|
shrughes posted:It's 1680x1050, why wouldn't I just get one of the ubiquitous 1920x1080's out there? Agreed. 16:10 is only worth it for the extra vertical height.
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2011 10:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 13:02 |
|
|
DrDork posted:Not a whole lot, sadly. There are still various issues with using a TV as a PC monitor, to the point where it's still not recommended. Still, if you're going to go that route, smaller TVs will always result in higher image quality than larger ones, and one that supports 1920x1080p input via a computer-aware HDMI/DVI port will minimize the fuckery that the TV will impose on the image. In that sense the Sony looks like a decent pick, but it'll still never look as good as a normal PC monitor. Coming from an older TV it shouldn't matter so much though (especially a 1366x768 model, I just don't know how you could cope with that resolution on a large screen) For what its worth my Sony KDL40ex500 is fairly okay to use as a monitor but I wouldn't want to do it full time. It also looks pretty much the same through VGA and HDMI.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2011 01:04
|
|
|
Subraji posted:Could you knowledgeable lot help me decide between these three monitors? LED is just the backlight - you'll find a lot of monitors have one now anyway even if they don't make a big deal of it. As for your three choices I'd rule the first one out immediately - the resolution is just too low for that sized screen.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2011 02:19
|
|
|
zxqv8 posted:I find that it's TN and that's the thing that makes me wonder. The OP leads me to believe that this technology will give me pretty crappy quality overall. Has this changed or am I just misunderstanding? I just play games, watch videos and browse a lot. I'm not in need of ultra high performance but don't want to waste money either. For a start all budget monitors are TN, so if you are in the market for a cheapish monitor don't let that worry you. The screen you are coming from would almost certainly have been TN anyway. As for response time I wouldn't worry there either. IIRC its largely marketing these days anyway, it can be defined in different ways (same goes for contrast ratios)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2011 12:26
|
|
|
Anyone working with different sized screens of the same (vertical) resolution? Currently I'm using a 20" 1600x1200 4:3 panel alongside a 20" 1680x1050 16:10 model which works surprisingly well because although the heights are different everything pretty much lines up between the two screens.  (see how the window is in roughly the same place on each screen) If I swapped out the 16:10 for a 24" Dell I'd be matching the vertical resolution of the 4:3 panel but the physical height is going to be quite a bit more (if my high school trig serves me correctly). Just wondering if this is going to be really jarring.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2011 04:01
|
|
|
Eej posted:Also a lot of people go with different sized monitors, just be aware that nVidia cards run hotter doing different resolutions at the same time (so I am told anyhow). Is this only newer cards? My creaky passive cooled 9600GT is running the same temps driving two different panels as it did with one.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2011 23:46
|
|
|
Whether you see black bars or not is a function of what aspect ratio the screen is and what aspect ratio the content is not anything to do with screen size. All of the models you posted are 16:9 (1920x1080 pixels) so no difference between them in that regard.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2011 13:11
|
|
|
How common are dead pixels these days anyway? There are five LCDs and a few of laptops of varying ages in this room and all of them are still perfect. All budget models too.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2011 04:19
|
|
|
movax posted:I'm not familiar with what's offered in Australia, but it's going to be tough to meet that price point. With 16:10 panels falling by the way-side, the guys making S-PVA/S-MVA panels (which would be perfect for you, like Samsung etc) can give you what you want...in 1920x1080. Dell would happily cover all of those with a 24" UltraSharp, but not at the price point you want. The newer stripped down Dell 24" (U2412M) is $399 AUD, might be worth keeping an eye on it to see if it goes on special. The pixel response time is 8ms GTG though, but I don't know how much thats actually going to matter
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2011 05:26
|
|
|
Phiberoptik posted:It's for windows stuff. Can I run 3 monitors off that one card though? Not that one, I think with Nvidia you need one of their crazy dual-GPU cards like a GTX 590. You're probably best adding another Nvidia card and using that for the third display
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2011 07:48
|
|
|
Xanar posted:1) Is extra software still needed. I remember reading some threads a long time ago recommending ultramon because windows XP used to handle 2 monitor setups badly. Is that still the case in windows 7? Is there any software that recommended that makes working with 2 monitors easier? I find Windows 7 fine for multi monitor support. Some people don't like that the taskbar is only on one monitor but I actually prefer it that way - I'd try stock first and look into software if you find yourself wanting some feature or other you don't have.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2011 04:42
|
|
|
You could say anything analogue is suboptimal for any signal that could have stayed digital through the entire path.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2011 03:11
|
|
|
I don't think the glass on an iMac (or other Apple display) is very scratch resistant anyway. Normal LCDs are pretty tough anyway, the two I'm looking at now have been transported to a tonne of LANs and are undamaged so I don't know how you wind up damaging yours.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2011 03:26
|
|
|
Senjuro posted:The biggest reason I'm looking to switch is screen size. At the moment I have a lowly 4:3 17". While it's still usable for games, when it comes to movies a third or more of the screen is black bars (but what fine, deep, CRT level black it is). Also there's the constant teasing I get for still having a CRT As hinted at unless that is a really good CRT then you'll probably be happy with even a cheap TN panel. If it was a CRT that came bundled with a PC years ago then you'll see massive improvements.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2011 23:29
|
|
|
Mush Man posted:After almost four and a half years, my current monitor is almost dead. When I turn it the first time for the day, it'll squeal for a second with crazy scanlines before it shuts off. If I persist turning it off and on again, it'll eventually stay on, but it's probably time for a new monitor altogether. I've really been putting up with scanlines, constrast issues and burn-in for months too long. LED vs CCFL is in the OP Anyway I'd be looking at 1920x1080 panels, they're cheap and worst case you can drop the resolution back to something your card can handle (it's won't look ideal of course, but the trade off is the rest of the time you get a far more usable panel)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2011 01:39
|
|
|
movax posted:Thread title is more of a joke. I briefly cover 16:9 vs. 16:10 in the OP, but other than the "MAH PIXELS" arguement, I'll just paste from the OP: There is no reason to choose a 16:10 1680x1050 panel over the much cheaper and more readily available 16:9 1920x1080 models though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2011 03:22
|
|
|
Apologies if this has already been discussed, I did a quick scan but didn't see anything. Is the 2212HM as well regarded as the 2312HM? I realise its not much cheaper but I'd eventually like to go for a pair and I think the slightly smaller size would work out nicely.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2012 01:49
|
|
|
DrDork posted:Yes. The only differences between them are the price and the size--and since the price difference is small, we usually recommend the 23", especially since the 2212HM is actually a 21.5" screen vice the 2312HM's 23" one. Double especially right now as the 2312HM is actually cheaper than the 2212HM thanks to a sale. Thanks for the feedback. I didn't think about sales, might just wait until one or other goes on sale where I am (who am I kidding, I'll probably end up ponying up for the 16:10 24" model)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2012 07:32
|
|
|
thegasman2000 posted:Awesome thanks. It seems rather silly you can have the thunderbolt and the miniDP being used at the same time. I found a Thunderbolt to DVI for £40... Also note a lot of TN monitors are practically unusable in portrait mode - check out whether the image is good enough for you before buying extra stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2012 08:39
|
|
|
The U2412M is currently $350NZD from dell.co.nz (thats $150NZD off) I was just about to order the 23" version but that deal on the 24" was too good to pass up. I hope my graphics card doesn't get too choked up by the extra pixels 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2012 11:30
|
|
|
My 2412M arrived safely and looks beautiful. Its so giant and awesome looking I'm considering getting rid of my secondary 20" TN panel
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2012 06:46
|
|
|
Haeleus posted:Does anyone have (or had) an Acer S243HL? I'm debating whether or not its worth replacing it with a Dell U2312HM, mostly for gaming but for media as well. The drab colours and ghosting on my current monitor leave much to be desired. If you're patient just wait until either goes on sale. I got my U2412 for $350NZD which is slightly less than what the not on sale U2312 costs here.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2012 00:39
|
|
|
After only a single weeks usage my U2412 at home has gone from seeming massive to normal sized. Unfortunately this has had the side effect of making my work setup seem almost unusably cramped.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2012 22:54
|
|
|
Pretty sure they're just the same as any other low end Samsung screen (i.e. low quality TN panel) with a few more inputs and a tuner. If you're fine with that then go for it.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
Swimsuit Places posted:Goons, I'm stuck trying to choose between the Dell U2312HM and the Dell U2412M. Is the price difference really worth the various differences between these two monitors? Depends on what the price difference is at the time - be patient and the 2412 will go on sale. Personally I think its worth it for the extra vertical resolution but if you're mainly into movies/games then native 16:9 on the 2313 could be an asset.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2012 05:54
|
|
|
GAY RETARD posted:So I have a LG flatron e2041 monitor that displays at 1600x900 and was working fine, but I accidentally hit the auto adjust button on the monitor settings and now theres a black bar at the bottom of the screen where the image extends but is blocked. The menu wont let me manually adjust the ratio at all, and hitting the auto adjust button again doesnt solve it either. I would really appreciate it if someone knew of some solution. What happens if you connect it with a DVI cable?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2012 08:33
|
|
|
Should be able to get a Dell U2410M for between $300 and 350 - it's 16:10 and I'm very happy with mine.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2012 06:45
|
|
|
KingChicken posted:I am torn between picking up a Dell U2312HM or a U2412M - the 24' is on sale right now, $25 more than the U2312HM, though that may go on sale again soon. Different aspect ratio - take a look at the 1920x1200 vs 1920x1080 section of the OP
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2012 03:38
|
|
|
Maelin posted:I don't really know how graphics cards work, so I'm not sure if having the smaller screen running alongside will cripple my framerates. Will my graphics card be able to handle gaming on the Catleap with the secondary monitor? Or should I go something smaller (1920x1200 if I can find it) to ensure I get decent framerates? You don't have to run at native resolution - GPU scaling is pretty reasonable these days
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2012 06:48
|
|
|
Corte posted:http://accessories.dell.com/sna/products/Monitors_Flat_Panel_Widescreen/productdetail.aspx?c=ca&l=en&s=dhs&cs=cadhs1&sku=320-2676 Basically the screen is slightly taller than a typical 16:9 TV which is what consoles are designed for so if you connect one the image will be vertically stretched. Not an issue if you have it connected to a PC because you can select a resolution that is the correct aspect ratio.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2012 01:50
|
|
|
Tedronai66 posted:What about IPS and P/MVA? My old monitor is a *VA, and even older secondary is IPS (dell 2007wfp). I've pondered getting a korean monitor and just putting the *VA in portrait mode. In my experience VA looks like arse in portrait mode
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2012 03:01
|
|
|
Ika posted:Has anyone gone from 27" to 30"? Obviously upgrading from 22", 24" is a huge difference, but what about going from basicly 16:9 2560x... to 16:10 2560x..., do you feel it is worth double the price? For gaming and movies it won't be an improvement. Actually if its just gaming and movies then I'd go with a television, the extra pixels only come into their own for desktop stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2012 23:20
|
|
|
Why is it so frigging difficult to find a mini display port to display port cable? I really don't want to import, and all I can find locally are a bunch of adapters to DVI/HDMI/VGA (which are all Apple white)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2012 12:26
|
|
|
Just one issue with that 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2012 03:54
|
|
|
Probably the same one that decided AMD® Vari-Bright™ should switch itself on every time you update the graphics drivers in a laptop.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2012 05:42
|
|
|
Tots posted:What's the 12v in for on the back of my U2412M? Pretty sure thats a power output for the optional clip on speakers: http://support.dell.com/support/edocs/monitors/2005FPW/En/setup.htm (different model but same thing)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2012 03:46
|
|
|
DeePee posted:I'll be using it mainly for gaming and Adobe CS design work. Running off the top end MacBook Pro from a year ago (AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1024 MB). You can always drop down to a lower resolution - it isn't going to look great, but you don't have much choice with that laptop as I don't think its going to be up to 1080p in most games anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2012 03:00
|
|
|
Some people bitch about the Dell anti-glare coating. Personally I'd much rather have the aggressive coating than a glossy screen (or worse a sheet of glass like some of the Korean imports come with)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2012 09:29
|
|
|
It only stretches if you feed it a 1920x1080 signal. If its connected to a PC this isn't an issue.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2012 00:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 13:02 |
|
|
headlight posted:I'm thinking of investing into a multi monitor setup but not sure whether I should get 3x19" (4:3) monitors or 2x24" monitors. Computer use is some coding, some gaming, but mainly web browsing and chatting on irc/skype. I might do some photo editing and music production as hobby stuff, but nothing serious. I run a 24" 1920x1200 and a 20" 1600x1200 side by side and vastly prefer it to the 3x 19" 1280x1024 (5:4) set up my father runs. For me the main thing is the loss of vertical real estate - its hard going backwards in that regard.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2012 00:21
|
|