• 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.

LCD Buyer's Guide

Page 30 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
2170NX is S-PVA 16/8 ms (Samsung LTM213U6), not IPS.

As for NEC's 90 series, they do have overdrive. It's explicitly stated in the specsheets. The 2090UXi has 16 ms r/f and 8 ms g2g response time. It's overdriven. Still, it sucks in terms of responsiveness compared to the goddamn glossy widescreen.

Zebo, the P227fB has a shadow mask, yes. However, it was rated very positively by hardware.fr - they claim it has nice colors, sharpness (in 1600*1200, considerably better than Iiyama with DiamondTron tube, also tested in the roundup), blacks and brightness - measured at 106 cd/m2. It looks like a really solid monitor.
 
I'm looking for advice for a 20" LCD non-widescreen for <$500 and have narrowed my options down to these 2 - the Dell 2001fp and the Samsung SyncMaster 204t. I will mainly use it for office applications and internet, some light amateur photoediting, and also occassionally watch DVDs. I will do very little to no gaming. After discounts both are comparable at around $450. Which of the two would you recommend and why? Here are the specs:
Dell 2001fp:

Panel: LG.Philips LM201U04 SIPS
Screen Size: 20.1"
Display Type: UXGA
Maximum Resolution: 1600x1200
Recommended Resolution: 1600x1200
Viewing Angle: 176°/176°
Pixel Pitch: 0.255mm
Display Colours: 16.7 Million
Brightness: 250 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1
Response Time: 16ms


Samsung SyncMaster 204T:

Panel: a-si TFT/Super-PVA
Screen Size: 20.1"
Display Type: UXGA
Maximum Resolution: 1600x1200
Recommended Resolution: 1600x1200
Viewing Angle: 178°/178°
Pixel Pitch: 0.255mm
Display Colours: 16.7 Million
Brightness: 300 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 700:1
Response Time: 16ms
 
Originally posted by: darXoul
2170NX is S-PVA 16/8 ms (Samsung LTM213U6), not IPS.

As for NEC's 90 series, they do have overdrive. It's explicitly stated in the specsheets. The 2090UXi has 16 ms r/f and 8 ms g2g response time. It's overdriven. Still, it sucks in terms of responsiveness compared to the goddamn glossy widescreen.

Zebo, the P227fB has a shadow mask, yes. However, it was rated very positively by hardware.fr - they claim it has nice colors, sharpness (in 1600*1200, considerably better than Iiyama with DiamondTron tube, also tested in the roundup), blacks and brightness - measured at 106 cd/m2. It looks like a really solid monitor.
Click to expand...


There are two guns used in diamondtrons and they make a world of difference, trust me used both. High-end U-NX single gun diamondtron and tripple guns in lower end AG. Not sure what Iiyama has - NEC 2070 and 2141 had U-NX while 2111 had garbage.

goddamn glossy widescreen.
Click to expand...

LOL It's awesome🙂
 
The response time for the 2090UXi didn't look bad at all for me considering it's a 'pro' model and it has more accurate colors (including black) than the best AG CRT listed on that site. It was only behind the VX922 by just a tad. The response difference between the 2090UXi and 20WMGX2 looks like it could be from difference in brightness.
 
Do you think so? IMHO, it looks like the 2090UXi has way more ghosting, not brightness-related. In the "best" situation, its ghost is clearly visible and colored while the widescreen's phantom image is barely visible. In the "worst" situation, it has one very clear ghost and the other image is faint but colored whereas the widescreen's last ghost is again barely visible and colorless.
 
Originally posted by: darXoul
Do you think so? IMHO, it looks like the 2090UXi has way more ghosting, not brightness-related. In the "best" situation, its ghost is clearly visible and colored while the widescreen's phantom image is barely visible. In the "worst" situation, it has one very clear ghost and the other image is faint but colored whereas the widescreen's last ghost is again barely visible and colorless.
Click to expand...

The 'actual' (non-afterglow) image (on "Rendu jeu, au mieux") as I see it is crystal clear on both the 2090UXi and 20WMGX2. The 2090 does have a bit more afterglow but since the actual image is in such contrast to it I doubt it will be very noticeable. However the 2090 might be lagging by the slightest bit on the "au pire" ones. In the best cases on my VP930b I can't even see the blur whatsoever (overdrive-favored bright scenarios). (I'll admit in the worst/rare cases it can be bad.) I don't know, maybe I'm just not that sensitive to it but I did after all notice the subtle dithering on this monitor. The 2090's output seems very close to my level of 'can't even see it' and I'd recommend it any day for gaming from what I'm seeing there. Maybe the simple test images they use in those aren't enough to draw conclusions about how it would perform in real usage. I think you should at least give it a try. 🙂 100% of colors rendered with ~0.6 or less difference according to the calibration graph. Quite a far cry from the ViewSonic P227f's results: http://www.lesnumeriques.com/duels.php?...03&p1=1026&ma2=41&mo2=100&p2=1016&ph=6

As I expected, the 2090's color results are hardly much of a departure from the 20WMGX2's though.

As for the hardware.fr CRT article, they said (and I translated by Google), CRTs are better for photo editing because of the lower luminance (maybe better skin tones or closer to D6500K). But for gaming/entertainment/movies, the LCDs are ahead because of their very bright and saturated picture. In that 2090 vs P227f comparison, the film picture looks a lot better on the LCD IMO (background is well lit and face is well saturated). To the CRT's credit obviously it wins the response time tests.

But of course if you do plop that much money down for the 2090 you should look at in a store first so you don't hate me if in the rare case you do decide to return it and you have to pay that restocking fee. 😛 Maybe at least one more review too just to make sure. I don't want you to spend that much money on something that you won't like. I mean, I haven't actually used either of those monitors or anything.
 
Hey, I just stumbled across this at a local Future Shop store:

LG Flatron F-Engine L203WT. It looked pretty nice in the store. Not a glossy screen (yay!).

It's a 20" LG widescreen with supposed specs of 8ms g2g, 1400:1 contrast, 300cd/m2

I couldn't find any more info about it, except a google search revealed it was announced at this year's CES in Vegas. It is apparently the sister model of the LG L203WX, which is listed on the flatpanels.dk site as having a S-IPS panel.

Other than that, I don't have any more to go on. I didn't have much time in the store. I'll go back tomorrow and see what I can find out.

Anyone ?
 
Originally posted by: xtknight
As for the hardware.fr CRT article, they said (and I translated by Google), CRTs are better for photo editing because of the lower luminance (maybe better skin tones or closer to D6500K). But for gaming/entertainment/movies, the LCDs are ahead because of their very bright and saturated picture. In that 2090 vs P227f comparison, the film picture looks a lot better on the LCD IMO (background is well lit and face is well saturated). To the CRT's credit obviously it wins the response time tests.
Click to expand...

Actually, I've read the entire article (and I speak French) and the conclusion was that CRTs are still miles ahead for gaming. Especially the dual mode clearly exposes the weaknesses of even the quickest LCDs, making it clear who is still the king in the area of gaming. It's not only response time but also the ability to render 120 images per second.

As for movies, they clearly said that one single weakness of CRTs was the mirror effect (but not nearly as dramatic as on glossy LCDs). There is no video noise ("fourmillement"), blacks are black, responsiveness and viewing angles are perfect, no gradient transition problems.

Regarding gaming, they even said the return to games on LCDs was difficult after enjoying CRT goodness 🙂
 
I wouldn't necessarily call it poor color. Looking at many LCDs, the IPS displays indeed rock in terms of color accuracy after calibration. However, many other LCDs, like e.g. the highly praised "pro" Eizo models based on S-PVA don't have a perfect color representation. Remember that DeltaE below 3 is good, below 2 very good and accurate, below 1 perfect. The P227fB has a few perfects and is in general "very good". It's also quite solid out of the box, e.g. way better than the popular ViewSonic VP930.

To be honest, in terms of performance in this area, I think what is important are smooth gradient transitions, vibrant colors and deep blacks. Whether one gradient or another is displayed super accurately or just quite accurately will be barely visible to a non-pro user in normal desktop work, on pics, in movies or games.
 
i would like buy LG L2000C, but LG have't in offer this panel in Czech republic.Can you help me where i buy it?
 
In Poland it's unavailable as well. People from LG Poland don't even know when and IF it will be offered here.

You can order it in Germany or Austria, if you're not afraid of potential RMA difficulties, etc. Just go e.g. to idealo.de and search for "L2000C". Plenty of offers and opinions concerning the stores. I'm probably ordering a ViewSonic P227fB today at digitalo.de or grosche.de. Grosche has the L2000C for EUR 621.
 
is it just me, or does the new 20" s-ips ghost exactly the same way as the old 20"? 🙂 http://www.lesnumeriques.com/duels.php?...=103&p1=1026&ma2=53&mo2=60&p2=681&ph=1 < that philips there, is the only pixperan image i could find for last years 16ms 20" or 23" models, hardware.fr didnt seem to run that test with the early 2005 reviews

i'm actually thinking of getting HP L2335, since i could get a fairly good price on it, if it's bezel&stand only looked bit more attractive, i would probably had that standing on my desk long time ago 🙂
 
Yeah, ghosting looks pretty much the same. It's interesting that the French reviewers claim that overdrive can be turned on or off on this monitor. Maybe they forgot to turn it on for PPA tests 😉

To be honest, I'm seriously disappointed with the 2090UXi's responsiveness. The 2080UXi (16 ms, no OD) was really highly praised as a top allrounder, fully gaming-capable. Many people claimed that ghosting was close to zero and even motion blur very limited in comparison to say 16/8 ms S-PVA. The 20W(M)GX2 is very good in terms of response time, as most reviewers claim, on par with the fastest TN displays. Hence, I expected the 2090UXi (16/8 ms) to be a very good gaming monitor.

I think I'm gonna wait until lesnumeriques folks add it to the 20" LCD roundup, give it a score, list its strengths and weaknesses, and comment on its gaming capabilities... before I finally pull the trigger on my German order of the P227fB CRT.


EDIT: Hmmm, OTOH, if you take a close look, it seems like 2090UXi always has exactly the same number of ghost images as old IPS with 16 ms response but, as xtknight pointed out, the difference between the main image and the ghost seems consistently more pronounced. The main image looks a bit clearer and the ghost marginally fainter. I wonder how it translates into human perception of afterglow on this monitor.
 
Do we even know if the 2090UXi has overdrive? If not it's possible it might be slow like that all over but I was assuming that's worst case scenario (PixPerAn theoretical test).
 
i've been following this thread for awhile and finally decided to join and converse.

i have a question though, what is the actual viewable area of the NEC20WMGX2 screen? i mean from corner to corner, length, height, etc.. i can't seem to find this info in any of the reviews or anywhere in the thread. (unless i saw it and just forgot.)

thanks

-greg
 
Originally posted by: darXoul
Well, it's explicitly listed everywhere, e.g. here:
http://www.nec-display-solutions.de/cor...d/146228/2090UXi-Datasheet-english.pdf
Click to expand...

I wonder what the difference is between RapidMotion and Rapid Response. If it is overdriven, I can't see how any form of ghosting would be worse than what's on that theoretical test. Anyhow on my VP930b (P-MVA/overdrive) I find the response a quite a bit more desirable in 90% of cases than my 710T (TN/no overdrive), with the other 10% being quite a bit worse. Those PixPerAn images would without doubt fall into the 10% 'quite a bit worse' category (the transition category that's measured at 60-80 ms on any overdriven LCD at Tom's Hardware or Xbit). In fact, they are only indicative of that 10% in my experience for overdrive LCDs. For non-overdrive LCDs, they tend to be accurate for everything. The colors they use in the test image is a nightmare for overdrive LCDs so it's really only useful for relative testing. Just something to keep in mind. Granted, when I do come across the '10%' transitions, they mostly happen within textures on walls in-game, so the textures are quite blurry in motion, losing lots of detail, but it does not affect my gameplay. That 10% is like the "no-overdrive-zone", because if it were overdriven there would be bad artifacts. By default, IPS has less response time than VA, so the 2090 might have a 30 ms advantage on the VP930 in that area already. Nowadays Tom's and X-bit just omit that 10% from their response graphs because it's not a useful gauge of much.

Do you know what PixPerAn tempo setting 'au mieux' and 'au pire' are? I'd like to see how it actually performs on my VP930b. On the other hand the VP930 does do quite a bit better than the 2090 in the "au pire" response tests so I don't know...😕 Do they have the 2090 on display in any stores in Poland? If not find something similar in response images to that 2090 and try and go take a look at it. Decisions...decisions...🙂
 
wow, thats not as big as i was expecting. making it widescreen they cut out a lot of the size. based on those numbers its roughly 17" wide by 10" tall. i guess that does from corner to corner equal about 20".

thanks for the info, i didn't realize that (equation) was a way of finding the viewable width and height.

19" x 12" is what the philips 230WP7NS is, so i think that is more what i am looking for. i'm looking for a monitor to replace my tv and also function as a computer monitor. just have to wait till theres some reviews or zebo get's one.
 
Originally posted by: REN0
wow, thats not as big as i was expecting. making it widescreen they cut out a lot of the size. based on those numbers its roughly 17" wide by 10" tall. i guess that does from corner to corner equal about 20".
Click to expand...

To be exact, active area for the 20WMGX2 is (as listed in the .pdf manual):

Active Display Area
[*]Horizontal : 17.1 inches
[*]Vertical : 10.7 inches

And that would make active diagonal: 20.17 inches.

Typically the monitors with an 'M' in them denote a multimedia monitor, which means multifunction (monitor+TV). The 20WMGX2 is one of them. Samsung has some 'M' monitors that are 19" and below. The Samsung 244T looks like an OK choice, but you may want to look at a monitor that uses the LG.Philips 23" S-IPS panel. I believe the Philips 230WP7NS does. The S-IPS monitors have much wider viewing angles than the S-PVAs like the 244T. TNs are totally unsuitable unless you're sitting as close as when you use your desktop. The 12 ms response time of the 230WP7NS sounds decent to me. I'm guessing it uses overdrive because 16 ms is listed on LG.Philips for its panel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top