Hey,
So finally im willing to put some money for new monitor, not much, but inaf to get better monitor than my current one. Sizes are between 20"-22".
I founded 4 different kind of monitors, and im wondering if someone know something about this products/manufacturer, or would help me which one to choose.

products:
BenQ G2020HDA (20") 900*1600 resolution
BenQ G2220HDA (22") 1080*1920 resolution
ASUS VK222S (22") 1080*1650 resolution
Acer X223HQB (22") 1080*1920 resolution

So what ive heard, its basically bigger=better. But i really dont know how much differense there are between 900*1600 and 1080*1920 resolutions. Okay i get that there are hundreds of more pixels, but still.. I could save with 20" about 20-40euros . And all those 22" are almost the same prices btw..

Not willing to look other monitors, so dont wanna hear something about "buy 24", its better, or buy this and that.. etc" I need info about this monitors, other products are to expensive in here. thanks

Well since you don't want to hear about other monitors, I'll just say get one of the 1920 ones, you definitely want the higher resolution.

What graphics card do you have? If you don't have enough graphics horse power, a lower resolution will run games better.

Even if it is low powered, I'd recommend the 1920, also. You can always add a more powerful graphics card in the future.

I got now ati club 3d HD3850, i mean two of them (crossfire). Should be inaf i think.

my advice avoid all of them and get something at least semi decent without a tn panel and (imho) preferably a normal srgb non extended colourspace

Quote from Shotglass :

my advice avoid all of them and get something at least semi decent without a tn panel and (imho) preferably a normal srgb non extended colourspace

Sounds expensive

well theres a new dell 22" 1650*1080 display that comes with an ips panel (the best type money can buy) that apparently is very very good at srgb colours and it would cost you around 290€
should be much more pleasant to look at than any of the ones you listed if you care about image quality at all

Quote from Shotglass :

well theres a new dell 22" 1650*1080 display that comes with an ips panel (the best type money can buy) that apparently is very very good at srgb colours and it would cost you around 290€
should be much more pleasant to look at than any of the ones you listed if you care about image quality at all

Well of course i would buy one of those if i got money That is like x2 more expensive.. so no more about that thanks. Starting to feel like that im going to buy that benq 22". Might be tomorrow in my desk.. but lets see

And the new monitor is:
BenQ G2220HDA (22")

Its what i wanted it to be No problems at all, i like it all around.

When was the last time you visited an optometrist?

:tired: <--- Me looking at my laptop's TN panel, or any TN panel for that matter.

BenQ monitors are known to be failure prone, I would have not gone for that one.

The company my mom used to work for got seven of them while she was there. I said that four of them would be dead in a month, just as a prediction.

In less than a month four out of seven died as I had predicted, the rest went shortly after a month. Now it's just a waranty game for them, it fails, they replace it.

Where are the Samsung's? They're epic

Quote from Bose321 :

Where are the Samsung's? They're epic

What u mean?

Well, ive heard many complains about Samsung - that theyr not good.

But, i really would like to get one of them. This one, worth it or i could get something better in that price?

Well, samsungs are really good.

yea, the specs are good but i havnt heard ... technically any good stuff about them. Also, i found something new what looks nice and smooth too. Its for sale in compusa/tigerdirect too, found some nice reviews from there.

Acer H243HBMID - couldnt find the stuff in google tho

Edit: http://www.compusa.com/applica ... details.asp?EdpNo=4242611

no colour calibration will be able to correct the fundamental fault tn panels have which is their complete inability to display a single colour across the whole screen without gradients from top to bottom
nevermind that shifting from one side of your chair to the other will make all that work and money put into calibrating its worthless

a tn panel which usually comes with a far too small lookup table uses dithering and all sorts of other rubbish coupled with a calibrator is a lot like putting a ferrari engine into a lada
itll improve things but the base is still rubbish (main difference of course is that a lada is actually enjoyable while a tn isnt)

and with tn panels 19" are tall enough to have a vertical viewing angle difference between the top and the bottom of the screen sufficient enough to make displaying a normal blue unicolour windows background impossible

and yes most tfts are horribly badly calibrated out of the box which is one of the many reasons why ill stick with my crt for the time being

There is no science about TN or VA or IPS monitors doing better than the other panel type. In the market you can find some very good TNs and some very bad IPS..

You can't be sure only looking at specs, because often (say always :tilt they don't follow specifications released by the manufacturer, so the best advice I can give you is to read press reviews to find the real world values (measured by instruments, not by marketing chiefs) of delay, colour fidelity, view angle etc.

For color calibration again there isn't a "one size fits all" rule... Some monitors are very well calibrated at factory values and the rest don't.

EDIT: sorry, this post is rubbish. I'm leaving it intact only because of transparency

Quote from petrewitz :

That was true for old CRT monitors. Unfortunately for modern one it's not true unless you buy a pro monitor. Even big very expensive consumer class panels are sold being not correctly calibrated but with a single purpose to show most saturated and bright colors they capable.
Just go to a TV shop and ask to put a football or any sport show on the screens. Notice a grass color. 90% of them will show absolutely unrealistic acidly over-saturated green. The same story with a sky color. Take such a monitor at home and you will see those insane colors on your own photos.
Some people like it but it have nothing to do with what colors your camera actually captured and makes senseless any attempt to edit them in photoshop.

Absolutely right, but reading Tom's Hardware Italy I found the Philips 190CW8FB to be perfectly calibrated by default (see graphs), even if my father recently bought it for 99 euro . Bold text says "Factory setting, 5000K, reported exactly 5000K, 6500K mode is at 6400K and 7500K is at 7500K! Perfect results!" and "It's not worth venturing into a manual calibration, because default settings are very good."

That's probably the exception..(?)

Quote from C22_H20_O13 :

There is no science about TN or VA or IPS monitors doing better than the other panel type.

I hope I merely didn't catch some sarcasm here.

If not, that's some serious rubbish. There are fundamental flaws in all TN and VA panels that help reduce cost, TN panels in particular. IPS is by no means perfect, but there's a reason it costs so much more than the others.

Quote from Forbin :

I hope I merely didn't catch some sarcasm here.

Why you extrapolated just a proposition?

Quote from C22_H20_O13 :

There is no science about TN or VA or IPS monitors doing better than the other panel type. In the market you can find some very good TNs and some very bad IPS..

That was an observation of the fact that some IPS panels do worse that TNs in the "not so cheap but cheap" price tag (< 350 euro for 22").

Not mentioning the bang/bucks ratio. No sarcasm intended.

EDIT: serious rubbish

Quote from C22_H20_O13 :

That was an observation of the fact that some IPS panels do worse that TNs in the "not so cheap but cheap" price tag (< 350 euro for 22").

Worse how?

And with the exception of one I think I may have heard of recently, there aren't any 22" IPS panels. 22" panels are almost entirely TN with a few VA's here and there.

http://www.widescreengamingfor ... aster_Monitors_List_22%22

My 20" IPS panel (NEC 20WMGX2, no longer in production) cost $550 USD a couple years ago. The Acer Ferrari F-20, also a 20" IPS panel, still sells for $500+ USD. The NEC 2490WUXi (24" IPS) still sells for $1000+ USD.

A monitor tends to be a longer-term purchase than all other computer hardware and you get what you pay for.

Quote from Forbin :

Worse how?

Dell 2209WA, 22" IPS, 334,80 € directly from Dell, good monitor all around, but has a deltaE of 3.6 with a good calibration!
Not bad, but I expect an IPS panel do better..
In fact the Philips 220CW9, 22" TN, 180 €, has a deltaE of 3.3 with factory calibration but after tuning the gamma peaks at 2.6!

source

If you read the 2209WA's review you can find what I wanted to say in my earlier post: "TN panels are often criticized for their lack of homogeneity and for very tight vision angles. On these two points, IPS panels are better than the TN ones, but not because of this are perfect."

Obviously this is only true for cheap IPS, I don't want to even compare good IPS (>= 500€) with TNs = no way

EDIT: I found a good site for LCD monitor reviews http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/

Quote from C22_H20_O13 :

... I found the Philips 190CW8FB to be perfectly calibrated by default (see graphs), even if my father recently bought it for 99 euro ...

I'm looking for a montior around 100€, but couldn't find that model you recommended, only 190CW9FB - costs 105 € :P would you recommend this for surfing the internet + watching movies ? (it's going to be used by my sister, cause the CRT she has is getting very blurry)

Color accuracy at a single given point may vary between monitors, I'll give you that. However, the important thing to note is this: colorimeters measure color at a single point directly over the monitor surface.

In the scientific sense, this is good because it eliminates variables. In the practical sense, it doesn't tell you anything more than the accuracy of the color at a small point straight ahead with your eyes held perfectly perpendicular to that point. It doesn't tell you anything about any of the other visual qualities (or lack thereof) of the monitor. Therefore it is an insufficient tool for naming a specific monitor or monitor type "better" than another.