 1990* series) when they could get a 26" widescreen H-IPS for less.

Sorry, but can not find these names either.

Most names that are available here.
Acer,AG Neovo,Apple,Asus,Asus,BenQCTX,D-Fruit,Dell,Fujitsu Siemens,Hanns-G,HP,Hyundai,ImageQuest,Iiyama,KTC,LaCie,Lenovo,LG,MAG InnoVision,NEC,Neovo,Philips,Proview,
RoverScan,Samsung,Samtron,Sony,V7 Videoseven,ViewSonic,Xerox,Eizo.

But what about Eizo S2231W, http://www.prad.de/en/monitore...eview-eizo-s2231w.html. It's an S-PVA screen and was wondering, if it has any weakness compared to IPS.
Still, got me wondering, if Pixel Pitch 0.282 wasn't too large with 22", and is 24" a must have compared to 22" or not. The 22" would be about 500$ cheaper though.

 

[panfist]

Originally posted by: xtknight

Storing 6 bits is inefficient in binary. You need 3 places to do so. Rather than padding them with zeroes, why not just use the 8 bits?

2^1=2
2^2=4
2^3=8

The programs that run on your computer are made to use the internal format of 8-bit RGB because this is what most operating systems use. Therefore you need to be in 8-bit RGB or ARGB (8-bit with 8-bit alpha channel) to even send something across to the monitor (or GPU in case of laptops) to dither it. Otherwise you'd have game engines doing dithering and sooner or later game engines doing your LCD's overdrive, and resolution scaling. We don't want that do we?

When you send 8-bit, the LCD can downsample it yet keep some detail due to the dithering. If 6-bits was sent undithered, it couldn't do anything with it and you'd have poor color reproduction with not even an attempt at adding extra detail. 8-bit is like enabling AA for 6-bit monitors.

Using a mode under 24-bit tells Windows to let the program give it a palette, as far as I know. That palette contains the colors that the game is going to use, out of the 16.7M that are available. But it can only choose 262,144 of those 16.7M to use, or maybe only 256 if you use 256 colors.

Unless you noticed the dithering why would this be the reason your TN is inferior to a DLP? 99% of the time, your DLP is not displaying the upper shades of the grayscale that your TN can't render. True, nuances might be rendered better with 8-bit, but I'm sure this is not the first thing you're noticing between the two displays. That would require quite some scrutinization.

Ok, some of the stuff you said I don't understand but other stuff I think you are mistaken. It takes 8 bit places to store an 8 bit number and 6 bit places to store a 6 bit number. The number of bits is literally equal to the number of binary digits. It takes 6 pins carrying a high or low signal to transmit a 6-bit number on a bus, it takes 8 pins carrying a high or low signal to transmit an 8-bit number on a bus. Most hardware is designed with bus-widths that are set to powers of 2 so I'm guessing that if in software you were doing all of your image processing and 3d rendering it would just send the 6-bit number down the 8-bit bus, and leave the last two digits zero or floating. Hence, you might not get speed boosts or bandwidth increases from doing your work in 6-bit because when it comes time for the hardware to actually crunch the numbers it's designed to crunch 8-bit (or 16, 32, etc). I don't know if that's what you mean but it's incorrect to say you need 3 places for an 8-bit number...you need 8.

When dithering the monitor doesn't attempt to add extra detail, it approximates extra detail. In some cases approximating extra detail is worse than not even worrying about the extra detail. For example, in a black to white gradient in 8-bit RGB displayed on a 6-bit panel, it will attempt to dither or whatever other newfangled approximation methods exist. If it is attempting to dither, if you know what to look for you will see dithering artifacts. On the other hand, if you render a black to white gradient in 6-bit RGB, even if it's sent down an 8-bit RGB signal path, the monitor will render the colors of the 6-bit gradient completely accurately. For displaying photographs and movies I'm assuming you wouldn't notice any dithering, but if you were going to render 3d graphics, why bother doing calculations on the extra 2 bits if the monitor is just going to attempt to approximate the 8-bit signal with only 6 available bits. For 3d gaming I'd rather the signal coming out of my video card be rendered exactly with 6-bits than a 6-bit approximation of 8-bits.

An example of when adding extra information via approximation is not always a good thing: a standard def tv signal looks better on a standard def TV than it does upscaled on an LCD HDTV. The LCD HDTV is extrapolating what's supposed to go in between all of the standard pixels and the result is an image that is soft and blurry. What I mean to say in a nutshell is, if you're not dithering you can't possibly see dithering artifacts.

I don't know what it is about the DLP that makes it better than my low-end panel, but colors on that thing pop like I can't describe in words. I have never seen more pure colors, greener greens or redder reds. The only place I have ever seen a green so rich is on a lawn on a bright sunny day.

And lastly, just because I didn't notice the dithering doesn't mean it was never there. For example, 90% of the time my parents don't care how their picture is coming through. They have this super nice DLP tv, high def cable, bluray player, etc. They were watching DVDs through their bluray player at 480i! They were also watching movies whose aspect ratio matched their TV...but they were still zooming in and stretching. When I point these things out, then they realize it and they can tell the difference. All I want is to be educated. Now I know the limitations of my display. That doesn't mean I'm going to run out to Best Buy and get whatever 8-bit panel they have on blue-light special. I'm still perfectly happy with my display.

 

[Ardan]

I have been scouring this thread, review sites and also the displays section of Hardforum and I am still so very, very undecided that I thought I'd finally add to the discussion. I trust your opinions better than others, without a doubt . Like others have stated, this is obviously a big decision (and I have free time today), so I'm going to speak my mind here. Please bear with me, but I didn't want to make it short and leave out thoughts I had.

Well, I have a SyncMaster 215TW which has been very good. I do use it for quite a bit of gaming as well as other things (I notice the input lag with games, but I successfully adjusted to it) and normally I wouldn't even consider replacing it. I have thoroughly enjoyed the S-PVA screen when watching movies and looking at pictures. I am a big fan of places like deviantart, interfacelift, etc. I love art and enjoy looking at it, but don't confuse me with a graphics design artist. I am in the IT field and I am in no way possible doing work that needs impeccable color accuracy.

Unfortunately, the backlight has started to bleed in an extremely annoying way. Normally, the bleeding was hardly noticable and didn't bother video. When I watch a movie now, however, it shows up prominently regardless of if I have the lights off or not and has shown up in some high-res pictures on my screensaver (ones that are not completely black, but are still dark). It comes from the edges and almost makes a perfect X pattern, since the bleeding from the edges nearly goes straight into the center of the screen, greatly affecting the quality of movies. Since then, I have stopped watching DVDs on here because of how annoying it has become. After a while of tolerating it, I decided that it has driven me crazy enough.

Since I do play games (TF2, Bioshock, Test Drive Unlimited and others, but on a casual basis), do you guys think something like the L227WTG would be best? I mean, I know its a step down, panel-wise, since it is a TN, but would it matter that much? It appears that the L227 gets some positive reviews around various forums and review sites. I would consider others, like the 2253BW from Samsung, but people have told me that the backlight bleeding on the L227WTG is considerably less than other models.

I enjoy videos on here (especially with the Klipsch ProMedia Ultra 5.1 speakers I use), but I have a good home theater setup in the other room as well that will be getting a good HDTV in the future (not the near future, but I will be). Everyone I've heard from raves about that Doublesight monitor and suggests I buy it, but I'm not sure I want a monitor that big, though I'm not completely and totally opposed to the idea. I don't really feel eager to have that big of a screen on here (though I have plenty of space for it), but I'm sure my computer could play those games at 1920x1200 with no troubles (Athlon 64 X2 5000+ Black Edition @ ~3.3ghz, 2gb Ballistix DDR2 RAM, 8800GT 512mb factory OC'd).

So what this all boils down to is that, since my current monitor was a real winner (at least to me and my friends/family), do you think I should hold out and buy that Doublesight monitor, or just go with a decent TN like that LG one? I'm so undecided because I have seen the L227 at best buy and I REALLY liked what I saw (considering it isn't the ideal setup for it there), but I can't find any of the others for comparison. I could buy something like the L227WTG immediately, but I would probably set aside money for the other monitor if I was to go that route. I suppose the DS would be a true upgrade from my 215TW, since it is a WG H-IPS and is a bit larger. Is it really that good of a monitor that I should hold off and get that one? If I didn't have any decent home theater setup, I'd go with the DS but I already have a good setup and will add a 40-50" LCD TV in the $1800-$2400 range later this year (I have my eye on the newer LED-backlit models from Samsung and others), so I'm not really sure that I necessarily need a 24+ inch display. Especially considering that, with the new TV in the future, I rarely will be watching movies on here. Already, regardless of enjoying DVDs on here, I would say that I probably play games more than I watch movies. Any opinions?

Thanks for bearing with me there. Any good advice or opinions on the matter would be greatly appreciated! Have a good week, everyone.

 

[muppet22]

my advice is to get a 22" (or 24") TN, since you aren't planning on watching movies on your monitor once u get a hdtv. the g2400w looks like a nice 24" tn. i've only briefly looked through 22" tn's and it's been hard trying to find a low-input one.

oh i just noticed that xtknight finally listed a 22" lcd in the gaming recommendations! i haven't read anything about the lg l227wt or l227wtg, although the l227wt is on digitalversus: http://www.digitalversus.com/d...8&mo2=304&p2=2943&ph=9
appears it has pretty bad input lag..although xtknight quotes 0 input lag and response time..dunno who is right

 

[Ardan]

Originally posted by: muppet22
my advice is to get a 22" (or 24") TN, since you aren't planning on watching movies on your monitor once u get a hdtv. the g2400w looks like a nice 24" tn. i've only briefly looked through 22" tn's and it's been hard trying to find a low-input one.

oh i just noticed that xtknight finally listed a 22" lcd in the gaming recommendations! i haven't read anything about the lg l227wt or l227wtg, although the l227wt is on digitalversus: http://www.digitalversus.com/d...8&mo2=304&p2=2943&ph=9
appears it has pretty bad input lag..although xtknight quotes 0 input lag and response time..dunno who is right

Yeah I saw that on digitalversus as well and was also wondering who was right, prad.de or digitalversus. It seems that a lot of people have great experiences with it in games, etc, and I noticed that it was placed right up in the #1 slot in the Gaming section in this thread, so I suspect that prad.de's review of the input lag is correct. I didn't look into that G2400W at all until you mentioned it. That definitely would be a good idea, and I saw they have a G2200W coming at the end of april, too. If I wait almost another month, I probably would be able to budget in that DS-263N, but I still don't think that is worth it. I mean, its worth it, I could afford it if I waited, and I agree that it is an astoundingly good value for that H-IPS panel, but why bother if I have a good setup in the other room? heh. I have heard that Samsung is coming out with a new S-PVA 22" screen, the 2263PW (if I remember correctly). Does anyone know when that should be coming out? That would definitely be worth waiting, because I had good experiences with an S-PVA.

 

[uGuru]

Hi everyone,
First want to thank you xtknight for your tireless efforts, they are appreciated more than you know. I've been reading this forum and a lot of others about all the different monitors as I too want the best monitor in my price range. I just opened a beautiful cardboard box with a brand new DELL Ultrasharp 2408WFP. I tell you I was brave with all the articles surrounding the input lag. Let me tell you, the first thing I did was to load up UT3 and I noticed not one iota of lag. I have the 24" right next to my 61" and they ran identical. I am so pleased, I just had to let all of you know. The clincher for this purchase was the sale on DELL for $599 plus overnight shipping only $24. More connections than even I could use... Cable box, Xbox360, PS3, Gamecube & PSP. Real bright out of the box, but the colors... Oh my god, the colors are astounding compared to my Samsung DLP... Gonna go try to calibrate it now... Thank you again for all your valuable information.

 

[redlinez33]

After trying all these monitors

Samsung 2253BW
HP w2207 (3 of them)
HP w2408h
Gateway FHD2400
Samsung 245BW
Viewsonic VX2255
LG W2452T-TF
SOYO 24"
Westinghouse 24"
Dell 2408WFP
Planar PX2611W
Dell 2707WFP


I have finally found the monitor I am keeping and enjoy, the Doublesight DS-263N. The Planar was a close call, but I couldnt get over the glow + price. The Dell 2707WFP was also a very close call, but the color shifting thing annoyed me.

I found out about the doublesight and thought I could live with the glow for a price of $680. Come to find out it has the A-TW polarizer built in, so no glow... Perfect.... This thing is worth MORE than they charge, atleast compared to other monitors on the market.. Dont tell them that though... Only 3 SMALL things making this not a PERFECT monitor (perfect as a monitor can be that is). No component input, its really to bright (wish the brightness setting would go lower), and the stand isnt height adjustable... Otherwise its amazing. Also using ToastyX profile from hardforum helped image quality even more.


Yay finally done.......

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: panfist
Ok, some of the stuff you said I don't understand but other stuff I think you are mistaken. It takes 8 bit places to store an 8 bit number and 6 bit places to store a 6 bit number. The number of bits is literally equal to the number of binary digits. It takes 6 pins carrying a high or low signal to transmit a 6-bit number on a bus, it takes 8 pins carrying a high or low signal to transmit an 8-bit number on a bus. Most hardware is designed with bus-widths that are set to powers of 2 so I'm guessing that if in software you were doing all of your image processing and 3d rendering it would just send the 6-bit number down the 8-bit bus, and leave the last two digits zero or floating. Hence, you might not get speed boosts or bandwidth increases from doing your work in 6-bit because when it comes time for the hardware to actually crunch the numbers it's designed to crunch 8-bit (or 16, 32, etc). I don't know if that's what you mean but it's incorrect to say you need 3 places for an 8-bit number...you need 8.

Yeah I was a little sleepy last night. Please ignore that. I was thinking of storing "8", not 8-bit (256 values). Even then you need four places to store "8".

The bus-widths thing was probably what I was trying to get at.

When dithering the monitor doesn't attempt to add extra detail, it approximates extra detail. In some cases approximating extra detail is worse than not even worrying about the extra detail. For example, in a black to white gradient in 8-bit RGB displayed on a 6-bit panel, it will attempt to dither or whatever other newfangled approximation methods exist. If it is attempting to dither, if you know what to look for you will see dithering artifacts. On the other hand, if you render a black to white gradient in 6-bit RGB, even if it's sent down an 8-bit RGB signal path, the monitor will render the colors of the 6-bit gradient completely accurately.

I highly doubt the 6-bit image is preferable to the pseudo-8-bit-dithered one. It would appear blocky. For every four 8-bit values (2^8=256) there's one 6-bit value (2^6=64). Unless you shrink the image too. With dithering, you can hardly even notice it except on dark colors.

For displaying photographs and movies I'm assuming you wouldn't notice any dithering, but if you were going to render 3d graphics, why bother doing calculations on the extra 2 bits if the monitor is just going to attempt to approximate the 8-bit signal with only 6 available bits. For 3d gaming I'd rather the signal coming out of my video card be rendered exactly with 6-bits than a 6-bit approximation of 8-bits.

That's pretty surprising given that dithering is very hard to notice.

An example of when adding extra information via approximation is not always a good thing: a standard def tv signal looks better on a standard def TV than it does upscaled on an LCD HDTV. The LCD HDTV is extrapolating what's supposed to go in between all of the standard pixels and the result is an image that is soft and blurry. What I mean to say in a nutshell is, if you're not dithering you can't possibly see dithering artifacts.

This is the exact opposite thing. You are upscaling a 480i image to a 720p HDTV for example. In this case, your source is less, not more. Therefore you lose detail. In stark contrast, when you start with 8-bit and go to 6-bit, you can't lose that much if the dithering algorithm is decent (which many are today).

Many times the reason a standard def signal looks better on a CRT is simply because the image is softer and because a lot of CRTs handle the interlacing naturally. With the LCD, deinterlacing algorithms cloud up the image and not to mention the scaling... Many times the CRT has more saturated colors, deeper blacks, and wider viewing angles too.

I don't know what it is about the DLP that makes it better than my low-end panel, but colors on that thing pop like I can't describe in words. I have never seen more pure colors, greener greens or redder reds. The only place I have ever seen a green so rich is on a lawn on a bright sunny day.

I'm not sure either, but I doubt it's the bit depth. Consider gamut and contrast, or even calibration. I believe some of the DLPs do have a higher bit depth of a lookup table, much like the professional LCDs, but their reproduction is still limited to a palette of 16.7M colors AFAIK. That just means the 16.7M colors that it can show can be adjusted.

And lastly, just because I didn't notice the dithering doesn't mean it was never there. For example, 90% of the time my parents don't care how their picture is coming through. They have this super nice DLP tv, high def cable, bluray player, etc. They were watching DVDs through their bluray player at 480i! They were also watching movies whose aspect ratio matched their TV...but they were still zooming in and stretching. When I point these things out, then they realize it and they can tell the difference. All I want is to be educated. Now I know the limitations of my display. That doesn't mean I'm going to run out to Best Buy and get whatever 8-bit panel they have on blue-light special. I'm still perfectly happy with my display.

Well, the problem is, I think what you are not understanding is that bit depth has very little to do with how inept your panel is when compared to a DLP.

If you don't notice the dithering, it basically isn't there, is it? If it was so good at tricking your eyes what would be the difference?

You saw in those test images that you could not see some of them. But this is probably more due to TN viewing angle than anything else. Although this may be a corner case where the dithering actually was at fault.

I'm also happy with the quality of most 22" TNs. I've seen DLPs as well and honestly I don't think the 22" TN is that far behind it. But I suspect gamut, contrast, and size are what you're seeing.

 

[cheap]

I went to Best Buy to try buy myself an LG 22" L22WTG-PF monitor the number 1 rated gaming monitor and they were all out. BB associate said it's probably because it's discontinued and instead offered me a W2252TQ-TF monitor. It's cheaper by ten or twenty bucks, looks about the same. Anybody know what the difference is between the two? Does it also have a 0 latency?

Thanx.

 

[panfist]

Originally posted by: xtknight
Well, the problem is, I think what you are not understanding is that bit depth has very little to do with how inept your panel is when compared to a DLP.

Everything in your post after this part, I'm not sure how I gave you the idea that I think my LCD is worse only because of bit depth. I totally agree that it's the TN nature of my panel that's the worst thing about it. It really doesn't matter how good it looks head on, if I actually have to pan and scan my head across my desk to see one frame in its full glory (lol). It's a $200 LCD compared to a $2000 TV, I'm sure there are a dozen reasons why my LCD is worse. The part above this that you quoted from my last post, I was merely saying that now I'm a little bit smarter as both a consumer, amateur photoshopist and movie buff, because now I now one more limitation of my display. If you look in one of my second post in this thread I attributed my monitor's two biggest flaws to the fact that it's TN, those flaws being awful cinema picture quality when I view from below, and pale shades of color all blending to white from above.

In fact that last problem, pale shades fading to white from above, is so bad that they actually are faded when viewed head on. I have to view from below in order to see some of the really pale shades. And these shades aren't so pale that designers never use them in programs, on the contrary it wasn't until months after I got my monitor that I realized that in programs like excel, foobar, winamp, itunes, I was missing out on some GUI elements that let you read lines in a list better. The list elements would alternate between white and some pale shade of grey or green or orange or whatever the program chose, but to me it looked all white, until one day I happened to see foobar from below and the contrast between the white and orange was very striking. You ask me, "If it was so good tricking your eyes what would be the difference?" Well my eyes were never tricked, I just didn't know what to look for. If I was educated on dithering, and I knew how to spot it, and I walked into a store and saw some monitors that I could NOT spot any dithering, and it was a 6-bit panel, that would be tricking my eyes. If I'm just ignorant I'm not being tricked at all.

And one last comment about rendering in 6-bit vs 8-bit... I agree with you that if you take an image that started out at full 8-bit RGB and downsampled to 6-bit, it really is kind of moot whether that gets done by the monitor, video card, CPU, whatever. All three of those could provide you with an equally crappy or nice image depending on how the downsampling is implemented. But if you're rendering a 3d image on the fly in 6-bits, and it comes out blocky, that's the fault of the 3d engine, not the inherent nature of 6-bit color. If your monitor only shows 6-bit color and you don't see blocks, then it must be possible to render in 6-bit and not have blocks. The 3d engine is responsible for exactly how each subpixel is displayed so it can definitely insure that you don't see any blocks.

The only reason I can imagine how rendering in 6-bit 3d might be inferior to sending an 8-bit signal and using the monitor's dithering is if your GPU is too slow to render at 60fps, and the monitor is applying some kind of temporal dithering at 60Hz.

 

[10e]

I think that the L227WTG is a pretty good screen. It's a high-gamut panel, with apparently only one small flaw, and that's color banding at contrast set below 70.

Of course I'm not sure how much banding, and to what extent it can be tamed via calibration or how it lessens or greatens throughout the contrast range of 40 to 70 (which is considered fairly usable).

Otherwise it looks like a good low-lag screen that doesn't break the bank, and probably looks super sharp due to the glossy panel.

From what I've read at HardForum, input lag is either non-existent or below viewable thresholds.

The Doublesight looks gorgeous, but is also almost three times the cost, and it's questionable what advantages it will bring.

Regards,

10e

Originally posted by: Ardan

Originally posted by: muppet22
my advice is to get a 22" (or 24") TN, since you aren't planning on watching movies on your monitor once u get a hdtv. the g2400w looks like a nice 24" tn. i've only briefly looked through 22" tn's and it's been hard trying to find a low-input one.

oh i just noticed that xtknight finally listed a 22" lcd in the gaming recommendations! i haven't read anything about the lg l227wt or l227wtg, although the l227wt is on digitalversus: http://www.digitalversus.com/d...8&mo2=304&p2=2943&ph=9
appears it has pretty bad input lag..although xtknight quotes 0 input lag and response time..dunno who is right

Yeah I saw that on digitalversus as well and was also wondering who was right, prad.de or digitalversus. It seems that a lot of people have great experiences with it in games, etc, and I noticed that it was placed right up in the #1 slot in the Gaming section in this thread, so I suspect that prad.de's review of the input lag is correct. I didn't look into that G2400W at all until you mentioned it. That definitely would be a good idea, and I saw they have a G2200W coming at the end of april, too. If I wait almost another month, I probably would be able to budget in that DS-263N, but I still don't think that is worth it. I mean, its worth it, I could afford it if I waited, and I agree that it is an astoundingly good value for that H-IPS panel, but why bother if I have a good setup in the other room? heh. I have heard that Samsung is coming out with a new S-PVA 22" screen, the 2263PW (if I remember correctly). Does anyone know when that should be coming out? That would definitely be worth waiting, because I had good experiences with an S-PVA.

 

[10e]

Input lag should be well-controlled. It also has a nice feature that allows you to turn overdrive on or off, as overdrive usually adds input lag.

As far as I know the L227WTG has a glossy screen whereas the W2252TQ has a matte screen, and apparently the W2252TQ is a standard gamut panel while the L227WTG is a wide-gamut.

I haven't heard of the L227WTG being discontinued. It's a very new model.

Regards,

10e

Originally posted by: cheap
I went to Best Buy to try buy myself an LG 22" L22WTG-PF monitor the number 1 rated gaming monitor and they were all out. BB associate said it's probably because it's discontinued and instead offered me a W2252TQ-TF monitor. It's cheaper by ten or twenty bucks, looks about the same. Anybody know what the difference is between the two? Does it also have a 0 latency?

Thanx.

 

[cheap]

Originally posted by: 10e
Input lag should be well-controlled. It also has a nice feature that allows you to turn overdrive on or off, as overdrive usually adds input lag.

As far as I know the L227WTG has a glossy screen whereas the W2252TQ has a matte screen, and apparently the W2252TQ is a standard gamut panel while the L227WTG is a wide-gamut.

I haven't heard of the L227WTG being discontinued. It's a very new model.

Regards,

10e

Originally posted by: cheap
I went to Best Buy to try buy myself an LG 22" L22WTG-PF monitor the number 1 rated gaming monitor and they were all out. BB associate said it's probably because it's discontinued and instead offered me a W2252TQ-TF monitor. It's cheaper by ten or twenty bucks, looks about the same. Anybody know what the difference is between the two? Does it also have a 0 latency?

Thanx.

Maybe it's just so much in demand and so new that BB is almost completely sold out of it in Portland, OR area. Employee checked the district warehouse and said they had none and none were coming on the next truck. That's why he thought it could be discontinued. There's still 3 left in one BB but it's a bit further from me than the rest. So which one of these is better for gaming + web surfing? High gamut is better than standard gamut right? Can I turn off overdrive on both of these screens?

Thanks.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: 10e
Response time is pretty good. Typical MVA where darker colors are a bit slower than medium or lighter colors in changing. I'm not sure if it uses overdrive. Maybe I'll do the Prad.de Pixperan test and see what the car looks like going across and if there is any overdrive artifacting.

I'm not sure about video card compatibility, but it does actually come up as an HDTV on the newer video cards with a maximum listed resoution of 1920x1200, so some older cards may have issues with the HDMI port.

I haven't had any issues on ATI HD 38x0 cards, or G80 and G92 8800GTS cards though, and I've even set it up with an HDMI switch. The only issues I've seen with the switch is on port 2 of the HD 38x0 series cards, but they are a bit strange in general.

The VGA port works very well, and has some of the best video quality I've seen over analog.

If given a choice in listing this or the L245/6WP I'd still take the LG in the recommendations section. I liked the panel on it better and the OSD was a little bit nicer. Additionally, the LG had a properly working Power save mode in HDMi, whereas the L2410NM just turns blue.

Though maybe an honorable mention, especially now that it's on special for $320 to $380 around the way.

Regards,

10e

OK. Added as honorable mention.

Thanks for your information here 10e it has been invaluable to many a consumer who doesn't browse HardForum as much as he should.

 

[patrickj]

I played with this monitor for two weeks before returning it to BB. It just seemed to be too bright/intense, and I was unable to adjust it to where I could tolerate it. I looked at all the monitors at BB before purchasing and this had the nicest picture. Once I got it home, I had second thoughts, but spent a good bit of time trying to adjust it. Also, the color banding, at least on the unit I had, was pretty bad. Maybe I got the "made on Friday" LCD.

Originally posted by: 10e
I think that the L227WTG is a pretty good screen. It's a high-gamut panel, with apparently only one small flaw, and that's color banding at contrast set below 70.

Of course I'm not sure how much banding, and to what extent it can be tamed via calibration or how it lessens or greatens throughout the contrast range of 40 to 70 (which is considered fairly usable).

Otherwise it looks like a good low-lag screen that doesn't break the bank, and probably looks super sharp due to the glossy panel.

From what I've read at HardForum, input lag is either non-existent or below viewable thresholds.

The Doublesight looks gorgeous, but is also almost three times the cost, and it's questionable what advantages it will bring.

Regards,

10e

Originally posted by: Ardan

Originally posted by: muppet22
my advice is to get a 22" (or 24") TN, since you aren't planning on watching movies on your monitor once u get a hdtv. the g2400w looks like a nice 24" tn. i've only briefly looked through 22" tn's and it's been hard trying to find a low-input one.

oh i just noticed that xtknight finally listed a 22" lcd in the gaming recommendations! i haven't read anything about the lg l227wt or l227wtg, although the l227wt is on digitalversus: http://www.digitalversus.com/d...8&mo2=304&p2=2943&ph=9
appears it has pretty bad input lag..although xtknight quotes 0 input lag and response time..dunno who is right

Yeah I saw that on digitalversus as well and was also wondering who was right, prad.de or digitalversus. It seems that a lot of people have great experiences with it in games, etc, and I noticed that it was placed right up in the #1 slot in the Gaming section in this thread, so I suspect that prad.de's review of the input lag is correct. I didn't look into that G2400W at all until you mentioned it. That definitely would be a good idea, and I saw they have a G2200W coming at the end of april, too. If I wait almost another month, I probably would be able to budget in that DS-263N, but I still don't think that is worth it. I mean, its worth it, I could afford it if I waited, and I agree that it is an astoundingly good value for that H-IPS panel, but why bother if I have a good setup in the other room? heh. I have heard that Samsung is coming out with a new S-PVA 22" screen, the 2263PW (if I remember correctly). Does anyone know when that should be coming out? That would definitely be worth waiting, because I had good experiences with an S-PVA.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: nwilson
After reading this forum and elsewhere, and searching for over a week, I got a great bargain from Buy.com on a HP LP2065 for $245.99 after rebates and discounts. The model has (hopefully) a 20" LG.Philips S-IPS (LM201U05) panel, 1600x1200, 8 ms, 800:1, view angles 178 degrees H/V. The price was $345.99 less $50 HP mail-in rebate thru 4/30/08, less $50 instant discount for buying first purchase with a Revolution Card issued instantly thru Buy.com, and free shipping in the continental US. I read a user review at newegg.com dated 1 June 2007 that said he got an AMVA panel in this model. I hope I'm luckier, even though the reviewer said it was still a great monitor with the AMVA, and that panel gave richer blacks than an S-IPS would.

The Buy.com page for this monitor is http://www.buy.com/prod/HP_LP2...loc/273/202327642.html

Oddly, Buy.com fails to mention the HP $50 rebate, but you'll find the mail-in form at
http://h71016.www7.hp.com/html/pdfs/1310-1DT.pdf

The HP page for the monitor is
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc...70-444767-1815933.html

HP also offers a $30 rebate on the LP1965 monitor, which offers a 1280x1024 S-IPS panel with 6ms and 1000:1 CR, for $319 with free shipping, for a net price direct from HP of $289. At Buy.com the price is $306.99 with free shipping, so if you use the $50 Revolution Card discount and $30 HP rebate the net price is $226.99 for the 19" versus $245.99 for the 20" model with higher resolution. For a mere $19 difference, the LP2065 is the better deal.

I looked up the panel ID on http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/ and found that the same panel is used in monitors from LG, NEC, Dell, BenQ, HP and Philips, but the HP model is by far less expensive - by hundreds of dollars - than any of the others (with possible exception of Philips, which I did not find available in the US).

I welcome any comments or additional info, and I hope this helps others who, like me, are looking for the sweet spot in a photo-editing quality monitor for a low price.

I believe the LP1965 is an MVA panel.

Thanks for the info though that looks like a great deal. The LP2065 indeed fills a niche; I hope it does not get discontinued.

Originally posted by: ericinho
4:3 vs. widescreen 16:10

Is there actually an advantage of a widescreen compaired to a 4:3 ratio screen, besides the fact that the wide screen is ofcourse ehm, wider ;-)

An 21" 4:3 has 1600x1200 native resolution, while a 21" WS has 1680x1050...
does this have any advantages or disadvantages in dotpitch for example?
Or does a non-wide screen has less trouble with color/gamma shifting?

Thanks!

There are no real advantages besides the width. It won't affect panel properties at all.

The dot pitch is really independent of the aspect ratio. Dot pitch has its own advantages. Bigger fonts with bigger dot pitch, etc.

Originally posted by: crownjules
Howdy folks,

There's a lot of information in this thread that I'm just not technically up to par on to make a good judgement on my own. So perhaps you can help me.

I've had a 2001FP for 5 years now. The original one broke and went in replacement and, of course, I received a refurb in exchange. I immediately noticed the difference - the monitor seemed dimmer and the colors way less vibrant. It's about time that I upgrade to some newer monitor technology. So what will it primarily be used for?

General useage. I do a fair bit of gaming and movie watching. The most important component is obviously the work I do on it. I'll be running lots of charts on the monitor, so color and clarity are of importance. I'd like to get a 24" widescreen and I am willing to spend up to $500 on one.

What do you think are my best options?

You had a VA/IPS panel before, so you probably want to get at least a VA. The problem is, no 24" VAs are under $500 that I know, besides the Westinghouse L2410NM. If you can find that, that's probably your best option. It uses the same panel as the most pricey 24" VX2435wm ($560) as well.