Hello.
I'm currently equipped with a 20" Fujitsu Siemens LCD monitor, which has a max resolution of 1650 x 1080.
I've been wanting to buy a new monitor for a while. My current monitor isn't broken or anything, I've just found myself wanting some additional horizontal screen space from time to time - and I've been wanting to harness a tad more power from my computer by increasing the resolution of my games.
[B]What I'm looking for:[/B]
[list]
[*]Minimum resolution of 1920 x 1080
[*][del]Preferably OLED screen (if possible at said resolution)[/del] (Not reasonable)
[*]HDMI compability
[*]I'm thinking around >=23" of screen (feel free to add your input on the screen size)
[/list]
[B]Questions:[/B]
[list]
[*]What is contrast ratio? E.g. a screen has a contrast ratio of 1:12000. What does it mean, and is higher better?
[*]What are the benefits of an OLED screen, if any? Should it just be a regular LCD?
[*]Would a resolution of 1920 x 1200 be better? And why?
[*]Which ratio is best: 16:9 or 16:10. I can't really tell because I've heard good and bad from both.
[*]Since 1920 x 1080 have been on the market for quite the while and been the max resolution on monitors for a few years, is it likely that a greater resolution will become the mere 'standard'? Such as QXGA (2048 x 1536) or WQXGA (2560 x 1600)?
[*]Anything else you could possibly tell me that I should look for in a monitor?
[/list]
[B]Budget:[/B] I haven't set a budget yet, I would like to see what I can get for money.
[B]Geographical position: [/B]Denmark
[B]GPU:[/B] ATi Radeon HD 5870
Calling all monitor experts to the thread. :black101:
1. Contrast ratio is a number that helps to define how dark the darks are, and how light the lights are, typically higher is better. If you are not a graphic designer, this does not mean very much. But, generally higher is better. (Also, dynamic contrast ratio changes the brightness of the monitor based on the image, a dark image=dark screen, in my opinion is useless. Screens that do this end up overdoing it, making the image appear way too dark. I disable it when ever I can.)
2. There is no such thing as an "LED" screen. If you are referring to "OLED" screens then they are very thin, but very expensive. LCD is fine and wont "burn in" like plasmas.
3. I just got a new 1920x1200 monitor, and looking at a x1080 monitor, there is a big difference. 120 pixels doesn't sound like alot, but man, it really does seem bigger. You can just see more vertically. It helps with peripheral vision, adding to the immersion(maybe its just me)
4. 16:9 is 1920x1080, 16:10 is 1920x1200. See previous question^^
5. In my opinion, no. Look at the Steam Hardware Survey under "primary display resolution". The primary user base still uses 1280x1024! The standards wont change before a new new monitor becomes necessary. [URL]http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey[/URL]
6. The only thing you should note about 16:9 and 16:10: if you are planning on using a game console or watching TV, on a 16:10 screen the image will become stretched those extra 120 pixels. It doesn't look too bad, but its worth noting. This can be countered by a feature sometimes called "just scan". Meaning, it will only display what it is receiving.(It will put black bars at the top and bottom of the image, preventing it from being stretched out)
Another thing to consider is response time, that is, how long it takes the monitor to change from a color to black to another color. For gaming I would recommend no greater than 5ms. The longer the refresh rate, the better chance there is for ghosting to occur.
Also, one thing they don't mention in monitor specs is input delay (or input lag). It is the time it takes from when the monitor receives the signal to when it is displayed on screen. Monitors of this resolution constantly have problems with this, because they have a lot of area to cover, and the monitors have to apply post processing to a large image. The best way to find out if a monitor has a decent input delay is to Google it! The common test is to set up a computer with a cloned desktop, one on a CRT as a base line, and another on the LCD monitor being tested. They then run a stopwatch program, take a picture of the 2 monitors, and count the milliseconds between the two.
I just got a new Samsung T240HD, its 24" @ 1920x1200. It has that "just scan" feature so when I'm watching TV or playing a console I don't get a stretched image. [URL]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001280[/URL]
[QUOTE=cyberwarrior;20275123]Sup[/QUOTE]
Thanks for a very useful post!
So if I want to use the monitor only for my computer, would 16:10 be a good alternative to 16:9, if I understood your post correctly?
Yes, I was referring to OLED, sorry.
Sadly Newegg isn't shipping to Denmark.
Thanks again, bro.
Yep, I would go with 16:10 over 16:9 any day. You can get a 16:10 for the same price as other 16:9s anyway, so any extra pixels you can get for the same price is a bonus.
Also, watch out for your retailer's dead pixel policy. I was really dubious about the pixel policy for Newegg, you need 7 dead just to get a replacement. (Luckily the one I got was perfect!)
i just bought a 23.5" Asus HD 1080p montior with a hdmi input for my ps3 for 199 Plus tax, check out staples
Oled screens still cost 2000€ for a 11" screen.
I would get an LCD with a reflective surface bacuese they usually display better colors.
and 16:10 > 16:9 for a pc.
[QUOTE=taipan;20286443]I would get an LCD with a reflective surface bacuese they usually display better colors.[/QUOTE]
I prefer matte finishes, just so you don't get a huge reflection on your screen the second you open a window. Some times they get reflections from the bulbs in the ceiling. I feel bad for the people I see that have reflective-screened laptops, they always struggle to get a good position with no glare. (And they smudge really easily)
I have heard that reflective finishes display better colors, but I haven't seen any differences from a side by side comparison. If your working in the dark or low light, feel free to go with reflective if you'd like, otherwise go with matte for no glare.
(Actually come to think of it, I've never seen a desktop monitor with a reflective coating, only laptops)
[QUOTE=cyberwarrior;20286782]I prefer matte finishes, just so you don't get a huge reflection on your screen the second you open a window. Some times they get reflections from the bulbs in the ceiling. I feel bad for the people I see that have reflective-screened laptops, they always struggle to get a good position with no glare. (And they smudge really easily)
I have heard that reflective finishes display better colors, but I haven't seen any differences from a side by side comparison. If your working in the dark or low light, feel free to go with reflective if you'd like, otherwise go with matte for no glare.
(Actually come to think of it, I've never seen a desktop monitor with a reflective coating, only laptops)[/QUOTE]
I sell electronics as a part time job and we have a row of PC screens.
For the higher end screens you clearly see a difference bitween Matte and gloss screens.
I have a HP W2216 Glossy screen and i have never had any problems with glare because it has a non reflective coating.
The colors are very deep tough.
Alot of never TV screens are also glossy btw.(especially Samsung)
Cool, thanks for the answers. Now I know what to look for at least.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
