Would u buy a 25.5" LCD @ 1920x1200 or a 27" @ 1920x1080?

[poohbear]

Hey all, im debating between a Samsung T260HD or a P2770HD, both have built in TV tuners, 5ms response time, & are TN panels and roughly the same price ($330 for the 260hd & $360 for the 2770HD). Differences are:

The T260HD is 25.5", has a 10, 000:1 contrast ratio and 1980x1200 resolution.

The P2770HD is a full 27", has a 50, 000:1 contrast ratio and 1920x1080

The P2770HD is the newer model as the T260HD is EOL. I'd really like the 1980x1200 resolution of the t260HD, but the size of the 27" keeps drawing me back. Thing is im a bit turned off from the 2770s 1980x1080 resolution for gaming. I've looked at both at different stores, but none of them have displayed them for gaming, just movies, and they look about the same in this regards. ( I'll mostly use the monitor for gaming.

which would u get and why? Thanks in advance for any feedback.

 

[Yuriman]

The 10,000:1 and 50,000:1 contrast ratios don't mean much, both are 1,000:1 panels.

I personally dislike 16:9 screens, but the extra size for the same price really does make this a hard decision...

 

[SlowSpyder]

I have a 25.5" 1920x1200, before that I had a 22" 1680x1050. For me personally, I wanted the extra vertical resolution. the 22" was a bit 'short' for me when looking at some pictures and some Office documents... but that's just my preference, others may be perfectly fine with 1050 or 1080 lines. Anyway, I am quite happy with this monitor, the size is great and I like the decently large resolution.

So anyway, if it was me I'd take the 25.5" for the extra res, but that's just me.

 

[Lonyo]

Depends on what I am using it for.
For work/etc type work, the extra res is useful, as is a smaller pixel size, since then the work area is more focused.
For media, videos, games, the extra size is nicer, and the resolution isn't a huge problem since for widescreen media I am losing nothing, and for games there's only a minor difference, but the extra physical size is nicer.

 

[kalrith]

Like Lonyo said, it largely depends on its usage. I just switched from a 24" 1920x1200 screen to a 32" 1920x1080 screen. I use it mainly for gaming and watching movies and TV, so I appreciate the increase in size more than I miss the 120 vertical pixels. Also, it's not like it doesn't work for productivity and web surfing; it just isn't as well suited for those. Since those comprise less than 25% of my usage, they weren't as important to me as gaming and media.

I will say that I spent $380 shipped on the Panasonic TC-L32S1 with an IPS panel and would recommend you adding that to your choices since it's 36% larger for only 6% more money.

 

[f4phantom2500]

i'd personally go with the 1920x1080, but that's partially because i use my computer monitor with my 360 as well as my pc. also it's less stress on your video card, which means (slightly) better framerates. also the fact that the screen is (slightly) larger.

 

[Lonyo]

Like Lonyo said, it largely depends on its usage. I just switched from a 24" 1920x1200 screen to a 32" 1920x1080 screen. I use it mainly for gaming and watching movies and TV, so I appreciate the increase in size more than I miss the 120 vertical pixels. Also, it's not like it doesn't work for productivity and web surfing; it just isn't as well suited for those. Since those comprise less than 25% of my usage, they weren't as important to me as gaming and media.

Plus if you already have a monitor, you can keep that and use a dual monitor setup, so the second monitor would add nicely for productivity purposes and the lost screen real estate means even less!

 

[konakona]

productivity? at home? seriously, that's what laptops are for

I do a bit of reading/posting at different forums on the said Panasonic TV with no qualms at all. For videos, it is a definite step up from all monitors I have used in the past combined.

 

[nOOky]

I would go with the extra height, but I spend most of my time surfing the web etc. where it's the more the merrier. For games, both resolutions are supported generally so it's a wash. For movies, well that's what my t.v. is for. For viewing pictures etc. the extra size is nice, and it's not that much harder on your gpu.
Depending on what you do I'd personally recommend the 1920 x 1200...

Have you considered this monitor?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236047

 

[poohbear]

thanks for all the feedback fellas! just a few more questions:

1.)@ Yuriman, good to know about the contrast ratio is mostly marketing, but why would the same manufacturer (samsung) label 2 of their products (same size) w/ different contrast ratios? eg Samsung's T260HD is 10, 000:1, but their T260 is 20, 000:1. Their P2770HD is 50, 000:1, and their P2770 is 70, 000:1. Would it indicate that the one w/ the higher contrast ratio has better colors?(its the same manufacturer)

2)The monitor would be mainly for gaming, i hardly ever watch movies, and surfing the internet/word processing really wouldn't matter much on the LCD would it?

3.) The thing about the 27", i love the size, but wouldn't games (textures) look less crisp w/ the lower resolution of 1920x1080? I always figured the larger the monitor the higher the resolution should be to continue to produce a sharp image for the games, no?

thanks again for any feedback.

@nooky, thanks for the link, but that's not available where i live (Seoul/Tokyo, keep bouncing back ).

 

[konakona]

2) well I guess you could sort of clump gaming / movies into one group (non-stationary images), as opposed to text heavy stuff. Text in fact looks visibly inferior to smaller monitors with the same rez, probably due to much worse pixel density. It's just that I am not all that particular about text quality in the first place.

3) the same can't be said about games / movies, they are most always rapidly changing and are much more complex looking with a whole lot more colors and gradients which all contribute to turn that lower pixel density much less noticeable. To me (and for most people for that matter IMO), the increased level of immersion gained from the larger display more than offsets the little tradeoff to deal with.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I have heard that the contrast rastios are measured differently from different companies, I guess there isn't a standard. So one companies 5000:1 could be another companies 8000:1.

Also, I think a lot of the contrast ratio comes from the dynamic lighting. Also, I've read that a lot of the time a company will inflate their contrast ratios by making brighter whites. So, you might have a monitor that has a lower contrast ratio than another monitor from that same manufacturer that has a higher contrast ratio, but the blacks may look better on the lower contrast ratio monitor. So, the lower contrast ratio monitor would most likely look better as blacks are commonly the weakness on LCD's. So even with a higher contrast ratio from the same company, it's possible that the a lower contrast ratio may look better.

At least these are the things I've read.

 

[poohbear]

thanks konakona, that's something i was worried about and is a big + for the 27". 1920x1080 on a 27" is still a good resolution then, and will save me a few fps on my 5770. Im also impartial to text, heck text is well, just, text!

regarding the contrast ratio, i guess i'll hafta try and find the 2 side by side to see if the higher contrast ratio really does produce better colors, although that's nearly impossible as the 2 monitors aren't sold in the same country!lol (p2770HD is in Korea, the p2770 is in Japan.) for now atleast...

 

[konakona]

I am sure you have looked at that too, but just in case... Do you know which is matte and which is glossy? Glossy finish can improve contrast ratio (in some of the cases that happens to be the only difference among the different lineups from the same manufacturers with accordingly different contrast ratios cited), but can give you some really atrocious glare depending on the lighting conditions in your room. Definitely YMMV on that, but matte is usually the safer bet. I myself prefer matte most of the times.

 

[poohbear]

no clue, how can i tell if one is glossy or not?

I'm heavily leaning towards the 27" @ 1920x1080, i doubt i'll notice the loss of the 120pixels that 1920x01200 has. I'm upgrading from a 22" @ 1680x1050, so i dont think it makes sense to fret over 120 pixels yea?

 

[fffblackmage]

One review indicates the P2770HD is not glossy.

Where are you buying this from? If they're not from the same place, it would probably come down to which monitor you might not have to pay tax/shipping for.

 

[konakona]

Sometimes product info page on the etailer or the manufacturer site would tell you that, but more often than not you would have to resort to googling to find that out. At least such was the case whenever I was in the market for a new monitor.

 

[postmortemIA]

Things that matters are panel size, and panel type, how your eyes like it, and eventually availability of advanced connections such as HDMI and USB. . Contrast ratio, response time and such are stupid marketing

 

[mm2587]

keep in mind that because of the difference in aspect ratios that a 27" 16:9 screen isn't reall that much bigger then a 25.5 16:10 screen

The 27" is about 23.5" wide and 13.3 tall. While the 25.5" is 21.5" wide and 13.5" tall (yes its actually slightly taller) So if you think an extra inch on each side width wise is worth it go ahead. Personally I'll take the additional pixels and vertical space.

 

[JAG87]

Strictly for PC use, I wouldn't. The pixel pitch is too large.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Strictly for PC use, I wouldn't. The pixel pitch is too large.

I worried about that when I got my 25.5" monitor. I have absolutely no issues with that, it's just not something I think that the vast majority of people would notice.

But, the 27" monitor he's thinking about has much larger pitch yet.

.28mm for the 25.5"
.31mm for the 27"

I guess for some people that could be an issue. I'd try and see it in person if at all possible, even if a different model any 27" with 1920x1080 res should give you that same pitch.

 

[dud]

OP,

Please satisfy my curiosity. Where can you get the P2770HD for $360? I checked NE and they don't sell it.

 

[Yuriman]

It may well be that they have similar contrast, one just has a (potentially) brighter backlight. I disable dynamic backlighting because I find it distracting.

 

[fffblackmage]

Strictly for PC use, I wouldn't. The pixel pitch is too large.

So I have the T260HD and my little brother has an Acer 21.5" 1080p monitor (forgot model #).

My complaint is that his monitor has a microscopic pixel pitch. I was playing a game on his comp, and I seriously had to pull the monitor up closer because everything looked so damn tiny on his monitor.

 

[poohbear]

regarding dot/pixel pitch, i thought that was much more important for CRT;s? Since LCD's have been mainstream i've never even seen them advertised as LCD's naturally have tighter pixel pitch. from PC Magazines definition:

On CRTs, the dot pitch is typically from .28 to .51mm, while large presentation monitors may go up to 1mm. On LCD monitors, dot pitch is typically from .16 to .29mm.


are u saying that on the 27" images/games will look less sharp/crisp because of the higher pixel pitch?

EDIT: hmmm just found out the 27" has a pixel pitch of 0.3114 mm & the 25.5" has 0.287mm, im guessing that's because of the higher resolution of the 25.5"? or is pixel pitch completely independant of resolution?

OP,

Please satisfy my curiosity. Where can you get the P2770HD for $360? I checked NE and they don't sell it.

erm, i dont live in the US, im currently in Korea/Japan working. it was on sale for 420, 000won in Korea, which w/ the exchange rate is $360 USD. avg price is ~450, 000, which is $386 to be exact.