|
Ok, so if I'm a competative FPS player who values low input lag, deep black levels, and minimal ghosting above all else, what LCD would be best suited for that... with around a 24 inch display or so?
|
#
?
May 31, 2011 17:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 21:44 |
|
|
Factory Factory posted:It's tough to get a single monitor that does everything without spending over 20 grand on an OLED display. Probably the best of the best is the HP Dreamcolor LP2480zx, a $2500 24" RGBLED-backlit IPS panel. That will cover the entire AdobeRGB gamut, plus all of a number of others. Unless I'm missing other RGBLED IPS displays, the 30" Dell Ultrasharp U3011 comes next with a tiny bit less color gamut (including not-full-AdobeRGB) and the slightly indistinct black/dark grays. Then the Dell U2410, which has even a smidge less gamut than the U3011, but is still solidly a wide-gamut display. We are going to use these for print work and photography. I was thinking of something less than $1000, should I just stick with the U2410's then?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2011 17:50
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:Most games, no. It has to do with how 1) Windows is programmed to handle video display, and 2) precisely how the game works within that framework. Most games are designed to run a single window in an exclusive display mode for performance reasons. There is a program called ShiftWindow that lets you run most games in a full screen windowed mode.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2011 20:07
|
|
|
GreatGreen posted:Ok, so if I'm a competative FPS player who values low input lag, deep black levels, and minimal ghosting above all else, what LCD would be best suited for that... with around a 24 inch display or so? As far as specific models go, if you're gonna go the budget/mid-range TN path, you can pretty much wander onto NewEgg and pick any 24" TN with a decent rating and be done with it. If you want a 120Hz, there aren't a whole lot of options, so it should be pretty easy for you to sift through them and determine which one you like better. LuisX posted:We are going to use these for print work and photography. I was thinking of something less than $1000, should I just stick with the U2410's then? DrDork fucked around with this message at 20:58 on May 31, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2011 20:55
|
|
|
What's the best 120hz panel right now? Seems like it's up to asus or acer. I've also seen some lg model but that seem to be discontinued.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2011 20:59
|
|
|
GreatGreen posted:Ok, so if I'm a competative FPS player who values low input lag, deep black levels, and minimal ghosting above all else, what LCD would be best suited for that... with around a 24 inch display or so? You won't get deep blacks (it's an LCD panel after all), but get an Asus VH238H. The VH236H is lauded by fighting game players as having extremely low input lag, and the 238 is the same screen with LED backlight for only $10 more.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2011 21:04
|
|
|
Thanks for the recommendations, guys. I'm still not sure about what to do though. Maybe I should just wait until they make LCD computer monitors that can do local dimming and actually turn off the LEDs behind the pixels that are supposed to be dark.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2011 00:25
|
|
|
GreatGreen posted:Thanks for the recommendations, guys. I'm still not sure about what to do though. Maybe I should just wait until they make LCD computer monitors that can do local dimming and actually turn off the LEDs behind the pixels that are supposed to be dark.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2011 00:35
|
|
|
GreatGreen posted:Thanks for the recommendations, guys. I'm still not sure about what to do though. Maybe I should just wait until they make LCD computer monitors that can do local dimming and actually turn off the LEDs behind the pixels that are supposed to be dark. LEDs are over marketed. The form factor is nice but the energy savings in a monitor will be minimal, it's not going to magically have CRT black levels and they often have the same flashlighting problems regular LCDs do. Get a good panel before you worry about how it's lit. The Dell Ultrasharp U2311H is fine for gaming, I play Counter-Strike, TF2 and more modern stuff all the time on it. I'm not a "pro gamer" but I do alright. It looks beautiful to boot, far better than any TN panel I've owned. I can't say I've ever noticed ghosting with it and the only time I've even seen it is in reviews where the camera's shutter speed is set to maximum. If 120hz is a sticking point then your only real option is the Asus you've already considered.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2011 15:41
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:LEDs are over marketed. The form factor is nice but the energy savings in a monitor will be minimal, it's not going to magically have CRT black levels and they often have the same flashlighting problems regular LCDs do. Get a good panel before you worry about how it's lit. The Dell Ultrasharp U2311H is fine for gaming, I play Counter-Strike, TF2 and more modern stuff all the time on it. I'm not a "pro gamer" but I do alright. It looks beautiful to boot, far better than any TN panel I've owned. I can't say I've ever noticed ghosting with it and the only time I've even seen it is in reviews where the camera's shutter speed is set to maximum. I use a U2410 without overdrive, and I can probably beat most gamers in TF2 and BFBC2. IPS's are fine for the large majority of gamers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2011 10:58
|
|
|
So I'm considering jumping on an Acer P216HV or a Hans-G HF225DPB, since they're available for around $110. Both are budget 22" 1080p monitors. I won't be doing any content creation, just typical desktop stuff and gaming (and I'm not super bothered by color inaccuracy or crappy viewing angles), so I don't think I need an IPS panel. Are these monitors a bad idea? I'm not averse to spending more money if it nets me some appreciable difference in quality, but if I'd be satisfied with something cheap, that'd be great.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2011 16:37
|
|
|
David Tennant posted:I use a U2410 without overdrive, and I can probably beat most gamers in TF2 and BFBC2. IPS's are fine for the large majority of gamers. I find that in TF2 and L4D, the extra frame lag combined with Valve's particular way of calculating client-side hitboxes means that you tend to have to shoot people ahead of where they appear on screen. It's possible to get used to, but the lower lag when using overdrive just feels so much more natural to me. Same thing, to a lesser extent, for other twitch games, as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2011 16:42
|
|
|
Ok am I just overcomplicating things? I have a u3011 and a Hanns G 27" side by side. Occaisionally I d like to watch a video stretch out over these two displays, however due to size and resolution difference I always get a disorted effect across screens. I ve tried changing res and resizing desktop. Is it even possible?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2011 17:23
|
|
|
You're playing a 16:9 video across 32:9 of screens with different resolutions and physical sizes. Of course it's going to be distorted. No, it's not possible without being worse and dumber than just playing it on the U3011.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2011 17:31
|
|
|
So I'm looking to replace one of my monitors for a 24" since I need a bit more screen space for work. I'm looking at ebay, so this is more of a post for older monitors. There are currently several monitors on sale: U2711 - $800 -> This is my dream, I really can't afford it, but eh, I can make ends meet if necessary 2405WFP - $185 2407WFP - $190 U2410 - $375 I'm leaning towards the 2407WFP, but i was wondering whether it would just be worth it to purchase the HP ZR24W new instead? I know the WFP monitors are PVA, but considering I don't do any serious graphics work, I don't believe I would necessary need IPS (although I may notice the difference in quality just by sitting the monitor next to my 2005WFP. Edit: Price update after negotiating. Shadowhand00 fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Jun 4, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2011 19:50
|
|
|
I've got around $1000 AUD to blow on a 2560x1440 monitor. I'm looking at the Dell 27" Ultrasharp but people keep bitching about the anti-glare. How heavy is the Dell 27" anti-glare compared to the Dell U2211H or U2311H? I live in Australia so finding demo units of the beast is basically impossible. I'd love an Apple Cinema Display but the lack of video inputs makes it a less tempting proposition (plus its like $600 more expensive than the Dell).
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2011 04:49
|
|
|
Shadowhand00 posted:So I'm looking to replace one of my monitors for a 24" since I need a bit more screen space for work. I'm looking at ebay, so this is more of a post for older monitors. Chafe posted:I've got around $1000 AUD to blow on a 2560x1440 monitor. I'm looking at the Dell 27" Ultrasharp but people keep bitching about the anti-glare. How heavy is the Dell 27" anti-glare compared to the Dell U2211H or U2311H? I live in Australia so finding demo units of the beast is basically impossible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2011 05:15
|
|
|
So how good is the U2410 as a tv replacement for PS3/360 gaming? Is lag really that bad? Color accuracy? It's been two months now and I'm itching to go back to the Ultrasharp series. VVVVV Edit: Sweeeet. Thanks for the heads up! I love my plasma, but 1280x768 resolution have been giving my some oddball, cut-off screens, results with the PS3 and my MacBook. Also, the real estate of 1920x1200 sounds very enticing. Mitsune fucked around with this message at 06:43 on Jun 4, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2011 06:08
|
|
|
Mitsune posted:So how good is the U2410 as a tv replacement for PS3/360 gaming? Is lag really that bad? Color accuracy? The lag is perfectly fine unless you're using it for one of those crazy Asian timing games. Like, the ones that serious players still keep a CRT-TV around for. Short of that, it's fine--with gaming mode enabled its lag/latency is quite good. It also actually (and properly) supports 24p input via HDMI from PS3 blu-rays, which is a nice bonus.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2011 06:36
|
|
|
DrDork posted:There's really no reason I can see to prefer the 2405 over the 2407 if the prices are that close. I've got both a 2407WFP-HC and a U2410, and is there a difference? Yes. Is it worth twice the price if you're going to be mostly using it for work (assuming your work isn't graphic design)? No, not really. Same goes for the ZR24W. Of course buying used carries its own bag of problems (mostly revolving around your options if you find a dead/stuck pixel), but you can certainly save a lot of money that way. does this difference also come down to the gaming lag?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2011 17:40
|
|
|
Shadowhand00 posted:does this difference also come down to the gaming lag?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2011 19:07
|
|
|
My U2410 showed up today with a dead pixel  Anyone know what Dell's policy on this is? I'm finding a lot of conflicting information.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2011 20:50
|
|
|
On an Ultrasharp? Two-day advance RMA until you're happy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2011 21:54
|
|
|
Chafe posted:I've got around $1000 AUD to blow on a 2560x1440 monitor. I'm looking at the Dell 27" Ultrasharp but people keep bitching about the anti-glare. How heavy is the Dell 27" anti-glare compared to the Dell U2211H or U2311H? I live in Australia so finding demo units of the beast is basically impossible. edit; found it. but I would now advise against it (read further down that thread to come across some people that tried this, and fubar-ed their expensive screens), just informative: http://forums.overclockers.com.au/showthread.php?t=878149 the wobble fucked around with this message at 01:29 on Jun 5, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2011 23:56
|
|
|
I'm thinking about a new monitor for my birthday. Could I get a consensus on whether 24" is too big when you're sitting right in front of it? If not, what's the best 24" LCD around right now? You know, 120Hz, deep blacks, all that poo poo. I'm not very good at this. Edit: right now I have a 21.5" (I think) Benq monitor from two and a half years back. I still like it, but it can only go up to 60Hz and it's killing my eyes when I'm not playing a game. I don't know why it's only starting to bother me now. paint dry fucked around with this message at 14:36 on Jun 5, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2011 14:29
|
|
|
paint dry posted:I'm thinking about a new monitor for my birthday. Could I get a consensus on whether 24" is too big when you're sitting right in front of it? If not, what's the best 24" LCD around right now? You know, 120Hz, deep blacks, all that poo poo. I'm not very good at this. What is "right in front"? 6" away from screen? (do you have a really shallow desk?). I think 24" will be fine, unless you sit so close to your monitor that you have to move your head. I sit about 2 ft. from my 30" and it's just about right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2011 16:30
|
|
|
paint dry posted:I'm thinking about a new monitor for my birthday. Could I get a consensus on whether 24" is too big when you're sitting right in front of it? If not, what's the best 24" LCD around right now? You know, 120Hz, deep blacks, all that poo poo. I'm not very good at this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2011 17:24
|
|
|
Also, 120hz doesn't matter at all for desktop usage. Whatever it is bugging you about your current monitor, it's not the refresh rate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2011 18:05
|
|
|
DrDork posted:The lag difference between the 2407WFP-HC and the U2410 is there when you turn game mode on in the U2410, but otherwise they're both in the low 30ms range (U2410 in game mode is ~17ms). For reference, I play a wide variety of games and have never really felt that I needed to turn game mode on--even at 30ms it's been fine for my uses. It's more that the colors and clarity on the U2410 are superior to the 2407 that makes (to me) the most noticeable difference. Just picked up the 2407WFP. Still need to get this thing calibrated at some point, but sitting next to my 2005wfp, there's really noticeable difference. 1 dead pixel that's not very noticeable - I have no real complaints.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2011 04:22
|
|
|
Shadowhand00 posted:Just picked up the 2407WFP. Still need to get this thing calibrated at some point, but sitting next to my 2005wfp, there's really noticeable difference. 1 dead pixel that's not very noticeable - I have no real complaints. I was quite surprised to learn that there are ways to try to fix dead and stuck pixels, though they aren't guaranteed. Here's the eHow article for dead ones. I used the stuck pixel article to actually fix a perma-red pixel on my laptop. I was pretty stunned. As long as you're careful, it's worth a shot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2011 04:39
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:I was quite surprised to learn that there are ways to try to fix dead and stuck pixels, though they aren't guaranteed. Here's the eHow article for dead ones. I used the stuck pixel article to actually fix a perma-red pixel on my laptop. I was pretty stunned. As long as you're careful, it's worth a shot. Oooh, thatnks for this. i was able to get rid of the one I noticed 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2011 04:51
|
|
|
I'm wondering if anyone here who color corrects video can recommend a sub-$1000 display that will be passable for color-correcting low-budget and personal projects (unless my income changes drastically in the near future, a fully broadcast color-accurate display isn't in the cards at the moment). I was referred here from the post-production thread in CC, and the advice I got out of them was to go for an IPS panel and calibrate with a Color Spyder 3. LED-backlighting and glossy finish are a must. Does anyone have any good or bad experiences to share or any recommendations? Also, how does the display on the 27" iMac stack up to other offerings on the market?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2011 21:46
|
|
|
The iMac display is about the same as the Dell U2711 and the Apple Cinema Display 27". Which is to say, it's good, but it's only accurate for sRGB and doesn't really match any wider gamuts (reds are weak). Your best bet below $1000 will be the Dell U2410, though, at ~$500 on a really good sale (normally $600). It's not glossy nor is it LED-backlit, but it's an accurate, wide-gamut display that actually just about gets every color in NTSC. Its lower 10% of blacks/grays are a little indistinct, but otherwise, it's a really rockin' screen. Honestly, I haven't seen a lot of pro PC monitor with a glossy finish except for the Apple Cinema Display, and as I said, the current generation of that doesn't have wide gamut support. As for calibrating, a Spyder3Pro would work. I use an X-Rite i1Display LT; the OP lists some options. E: Frankly, LED backlighting and glossy are troublesome. LED backlighting cuts down on your color gamut unless you pick a $2500 RGBLED professional monitor. Glossy makes things look all kinds of pretty, but professional monitors tend to be a bit stodgy and traditional in terms of keeping anti-glare coatings, so glossy screens are hard to come by. Factory Factory fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Jun 6, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2011 22:36
|
|
|
Moon Potato posted:LED-backlighting and glossy finish are a must. Otherwise the ACD is a good quality monitor, but it does fall short of the competition in pretty much every single area that isn't the panel and looking sexy. That is, it has poo poo for connectors (hope your video card has a DisplayPort output on it), and no other features whatsoever to speak of (card reader? Nope. Height/Swivel/Rotate stand? Nope. etc). On the upside, it's Apple, which means it's sexy as hell. If you can break outside the glossy-LED box, my vote would be for the U2711, which on sale (currently) you can get for $999, and is a fantastic monitor. Though depending on what sort of proofing you're doing, you may want to avail yourself of some knowledge on how to handle wide-gamut monitors (which it is), and how that will affect your eventual output (doing print work? good! doing web work? bad!). DrDork fucked around with this message at 22:41 on Jun 6, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2011 22:37
|
|
|
Thanks for the advice - maybe it's because I haven't checked out many newer monitors, but pretty much all the ccfl-backlit screens I've worked with have noticeably uneven light distribution when working with darker images. LED backlighting improves this significantly, but if it impacts the color gamut and if newer ccfl systems have improved significantly, I guess it's not a requirement. I'm currently working with a 6-year-old Dell 2405fpw, and all the colors just turn to mud when you get near black which is a huge pain when you're trying to figure out how much to crush your blacks and something I don't want to have to work with. Again, it may be because I'm unfamiliar with what's on the market currently, but I've always thought antiglare displays have always looked dull and washed out compared to glossy displays or a nice television. My editing setup is in the corner of a room with no direct sunlight and one very diffuse light on the ceiling, so I really have no need for an antiglare finish. I've read that a glossy finish allows for a wider range of color reproduction, but that may very well have been marketing BS.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2011 23:47
|
|
|
There are three big reasons glossy displays exist: 1) Anti-glare coatings produce very slight color distortion in the sense that there is a VERY slight appearance of something like multicolor noise. But it's like fluorescent light flicker in that most people don't really notice it, but if you do, it drives you nuts. 2) It's cheaper to produce a glossy screen than apply an anti-glare coating 3) Human beings are driven by instinct to prefer shiny things for evolutionary reasons (i.e. speculative reasons that start with "We like shiny" and try to find competitive benefits of that being an adaptation). Shiny water is clean and good for drinking. Shiny hair implies youth and good health for baby-making. So glossy displays look delicious and sexy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2011 00:19
|
|
|
LED backlit monitors are even more susceptible to splotchy backlighting than CCFL from what I've read. No professional or semi-professional display uses WLED backlighting; they all use either CCFL or RGB LED backlighting. However, I don't know of any RGB LED displays that fall within your budget. The high end Eizos and NECs are still using CCFL because of its ability to produce wide colour gamut. If you're extra concerned about screen uniformity then the NEC PA series displays have a feature called ColorComp which will automatically adjust the monitor to compensate for uneven color produced by panels with less than perfect screen uniformity. I've enabled this on my NEC monitor and it works perfectly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2011 00:49
|
|
|
Do shiny screens tend to have deeper black levels or am I completely making that up?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2011 01:08
|
|
|
GreatGreen posted:Do shiny screens tend to have deeper black levels or am I completely making that up? Now, if you're the type of person who can catch the "AG sparkle" it may be that--for you--shiny screens look "more black" since they lack the sparkle that you might otherwise catch. Contra-wise, if you're like me, you catch every little glare and reflection from a shiny screen, and nothing ends up looking very dark. YMMV.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2011 01:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 21:44 |
|
|
GreatGreen posted:Do shiny screens tend to have deeper black levels or am I completely making that up? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2011 01:57
|
|