DescentBB

a LG monitor? I'm looking for a new monitor for my new build. This is the monitor I'm looking at http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824005126 My new system will have hdmi with the onboard video. Most likely I will go with a newer video card for the system but I ramble on. So do any of you have a LG?

The quality of a display is largely dependent on what type of panel it is and who actually made it. Whoever made the stand/connections/DSPs and stuck their name on it is less important. Although I would honestly try to avoid a monitor with that aspect ratio for a PC, get a standard 16:10 screen (1920x1200) instead of a 16:9 screen (1920x1080) unless you plan on only using this screen for watching movies and not gaming. Especially for that price, it looks like they are bragging about having \"full HD\" resolution when its actually a lower resolution and smaller screen than the standard monitors in the same class.

As far as HDMI goes, DVI and HDMI are identical signals except DVI doesn't include audio, but you don't want to hear what would come out of a PC monitor speaker anyway. There is no need to go chasing down a monitor that specifically supports HDMI input since you can just as easily get a DVI/HDMI converter or cable.

I'd go looking up good professional reviews for the best display you can find that fits your budget and if needed grab whatever you like out of these.

So some thing along the lines as these?

Every LCD screen has an LG liquid crystal panel, as LG is the top manufacturer of liquid crystal panels, with Samsung following close behind.

So you'd wonder, why are there so many monitors with different characteristics? Each manufacturer combines the various internal components in different ways and so the results vary as does the price.

Personally and out of experience, I like Acer and Samsung LCD screens. LGs are good, but they can be expensive.

I agree with Krom that it's the materials inside more than the name, though certain names have excellent reputations.

DVI x2. DVI produces a signal that LCDs use very effectively. Every LCD that I have used with DVI I've noticed slight superior performance to VGA.

I have an LG monitor, actually. 19\" 1280x1024 that I bought about 3 years ago and still works/looks fantastic. Of course, if you care about the welfare of dogs in the illegal but inadequately enforced dogmeat trade, you won't buy Korean products.

Always wondered what Mcdonalds hamburgers were made of.

Also I should point out that the response time on Newegg is about as deceptive as they come, its gray to gray, but they don't say how exactly they measure it. The G2G response time can vary dramatically and the real pixel lag on even a 1 MS monitor could be as much as 20 MS depending on which colors it is changing to and from. Often the response times quoted by the manufacturer are practically outright lies. With a lot of research you can pretty much prove it by tracking down who exactly made the panel and checking other manufacturers and monitors using the exact same panel, odds are they will list a different response time.

The inexpensive monitors you see are probably all TN type panels, they have the advantage of being relatively cheap to produce and they have good response times. However they have the disadvantage of very poor (borderline horrible vertical) viewing angles and poor color reproduction. They claim 16.7 million colors but the technology is actually 6 bits per channel so they have a hardware maximum of 262,144 colors and use dithering to make up the difference.

The type of panel you are probably most interested in would be a S-IPS/H-IPS type panel, they have good response times although not *quite* as fast as a TN panel, the best viewing angles (up to 178 degrees both ways) and can reliably reproduce 8 or even 10 bits per channel (16.7 million/1 trillion color hardware limit, equal to CRTs). Even though they are widely considered the best LCD technology available, they are rarely found because they are ~30% more expensive to produce than a TN panel.

The third common contender is S-PVA, these also feature good colors and viewing angles like the IPS types, and they have probably the best contrast ratios of any technology. However they suffer from both input lag and a sluggish pixel response times which can end up weighing in at 24+ MS response time + a 40-60 MS input lag, which makes then unsuitable for gaming or fast video and they are also more expensive than TN types.

I personally have a 1600x1200 Samsung 5 MS TN panel for my secondary monitor, it is sufficient as a second monitor, but the vertical viewing angle is narrow to the point of being painfully obvious. Anytime the monitor displays a solid color over the entire screen, anyone can see the gradient change in color from the top to the bottom. As a secondary monitor off to the side it doesn't really matter, but I would not be able to use it as my primary display for very long.

Krom, are you speaking of super-twist nematic versus thin film transistor, or something more in-depth than that?

He's talking about Twisted-Nematic vs. In-Place-Switching vs. Pattern-Vertical-Alignment TFT technologies. STN (or CSTN) is passive matrix tech, I'm not aware of that being used in displays anymore.

Thanks every one.

flip wrote:Always wondered what Mcdonalds hamburgers were made of.

ROFL Mc D's sucks- "I'm Hatin' it!"

As for LG- my experience has been that their products boast a lot of features, but the quality is so-so.

EngDrewman wrote:

flip wrote:Always wondered what Mcdonalds hamburgers were made of.

ROFL Mc D's sucks- "I'm Hatin' it!"...

I'm lovin' it
=
I am loving it
Anagram:
ailing vomit

Getting a bit far off tho.