For cheap (sub $200) monitors, is LED backlit the way to go?

[geepondy]

I fully realize the disadvantages of a TN-display monitor but for an approximate 22" sub $200 monitor, are LED backlits the best way to go? I see at least two in this price range, the
ViewSonic VX2250wm-LED and
SAMSUNG EX2220X Glossy Black 21.5" 5ms LED Backlight.

Or would be the money be better spent on another model? This is simply to replace a dying CRT on a second PC that mostly the kids will be using.

 

[gorobei]

eventually all the cheap monitors will be LED, it cost less to implement and uses less energy so the manufacturers can advertise how green it is.

older fluorescent backlit monitors will be cheaper right now due to eol and distributors wanting to clear out stock. Since you aren't getting ccfl for sRGB gamut reasons, go LED if you can afford it.

 

[AndroidVageta]

LEDs, if Im not mistaken, also distribute a more even backlit than CCFL.

 

[geno247]

$179 at newegg. Can't go wrong with Viewsonic, definitely picking this up.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824116442

 

[solofly]

are LED backlits the best way to go?

Sure...

 

[vailr]

Are there any 16:10 ratio LED-backlit LCD monitors, under 22" screen size?
The Viewsonic & Samsung mentioned above are 1920x1080 = 17.7:10 ratio.
1920x1080 monitors are just recycled TV displays.
LG has a 20" 16x9 ratio LED backlit monitor:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824005148
Also: why aren't there any Dell or HP branded 20" 16:10 ratio monitors with LED backlighting?
Apple & HP formerly offered some nice 20" 16:10 monitors (1680x1050), but with CFL backlighting.

 

[mfenn]

I would rather have a bigger monitor than LED backlighting. 1080P on a 22" screen is too small, 23"-24" is far more reasonable IMHO.

 

[itsmevader]

i would select the Viewsonic model that you have provided but I really see no point in buying LED monitors now. They are just new technologies and still many areas to covers. I bought this monitors 3 months ago and its great going with it. its DELL 22" SX2210.

 

[acx]

Are there any 16:10 ratio LED-backlit LCD monitors, under 22" screen size?
The Viewsonic & Samsung mentioned above are 1920x1080 = 17.7:10 ratio.
1920x1080 monitors are just recycled TV displays.
LG has a 20" 16x9 ratio LED backlit monitor:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824005148
Also: why aren't there any Dell or HP branded 20" 16:10 ratio monitors with LED backlighting?
Apple & HP formerly offered some nice 20" 16:10 monitors (1680x1050), but with CFL backlighting.

1920x1080 is 16:9. The panel manufacturers are standardizing on 16:9 panels to save money.

 

[0roo0roo]

LEDs, if Im not mistaken, also distribute a more even backlit than CCFL.

edge lit is no different than ccfl.
cheap lcd isn't going to have local dimming or any fancy backlight.
panel tech/type is more important than led, if an older screen with a higher end panel cost the same as a new one one with a tn panel/led..get the older model

 

[evolucion8]

LED lightning definitively is the way to go, it distributes the light more evenly. CCFL based monitors, specially the ones that comes with TN panels shows terrible inconsistency across the screen with dirty whites and uneven gray tones and pathettic blacks. A LED based monitor can fake the blacks better with dimming tricks. But If I can afford a MVA or IPS panel, just go for it regardless of the backlight technology, but if you can't choose anything but TN panels, LED will be much better.

 

[CurseTheSky]

Paying anything more than $200ish for a TN panel is insane considering you can pick up an e-IPS panel like the NEC EA231WMi or one of Dell's new offerings for $280-300ish. They won't be LED backlit, sure, but I'd take a good panel type over a TN with some new tricks any day.

 

[EarthwormJim]

I thought white LED (non-RGB) back-lighting was the worst when it came to picture quality. They do use less power than a CCFL though.

CCFL's provide a wider color gamut than white LEDs.

For picture quality: white led < CCFL < RGB LED.

 

[StinkyPinky]

1920x1080 is 16:9. The panel manufacturers are standardizing on 16:9 panels to save money.

i'd rather pay more and have 16:10

 

[0roo0roo]

i'd rather pay more and have 16:10

at 24" it really stops mattering.
shorter screen mattered when the smaller wide screens were all we had.

 

[taltamir]

OP, the quality of the individual monitor is what matters most. I won't bore you with the detail but suffice to say that LED backlit monitors can be either higher or lower quality, depending on the exact design (which is influenced by cost, naturally).

So do your research on an individual model rather then assuming "Model X is of tech type A, therefore it is better than Model Y which is of tech type B"

 

[evolucion8]

I wouldn't go back to TN no matter what, my laptop has it and is a pain in the rear having to sit straight all the time and move my head around in dark playback scenes due to its poor black reproduction and muddy whites, plus the angles are terrible, it looks better now with the Samsung panel that it has now compared to the Quanta it had previously which looked dimmer.