|
MadMax posted:I guess I have three main questions regarding this. My graphics card is a radeon 6870, currently not over clocked at all and I can play Crysis 2 at maxed settings no problem; will I need to upgrade my gpu for either/one/both of the above-outlined ideas?
|
# ? Jun 26, 2011 02:49 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 09:41 |
|
I wanted to get the U2311H as a replacement monitor, but I had about $100 in reward zone monies at Best Buy so I ended up getting this LG IPS monitor. The stand blows but I'm going to be mounting it to some desk-mounted arms anyway so that isn't a big deal. I can't seem to find much of anything about these LG IPS monitors though, besides this award and some other positive reviews. I replaced my main monitor (an HP w2207h). The difference is absolutely amazing. I see colors that I simply didn't see at all on the new panel. Subtle gradients and things all over the place I can now see, whereas on the HP monitor it would be a solid mass of color. I'm very happy with the LG and was wondering if anyone knows about it at all? I don't do photo work or anything that needs exact colors, I just happen to be able to notice the increased color depth. It also claims it is an IPS LED monitor which I have never heard of before.
|
# ? Jun 26, 2011 03:20 |
|
There still aren't too many reviews of that monitor floating around, but from what I've seen it's generally considered to be a pretty decent monitor. The display quality should be only slightly below the U2311H (if at all), with the main differences coming in terms of the extras: A much better stand, a thinner bezel, a better/longer warranty, a Display Port input, as well as USB ports. The U2311H also claims to be brighter (300 cd/m2 vs 250), but those measurements are always iffy. The LG, on the other hand, has speakers and LED backlighting (which won't improve the visual performance at all, but does allow it to be thinner and consume less power, which also means it'll run cooler), and is $50 cheaper. e; The LG also appears to use an external power brick, which I've never been a fan of at all, so points docked for that. DrDork fucked around with this message at 03:36 on Jun 26, 2011 |
# ? Jun 26, 2011 03:33 |
|
movax posted:I think you will; 2560x1600 is murder on graphics card. If you're willing to give up AA or AF, you might slip by with a single card containing the highest-end GPU. I have this feeling I'm going to end up going SLI to play Battlefield 3 and Mass Effect 3 with all eye candy when they come out. (I have the U3011). I find that the dell u3011 has excellent scaling so you still play games at 1920x1200 on it, it will just look a little soft. I don't find that I am that sensitive to it, but other people might scoff at using the monitor at anything other than it's native resolution. Seems like a better solution than messing around with sli.
|
# ? Jun 26, 2011 04:24 |
|
Well, you can always get something like a 6990 or 590. About the same price as a SLI/CrossFire setup, and while slower, you don't have to worry about the issues that always crop up in multi-GPU setups.
|
# ? Jun 26, 2011 04:46 |
|
I have my computer connected to a monitor and my tv through HDMI. I'm trying to get XBMC to run in fullscreen and at the same time play a game on my monitor full screen but my tv goes black when I run Bad Company 2 full screen. Is there anyway to fix this?
|
# ? Jun 26, 2011 07:01 |
|
That sounds like BC2 causing you grief with trying to monopolize the output when fullscreened. If you can, try running it windowed. Not sure if it has a "full screen windowed" mode, but if it does, try that. If not, try a normal windowed mode and see if that helps, and if it does, use something like ShiftWindow to fake the fullscreen windowed effect.
|
# ? Jun 26, 2011 07:17 |
|
It's time to replace my 10 year old Sony LCD with a brand new monitor. I'm looking for a color-accurate IPS around $500 or less, since I'm a cheap bastard who also happens to do a lot of amateur photo editing. Is the Dell U2410 still the best thing going? I understand NEC and HP have some good IPS models, but I don't know enough about their specifics to know which ones the good ones are. Anything comparable to the U2410?
|
# ? Jun 26, 2011 18:54 |
|
Not really. The U2410 is possibly the cheapest wide gamut display out there, which is a critical feature for photo editing. Its 24" and 23" competitors generally max out at the sRGB gamut, which is fine for web work and stuff that will be e-mailed to friends and family, but it's a narrower gamut not suited for print.
|
# ? Jun 26, 2011 19:01 |
|
Factory Factory posted:Not really. The U2410 is possibly the cheapest wide gamut display out there, which is a critical feature for photo editing. Its 24" and 23" competitors generally max out at the sRGB gamut, which is fine for web work and stuff that will be e-mailed to friends and family, but it's a narrower gamut not suited for print.
|
# ? Jun 26, 2011 20:58 |
|
Very helpful, guys. Thanks. A lot of what I do ends up printed just for my own pleasure, and this represents the first in a long series of steps to sharpen my skills and calibrate my gear with the goal of selling some of my prints some day. Next up after I get a decent monitor is learning proper calibration and how to use color profiles.
|
# ? Jun 26, 2011 22:03 |
|
If that's the case, then yeah, the U2410 is really hard to beat. As for calibration, it's going to be required to get the most out of the U2410. You can use some of the current generation of calibrators, like the Sypder3 or the X-Rite i1 with good results. X-Rite has also just put out a new lineup of i1Display Pro and iColorMunki products, which promise better support for wide gamut, which may be worth looking into.
|
# ? Jun 26, 2011 22:58 |
|
DrDork posted:The U2311H also claims to be brighter (300 cd/m2 vs 250), but those measurements are always iffy. The LG, on the other hand, has speakers and LED backlighting (which won't improve the visual performance at all, but does allow it to be thinner and consume less power, which also means it'll run cooler), and is $50 cheaper. Literally the first thing you want to do on a U2311H is turn down the brightness anyway because by default, its set to liquidate your eyeballs into radioactive puree. Factory default is 70. I have mine somewhere in the 30s (and in a dark room its still bright as hell). As long as you get one that doesn't have weird tinting or stupid amounts of backlight bleed, U2311H is a fine monitor but the stand is crap as mentioned above. Its too stiff, so you can't swivel the panel without holding the base (or nailing it down). Built in speakers are almost always complete asscakes so I generally wouldn't regard that as a positive in any display.
|
# ? Jun 27, 2011 13:01 |
|
Regarding color profiles, is sRGB okay for just about anything? I like to make sure I am getting the best bang for my buck. Things look amazing (this is on the U2410) but if I can push it even more, hell let me know.
|
# ? Jun 27, 2011 21:49 |
|
sRGB is a small gamut. It is intended as the standardized web gamut, designed to standardize the gamuts on all computer-connected monitors and displays the way NTSC does for broadcast and TVs. Anything that's meant to be consumed on a PC will be displayed in sRGB, and there's nothing wrong with that, it's just not the largest set of colors in the world. Compared to AdobeRGB or the gamut possible in the CMYK printing process, sRGB is lacking. AdobeRGB has a wider range of blues and greens available, for example. The U2410 is capable of wider gamuts for professional or high-end photographic use: This is why you buy a U2410. If you only use it to display sRGB-gamut things, one or two things will happen: 1) You'll have wasted your money, as you didn't need wide gamut 2) If you don't calibrate the display (or use its sRGB mode), you'll display sRGB content with heart-achingly beautiful but actually incorrect colors If you Google "sRGB vs. Adobe RGB" you get some real morons who don't understand color management lording themselves over people who also don't understand it, so be careful with that.
|
# ? Jun 27, 2011 22:04 |
|
I'll switch it up tonight than, this stuff is way above my level of understanding but that is what those presets are for. Thank you once again!
|
# ? Jun 27, 2011 23:57 |
|
How future-proof is a 1366x768 display? In 3-4 years, will programs stop supporting a res with such a short height? Or have menus that are truncated? This will be mostly be running Office 2010, a bunch of statistics programs and several AutoDesk programs.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2011 18:38 |
|
Megiddo posted:How future-proof is a 1366x768 display? In 3-4 years, will programs stop supporting a res with such a short height? Or have menus that are truncated? Seriously, though, unless there's some solid reason for that resolution (like it's a laptop), there's virtually zero reason not to step up to something bigger. 1680x1050 is usually only fractionally more expensive, while providing substantially more space.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2011 19:15 |
|
1600x900 is an available option, but the powers that be went for the cheap base display option with a 1366x768 resolution rather than paying the $70 to upgrade to 1600x900, and without even consulting us first. What's really stupid is that all the laptops they bought last year were 1600x900 resolution 8440p models, so I was expecting the same specs in the new model. I think I came up with a good enough justification, so hopefully my department will pay for the upgrades. These are mostly going to be used by students at a private university, so they will definitely notice the lack of screen height when using Word or doing research for papers (or using Facebook).
|
# ? Jun 28, 2011 19:51 |
|
Yeah, 1366x768 is acceptable for, say, a netbook, where you're already accepting that you're going to be very space-limited, and aren't intending to use it for a whole lot more than web browsing and email. You should have a strong case for 1600x900 if it's meant as a more full-featured platform where people will actually be using it for productive purposes. I can't really imagine trying to do any sort of CAD work with such a low resolution. Having looked at some screenshots, it seems that the various menus and whatnot would take up 1/2 the screen even on an empty project!
|
# ? Jun 28, 2011 20:25 |
|
Well, CAD programs will be on there since we're licensed and it's part of our standard scripted install, but I don't expect very many users to try using the laptops for CAD work. That said, they are Core i5 laptops with 4GB of RAM and will be better spec'd than the majority of our desktops for the next two years, so I would expect that some users will use them in lieu of a desktop for all kinds of stuff you wouldn't think people would use a laptop for.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2011 23:43 |
|
Does anybody have any thoughts on IPS vs TN (with LED backlight) just for stuff like gaming, movies & coding? I'm not sure if it's worth it to get better color reproduction (that I might not even really take advantage of) in exchange for the slight loss in response time/potentially higher price. I was mostly looking at the U2311H for IPS & the Dell P2411H and Samsung BX2440X for TN.
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 03:08 |
|
Snagged a 2405fwp for $100 on criaglist. Looks really great except the 9 in 1 card reader doesn't work. Also what is the life time for these displays (this one is about 5 years old though in great condition)
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 03:32 |
|
My 2005FPW just started crapping out this year so you may still be good for a little longer more. Actually, the monitor was fine just that when it came back from being in hibernation the image would be like a film projector eventually producing a stable image if that makes sense.
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 03:50 |
|
The main problems with aging LCD monitors seem to be capacitors going bad, and/or the backlight going out, either because the inverter goes poof or the CCFL's themselves basically burning out (purple tinting and extended warmup as two symptoms of the latter). Capacitors are not the end of the world to replace, they're generally cheap, and not a horrible hassle to get at. CCFL's are also bearable to replace, but the replacement CCFL's are often expensive enough to make it not worth it. I had to swap caps on an LG L245/L246WP myself, a slight hassle, but the monitor works perfectly after fixing, saving me a few hundred bucks in the process.
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 05:28 |
|
My wife has a bunch of money to burn from a professional development allowance her work gives her, and one of the things she can use it for is a monitor. Our PC has an ATI Radeo HD 5770 1GB video card and is used for a bit of everything (word processing, internet, gaming etc). Does anyone have a recommendation in the $1500 or less price range? Are the Apple Cinema displays worth looking at and will they work with that card (I've read mixed things around the net)?
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 05:43 |
|
I recommend the Dell 30"
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 06:44 |
|
Adhesion posted:Does anybody have any thoughts on IPS vs TN (with LED backlight) just for stuff like gaming, movies & coding? I'm not sure if it's worth it to get better color reproduction (that I might not even really take advantage of) in exchange for the slight loss in response time/potentially higher price. I was mostly looking at the U2311H for IPS & the Dell P2411H and Samsung BX2440X for TN.
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 07:46 |
|
Bubble-T posted:Does anyone have a recommendation in the $1500 or less price range? Are the Apple Cinema displays worth looking at and will they work with that card (I've read mixed things around the net)? Alternately, spaceship's recommendation for a U2711/U3011 is solid (though in either case you probably won't be able to game at full resolution with just a piddly 5770 pushing it unless you just play older games, but you can work around that).
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 07:49 |
|
Looking around more I see reports that the 5770 simply doesn't work with this screen or the new iMacs vs MiniDP-DP adapter cords. Not sure if that's true for all versions of the card but I don't feel like taking the chance, I'll look at the Dell monitors. Thanks
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 08:25 |
|
Bubble-T posted:My wife has a bunch of money to burn from a professional development allowance her work gives her, and one of the things she can use it for is a monitor. Our PC has an ATI Radeo HD 5770 1GB video card and is used for a bit of everything (word processing, internet, gaming etc). spaceship posted:I recommend the Dell 30" Without a doubt. If you have $1500 to burn and you want the best display for that money: http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=bsd&cs=04&sku=224-9949
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 09:16 |
|
DrDork posted:No, the U2311H, U2410, U2711, and U3011 all have lag under 20ms. You're probably thinking of the 2408wfp, which did have lag in the 40-50ms range. The older you go, the worse the lag usually gets. The U2311H has no significant lag (< 3 ms) other than pixel response times. The U2410 has one frame of lag (17-20 ms) except in game mode where it has no significant lag other than pixel response times. The U2711 and U3011 have one frame of lag, and game mode has no effect. DrDork posted:If you're not some pro gamer who feels he lives and dies by single frames, it's unlikely you will ever notice the (very small) performance difference between a TN and the U2311H in game mode.
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 09:30 |
|
Adhesion posted:Does anybody have any thoughts on IPS vs TN (with LED backlight) just for stuff like gaming, movies & coding? I'm not sure if it's worth it to get better color reproduction (that I might not even really take advantage of) in exchange for the slight loss in response time/potentially higher price. I was mostly looking at the U2311H for IPS & the Dell P2411H and Samsung BX2440X for TN. I went from TN panels to a U2311H and I've had no problems in any online gaming or etc. I play a lot of fast paced FPS games but I'm not a pro-gamer or something. Either way, I can't really see a difference in ghosting, response or etc. Black actually being somewhat black instead of a dark grey is really nice for darker games too.
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 14:09 |
|
Were the old 2005FPW's "bad" for gaming too? I played everything on there and not once did I have problems. Dell makes solid monitors that don't gently caress around.
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 15:23 |
|
Also someone was mentioning the stands on the U2211H/U2311H being kind of average but when you compare them to the wobbly pieces of poo poo you find on most TN panel monitors they are heaven.
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 15:55 |
|
Vintersorg posted:Were the old 2005FPW's "bad" for gaming too? I played everything on there and not once did I have problems. Dell makes solid monitors that don't gently caress around. e; I originally read your post as being about a 2405FPW. Not sure what the latency on the 20" is/was, but everything's gotten a lot better in the last 6 years, so my point still applies. The Gunslinger posted:Also someone was mentioning the stands on the U2211H/U2311H being kind of average but when you compare them to the wobbly pieces of poo poo you find on most TN panel monitors they are heaven. DrDork fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Jun 29, 2011 |
# ? Jun 29, 2011 16:41 |
|
I currently have a benq g2400w which I bought 3 years ago but I'm looking to get another monitor for my new computer. Is this monitor still decent compared to what's out now? I'm looking to spend around 200-300 and would prefer 24 inch/1900x1200. I just do standard web browsing and some tf2/sc2 gaming at ~medium settings so I'm not looking for some extreme super response time or 100% color reproduction photoediting monitor. I've been getting fine with the benq so far but I'm gonna need a 2nd monitor since the benq will be used for my old one. Please help!!
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 19:34 |
|
The Gunslinger posted:Also someone was mentioning the stands on the U2211H/U2311H being kind of average but when you compare them to the wobbly pieces of poo poo you find on most TN panel monitors they are heaven. http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=109&cp_id=10828&cs_id=1082808&p_id=5400&seq=1&format=2 A 15 dollar solution. My brother bought a dell monitor a while back and I didn't find the swapping the view around to be that bad. I did have to hold the base down though but that was just fear of plastic.
|
# ? Jun 29, 2011 19:59 |
|
Gunna pull the trigger on one of these two: ASUS VW246H http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236049 Acer G245HBbd http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009297 Don't need the build in speakers and the HDMI port on the ASUS is nice, but it's not worth $40 when I can get an HDMI-to-DVI converter for $9 shipped. Is there any significant difference between the display quality on either of these to warrant buying the ASUS over the Acer? They seem to both have 1000:1 contrast ratios, which is really all I know what to look for when comparing displays. Bazanga fucked around with this message at 16:47 on Jun 30, 2011 |
# ? Jun 30, 2011 16:45 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 09:41 |
|
Thanks for the great info everybody! Looks like a U2311H is in my future Anybody have any experience ordering monitors direct from Dell? I would go with Newegg but it looks like they don't stock it.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2011 00:30 |