So what would be your idea of an advanced monitor today?

[velis]

So what would be your idea of an advanced monitor today?

I for one am in the market for a new monitor but find current offerings utterly disappointing.
With this thread I'm aiming to find out if it's just me or are the monitor makers really playing dumb.
See this link for background: http://velisthoughts.blogspot.com/2010/07/are-monitors-going-anywhere-today.html

Basically, I'd like to have a 120Hz IPS 24"-27" 2560x1600 monitor for $/€ 1000. That would at the moment seem realistic and achievable if only one of the manufacturers decided there's a market for such a monitor. I quit dreaming of a WQUXGA monitor a while back when I went shopping only to find out that the monitor market went backwards...

So tell me what you think. The poll has multiple selectable options, but separated into groups. So please only select one option in each group. Since this is my first thread with a poll, I may have trouble setting up the poll, so bear with me.

Edit: I should also add price poll, but there simply aren't enough options in the poll setup (max 10 options)

 

[sandorski]

Just waiting for this one to go back on Sale for $199

Thought about saving some ducats for an IPS, but I'm cheap and I hear this monitor is fairly nice.

 

[Borealis7]

TN is fine, 120Hz a must, i want those pixels! and small is good.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Ideally?

I want no ghosting or blurring, at all. Or at least comparable to CRT in regards to motion on screen. Every 60 Hz LCD I've ever used has had too much blurring for my tastes. So in this regard I choose 120 Hz as I've heard it reduces blurring.

I haven't seen anything besides TN, but better is better so IPS.

With how close I sit to a monitor, 30" seems to big. I went with 27".

And more pixels, I don't want to even see them. This should help when running non-native resolutions, too, right?

 

[tokie]

My next monitor will be the ACD 27". IPS panel with LED backlighting + glossy coating to make colours pop.

Too bad it will take me a while to save up the $1000 to buy it.

 

[smackababy]

So, no 1920x1200 option? How lame...

 

[Narrlok]

So, no 1920x1200 option? How lame...

There probably won't be any screens with a 16:10 aspect ratio pretty soon so we'll have to settle for a few less vertical pixels unless we go for a higher res.

 

[magomago]

Any monitors with a super high dynamic range? I would think that will be the next 'revolution' in imaging lol...and that if anything, 1k euros should be enough to get something lol

 

[Xed]

I'd like a 120hz ips panel but I'm going to take the plunge on that new asus 120hz and just upgrade again when something better comes out cuz I'm a sucker for new tech.

 

[smackababy]

There probably won't be any screens with a 16:10 aspect ratio pretty soon so we'll have to settle for a few less vertical pixels unless we go for a higher res.

Sadly, this is true. I don't want a huge monitor (30"+) and I don't like smaller monitors with higher pixel density.

 

[akugami]

Sadly, this is true. I don't want a huge monitor (30"+) and I don't like smaller monitors with higher pixel density.

I think the problem is Windows hasn't been properly designed to handle higher pixel densities. I know one of my biggest complaints is the tiny text when using monitors with higher resolutions but smaller size. Windows needs to be more smart about self-tweaking the UI to look good. Instead all we get is a manual option to change the text from larger to smaller sizes. The problem is that the result isn't always pretty and looks half-baked.

24" or 27" monitor, higher resolution, 120hz, IPS. I think 24" is not "small" by any means and 27" is reaching close to the max size that is comfortable for me as a computer monitor. Higher resolutions for a more realistic look that is not pixellated. Also reduces the need for AA with higher resolutions. IPS screen is a must cause TN doesn't cut it for a high end monitor. Nothing wrong with TN, I always use TN's and recommend TN panels for those using it for office and light gaming and a few movies but we're talking high end here. 120hz for smoother animation not for 3D.

 

[cbn]

I would like a monitor with true edge to edge glass (ie, no bezel).

This way larger resolutions would be achievable by simply arranging smaller more affordable multiple monitors next to one another.

 

[Grooveriding]

The monitor on main pc currently is near perfect for me, only caveat would be 120hz refresh, with that it would be ideal.

 

[Zargon]

I would like a monitor with true edge to edge glass (ie, no bezel).

This way larger resolutions would be achievable by simply arranging smaller more affordable multiple monitors next to one another.

this

gimme near zero bezel 24 1920x1200 or 27-30 22560x1600

120hz

LED is fine if it works well but could make cost skyrocket

TN is fine, because I'll be gaming on and programming, no need for extra quality with extra lag....

3d capable of course

400 for the 24 wouldnt be so bad with those features, I mean the 28" hanns g's run 300, maybe 500 if its IPS

800 for the 27-30 for TN and a g or so for IPS

would be amazing....

 

[Qbah]

A non-TN, 1080p, 120Hz screen. The bigger the better. I absolutely love my 40" 1080p HDTV It's 60Hz though, hence no 3D. Apart from that, love it

 

[Kalakissa]

IPS, 16:10, high DPI (150+), 24" or more.

Not going to happen any time soon though I guess

 

[Voo]

I think the problem is Windows hasn't been properly designed to handle higher pixel densities. I know one of my biggest complaints is the tiny text when using monitors with higher resolutions but smaller size. Windows needs to be more smart about self-tweaking the UI to look good. Instead all we get is a manual option to change the text from larger to smaller sizes. The problem is that the result isn't always pretty and looks half-baked.

Huh? You can change the DPI settings in Windows for years (which should be the correct way to handle that thing), the problem is not Windows, but all those applications that don't work correctly with non default DPI settings..

IPS, 16:10, 24"+, small dot pitch (i.e. high resolution) for me please. Atm I'm completely happy with my U2410 - absolutely worth the money.

 

[Cerb]

If you're going to talk about not seeing pixels, 3840x2400 isn't even scratching the surface, even for a 20", for which they are pipe dreams. I want to see 500+ DPI monitors, and death to 16:9 or shorter (or, very large monitors cheap, so it can be at a greater distance, doing the same thing). I also would like to see real matte coatings come back. All the new matte screens I've seen are really some kind of eggshell crap, and that makes me want to stick with glossy, even though I don't like glossy. A well-implemented LED backlight would be a plus.

For a minimal upgrade, I want to at least see 176 DPI (2x what my monitor reports it is). My 22" 1680x1050 is large enough. Larger wouldn't be bad, or anything, but I want more DPI before more physical space.

 

[mhouck]

They already have 120hz IPS monitors but ... the one I found is 17'" and $3,895.

http://www.abelcine.com/store/17-Panasonic-BT-LH1760W-120Hz-IPS-HD-SD-LCD-Monitor/?page=1.

If they could add about 10" and drop about 2.5k within the next 2 years that would be great.

 

[brybir]

I personally follow two rules when buying computer components:

1. The $200 rule: No 1 component of my PC will cost more than $200. This includes the monitor.

2. I will set aside $50 per month for PC parts and will spend no more than what is accumulated in that set aside


By keeping the limit below $200, I was able to get an ACER 24" TN Panel that I think is just great. Its pretty standard though, and my next upgrade will probably be to 120Hz...when it comes below the price limit.

These rules help me to control my pc parts lust by keeping me a generation behind most of the time (see my rig below), but I find I actually enjoy the process of finding the best tech for the $ at a given time (next up is my CPU.....the 6 core AMD procs at $199 just hit my price point)

 

[darkewaffle]

For me IPS was a must but given my budget and desk real estate I made a conscious decision to go with a smaller monitor. My 20WMGX2 loves my 5770, and I saved money on both ends.

 

[Zargon]

Huh? You can change the DPI settings in Windows for years (which should be the correct way to handle that thing), the problem is not Windows, but all those applications that don't work correctly with non default DPI settings..

yup some apps totally wreck themself when you change DPI

whats with people actually wanting 16:9 panels over 16:10?

you cant say you want more pixel real estate and ask for 16:9 at the same time :thumbsdown:

 

[evolucion8]

A hybrid approach of MVA and IPS, so we can have the better blacks of MVA and its faster performance coupled with the great color reproduction of the IPS, plus 120Hz is nice, but isn't a guarantee that ghosting will go away, we need faster pixel response.

 

[smackababy]

yup some apps totally wreck themself when you change DPI

whats with people actually wanting 16:9 panels over 16:10?

you cant say you want more pixel real estate and ask for 16:9 at the same time :thumbsdown:

16:10 shall live on forever in the hearts of millions! This new 1920x1080 crap is total BS.

 

[akugami]

Huh? You can change the DPI settings in Windows for years (which should be the correct way to handle that thing), the problem is not Windows, but all those applications that don't work correctly with non default DPI settings..

IPS, 16:10, 24"+, small dot pitch (i.e. high resolution) for me please. Atm I'm completely happy with my U2410 - absolutely worth the money.

I know about the DPI setting and that's what I actually meant when I was talking about changing the font size. Even though you can change the DPI, the displayed UI seems a little off. I can't explain it but it just doesn't seem natural. It's like everything is familiar but just slightly off kilter.

It's also not an auto-detected feature so the common user won't even know they can change the DPI.