-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
*HOT* polyview 17" 10ms DVI LCD monitor only $219.99 shipped!
- Thread starter boborich
- Start date
BrokenVisage
Lifer
you should add "GOGOGO" for this. :Q
mercanucaribe
Banned
That's a damned obscure monitor. Searching yielded 4 links on google, none of which is a review.
I bought a similar looking model from CMV/Polyview from Newegg 5 months ago. If it's on for more than 30 minutes or so, the buttons stop working at the front and the speakers (which are terrible, and for decorative purposes only) start emitting some strange noises. I tried contacting CMV without much luck so gave up and just use it as it is.
On the plus side the picture is very good 🙂
On the plus side the picture is very good 🙂
I have the Polyview 19" V293 and am happy with mine. Had it for a few months and no problems at all. 21ms response, DVI/Dsub in, little bity speakers but I dont use them. Little ghosting in games but very sharp and the colors are very vivid. And.....no dead pixels, too may Hyundai's seem to have that problem. Got mine for $318.00 OTD.
ChuckHsiao
Member
It doesn't have many google hits because it's a new product. There'll be many more hits as google reindexes the sites in the next couple of days.
I can't personally testify that it's 10 ms (those are the specs the manufacturer gave us) but I do know that it's more expensive than the other 17 inch monitors that we sell. If that's not because of the response time, then I wouldn't know why, because its other specs are similar to our other 17 inch monitors.
In terms of its quality, I haven't had a chance to check out the V17D specifically, but I know the original manufacturer is top-notch (they're the original manufacturer for a lot of "name brand" monitors; I'm not sure if I'm allowed to say which ones). The DVI cable comes included (some monitor makers don't include a DVI cable with their DVI-compatible monitors to save a buck). Personally I like the Polyview V293's design over that of the similar CMV CM-922D, but the 922D seems to handle signal degradation better. When we split the signal multiple ways, the V293 develops a red hue on the left after splitting it 4 ways; the CM-922D doesn't develop the problem until the signal is split about 8 ways or so. Or maybe that's just because our signal splitter is old and sucks. I haven't seen how the V17D performs though.
The link has an error: Our warranty is 3 years for parts, 3 years for labor, but ONE year for the LCD panel (which includes the backlight and the screen itself).
znaps: I have no idea why Newegg keeps directing people to contact CMV even though we're their U.S. distributor (CMV is in Taiwan; you probably wouldn't want to return stuff to there). PM me and I can try to work something out.
Note: I am an employee of Amptron, which is the U.S. distributor for CMV and Polyview monitors.
Chuck Hsiao
Amptron
I can't personally testify that it's 10 ms (those are the specs the manufacturer gave us) but I do know that it's more expensive than the other 17 inch monitors that we sell. If that's not because of the response time, then I wouldn't know why, because its other specs are similar to our other 17 inch monitors.
In terms of its quality, I haven't had a chance to check out the V17D specifically, but I know the original manufacturer is top-notch (they're the original manufacturer for a lot of "name brand" monitors; I'm not sure if I'm allowed to say which ones). The DVI cable comes included (some monitor makers don't include a DVI cable with their DVI-compatible monitors to save a buck). Personally I like the Polyview V293's design over that of the similar CMV CM-922D, but the 922D seems to handle signal degradation better. When we split the signal multiple ways, the V293 develops a red hue on the left after splitting it 4 ways; the CM-922D doesn't develop the problem until the signal is split about 8 ways or so. Or maybe that's just because our signal splitter is old and sucks. I haven't seen how the V17D performs though.
The link has an error: Our warranty is 3 years for parts, 3 years for labor, but ONE year for the LCD panel (which includes the backlight and the screen itself).
znaps: I have no idea why Newegg keeps directing people to contact CMV even though we're their U.S. distributor (CMV is in Taiwan; you probably wouldn't want to return stuff to there). PM me and I can try to work something out.
Note: I am an employee of Amptron, which is the U.S. distributor for CMV and Polyview monitors.
Chuck Hsiao
Amptron
SynthDude2001
Lifer
"Response time" for CRT's is well under one millisecond. Tom's Hardware Guide did an article about this a while back.
ChuckHsiao
Member
Yea response times for CRTs are practically nonexistent.
CRTs rely on electron guns hitting a phosphor screen every so often. The screen itself very rapidly loses its brightness after getting hit by an electron, somewhere less than a millisecond. Unfortunately, the gun refreshes the screen only 60 times or so every second (60 Hz), which is 17 ms, or 75 times a second (75 Hz), which is 13 ms. This means that for a CRT, most of the time is actually spent in "darkness" so to speak (actually, more like the decay of a previously bright dot). Your eye sort of averages it out, because the refresh rate is too high to consciously notice. My pet theory is that this is actually why CRT monitors are hard on the eyes; because a large part of the time is spent in the dark position, the bright part has to be much brighter to compensate. However you don't notice this consciously. Too bad the cells in the eyes do (since they're basically rapidly receiving bursts of light). But that's my pet theory, I don't know if it's correct or not.
Incidentally, this is why CRT has a contrast ratio in theory of infinite. Simply put, it doesn't emit radiation unless the electron gun decides to fire an electron at it. I suppose there is a chance that the gun might fire an electron when it's not supposed to, or something.
For LCD monitors, each pixel (actually, each subpixel) basically acts like an electronic shutter, to either block the light coming through or to let it pass. This means that the light is always on, until the shutter changes position, so no flickering for LCDs. The bad part is that the shutter takes time to change between open, close, and anywhere in between. The problem though is that how fast it changes is roughly proportional to the difference between how bright you want it to be, and how bright it actually is, and thus the actual response time is NOT based on the magnitude of this difference. That is to say, the shutter has farther to go from black to white than dark gray to light gray, but it also moves faster when going from black to white than dark gray to light gray. Thus you'll also see "gray to gray" response times. In fact, for the dominant LCD technology today, the black-to-white response time is actually faster than the gray-to-gray response time.
My personal preference would be for manufacturers to list response time as an average across all grayscale to grayscale combinations. Or better yet, to release it in the form of a 3D graph (x be initial, y be final, height be time), for visual guys like me. Unfortunately, this would mean an immediate increase in reported response time to whoever adopts this standard; consequently, Gresham's Law ("bad money drives out the good"; in this case, substitute response time reporting for money) dictates that manufacturers follow a better-sounding, if more deceptive, reporting method. Unfortunately, until the ISO adopts this standard, we'll have to make do with this common industry practice.
Incidentally, if you look at this carefully, this means that it's actually easy for LCD monitors to have a low response time. Say you're going from dark gray to light gray. Currently, the LCD simply sets the voltage to what's appropriate for light gray, then waits for the subpixel to stabilize to that color. But all you have to do to minimize the response time is to drive the voltage as if you were going for white (so drive it toward the max), then immediately change to light gray once the subpixel actually is at light gray. I thought of this immediately when I was looking into how LCD monitors work after I started working at Amptron. Unfortunately, I found out later on that manufacturers had apparently already developed this technology several years back. Boooooooo. If only I had been born 5 years earlier I guess. But I would expect this technology to be commonplace fairly soon; it's very easy conceptually, and as was noted, it does not involve any sort of new technology in terms of the LCD substrate; all you need to do is to modify the controller that governs how much voltage to apply to each subpixel. I imagine that most monitors appearing on the market will soon be using this concept, if not already. Maybe at that time it'll be more practical to report gray-to-gray response times, and we'll finally get a figure that means something. And, of course, the elimination of ghosting for LCD monitors.
An article about this can be found here:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,10085,00.asp
Chuck Hsiao
Amptron
CRTs rely on electron guns hitting a phosphor screen every so often. The screen itself very rapidly loses its brightness after getting hit by an electron, somewhere less than a millisecond. Unfortunately, the gun refreshes the screen only 60 times or so every second (60 Hz), which is 17 ms, or 75 times a second (75 Hz), which is 13 ms. This means that for a CRT, most of the time is actually spent in "darkness" so to speak (actually, more like the decay of a previously bright dot). Your eye sort of averages it out, because the refresh rate is too high to consciously notice. My pet theory is that this is actually why CRT monitors are hard on the eyes; because a large part of the time is spent in the dark position, the bright part has to be much brighter to compensate. However you don't notice this consciously. Too bad the cells in the eyes do (since they're basically rapidly receiving bursts of light). But that's my pet theory, I don't know if it's correct or not.
Incidentally, this is why CRT has a contrast ratio in theory of infinite. Simply put, it doesn't emit radiation unless the electron gun decides to fire an electron at it. I suppose there is a chance that the gun might fire an electron when it's not supposed to, or something.
For LCD monitors, each pixel (actually, each subpixel) basically acts like an electronic shutter, to either block the light coming through or to let it pass. This means that the light is always on, until the shutter changes position, so no flickering for LCDs. The bad part is that the shutter takes time to change between open, close, and anywhere in between. The problem though is that how fast it changes is roughly proportional to the difference between how bright you want it to be, and how bright it actually is, and thus the actual response time is NOT based on the magnitude of this difference. That is to say, the shutter has farther to go from black to white than dark gray to light gray, but it also moves faster when going from black to white than dark gray to light gray. Thus you'll also see "gray to gray" response times. In fact, for the dominant LCD technology today, the black-to-white response time is actually faster than the gray-to-gray response time.
My personal preference would be for manufacturers to list response time as an average across all grayscale to grayscale combinations. Or better yet, to release it in the form of a 3D graph (x be initial, y be final, height be time), for visual guys like me. Unfortunately, this would mean an immediate increase in reported response time to whoever adopts this standard; consequently, Gresham's Law ("bad money drives out the good"; in this case, substitute response time reporting for money) dictates that manufacturers follow a better-sounding, if more deceptive, reporting method. Unfortunately, until the ISO adopts this standard, we'll have to make do with this common industry practice.
Incidentally, if you look at this carefully, this means that it's actually easy for LCD monitors to have a low response time. Say you're going from dark gray to light gray. Currently, the LCD simply sets the voltage to what's appropriate for light gray, then waits for the subpixel to stabilize to that color. But all you have to do to minimize the response time is to drive the voltage as if you were going for white (so drive it toward the max), then immediately change to light gray once the subpixel actually is at light gray. I thought of this immediately when I was looking into how LCD monitors work after I started working at Amptron. Unfortunately, I found out later on that manufacturers had apparently already developed this technology several years back. Boooooooo. If only I had been born 5 years earlier I guess. But I would expect this technology to be commonplace fairly soon; it's very easy conceptually, and as was noted, it does not involve any sort of new technology in terms of the LCD substrate; all you need to do is to modify the controller that governs how much voltage to apply to each subpixel. I imagine that most monitors appearing on the market will soon be using this concept, if not already. Maybe at that time it'll be more practical to report gray-to-gray response times, and we'll finally get a figure that means something. And, of course, the elimination of ghosting for LCD monitors.
An article about this can be found here:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,10085,00.asp
Chuck Hsiao
Amptron
aircooled
Lifer
Mine Just arrive from Newegg yesterday $212.98 Shipped
No dead pixels! great for a budget monitor with DVI. Nice contrast, sharp picture.
Who manufactures these for Polyview? Amptron?
EDIT: Answered my own question 🙂
No dead pixels! great for a budget monitor with DVI. Nice contrast, sharp picture.
Who manufactures these for Polyview? Amptron?
EDIT: Answered my own question 🙂
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
