Posted: 8/13/2013 10:21:44 AM EDT
|
Trying to decide on a 24" LED monitor. Can't decide between a Asus VG248QE and a the Benq XL2420T. Also interested in the differance between IPS and monitors with a 120MHz+ refresh rate. My budget is $300ish.
So what are you guys playing on? |
|
Quoted:
Trying to decide on a 24" LED monitor. Can't decide between a Asus VG248QE and a the Benq XL2420T. Also interested in the differance between IPS and monitors with a 120MHz+ refresh rate. My budget is $300ish. So what are you guys playing on? I understand that you want a good monitor for gaming. Nothing wrong with that. But do you really want a monitor that is great for gaming but has shortcomings everywhere else? Which is what those high refresh rate monitors are. I'd suggest that you go for an ips or va panel monitor that will give you a good gaming experience in addition to being good at other tasks/uses. For glossy monitors here is a option: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Dell---24%26%2334%3B-LED-HD-Monitor/6814952.p?id=1218807855012&skuId=6814952 Sine its a VA panel you will have great black levels and a contrast ratio to go with your good viewing angles and color accuracy. But it is very glossy which could be problematic to you. If you prefer a matte screen and/or value viewing angles and color accuracy over contrast ratio and black levels then this is a good option: http://www.amazon.com/PA248Q-24-Inch-LED-Lit-Professional-Graphics/dp/B008DWH00K |
|
Quoted:
I understand that you want a good monitor for gaming. Nothing wrong with that. But do you really want a monitor that is great for gaming but has shortcomings everywhere else? Which is what those high refresh rate monitors are. I'd suggest that you go for an ips or va panel monitor that will give you a good gaming experience in addition to being good at other tasks/uses. For glossy monitors here is a option: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Dell---24%26%2334%3B-LED-HD-Monitor/6814952.p?id=1218807855012&skuId=6814952 Sine its a VA panel you will have great black levels and a contrast ratio to go with your good viewing angles and color accuracy. But it is very glossy which could be problematic to you. If you prefer a matte screen and/or value viewing angles and color accuracy over contrast ratio and black levels then this is a good option: http://www.amazon.com/PA248Q-24-Inch-LED-Lit-Professional-Graphics/dp/B008DWH00K Quoted:
Quoted:
Trying to decide on a 24" LED monitor. Can't decide between a Asus VG248QE and a the Benq XL2420T. Also interested in the differance between IPS and monitors with a 120MHz+ refresh rate. My budget is $300ish. So what are you guys playing on? I understand that you want a good monitor for gaming. Nothing wrong with that. But do you really want a monitor that is great for gaming but has shortcomings everywhere else? Which is what those high refresh rate monitors are. I'd suggest that you go for an ips or va panel monitor that will give you a good gaming experience in addition to being good at other tasks/uses. For glossy monitors here is a option: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Dell---24%26%2334%3B-LED-HD-Monitor/6814952.p?id=1218807855012&skuId=6814952 Sine its a VA panel you will have great black levels and a contrast ratio to go with your good viewing angles and color accuracy. But it is very glossy which could be problematic to you. If you prefer a matte screen and/or value viewing angles and color accuracy over contrast ratio and black levels then this is a good option: http://www.amazon.com/PA248Q-24-Inch-LED-Lit-Professional-Graphics/dp/B008DWH00K Thank you for responding. You clearly know much more about this then I do. I only do a few things on my desktop. Play games, surf the web and write in Word. Competitive online gaming is the primary use of my computer. So I am very interested in the smoother frame rate and faster response time that people claim to get using a monitor with a 120 Mhz refresh rate. |
|
Quoted:
Thank you for responding. You clearly know much more about this then I do. I only do a few things on my desktop. Play games, surf the web and write in Word. Competitive online gaming is the primary use of my computer. So I am very interested in the smoother frame rate and faster response time that people claim to get using a monitor with a 120 Mhz refresh rate. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Trying to decide on a 24" LED monitor. Can't decide between a Asus VG248QE and a the Benq XL2420T. Also interested in the differance between IPS and monitors with a 120MHz+ refresh rate. My budget is $300ish. So what are you guys playing on? I understand that you want a good monitor for gaming. Nothing wrong with that. But do you really want a monitor that is great for gaming but has shortcomings everywhere else? Which is what those high refresh rate monitors are. I'd suggest that you go for an ips or va panel monitor that will give you a good gaming experience in addition to being good at other tasks/uses. For glossy monitors here is a option: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Dell---24%26%2334%3B-LED-HD-Monitor/6814952.p?id=1218807855012&skuId=6814952 Sine its a VA panel you will have great black levels and a contrast ratio to go with your good viewing angles and color accuracy. But it is very glossy which could be problematic to you. If you prefer a matte screen and/or value viewing angles and color accuracy over contrast ratio and black levels then this is a good option: http://www.amazon.com/PA248Q-24-Inch-LED-Lit-Professional-Graphics/dp/B008DWH00K Thank you for responding. You clearly know much more about this then I do. I only do a few things on my desktop. Play games, surf the web and write in Word. Competitive online gaming is the primary use of my computer. So I am very interested in the smoother frame rate and faster response time that people claim to get using a monitor with a 120 Mhz refresh rate. It would be a mistake to use an ips panel for competitive gaming. You would be at a huge disadvantage. |
|
Im running a 5-6 year old Samsung 24" lcd. It's a workhorse, but it's not gonna live forever.
I too use my PC primarily for online, first person shooter gaming. I dunno if my 45 year old reflexes and eye sight could be called competitive but I do enjoying pwning bitches when I can flank em and catch em unawares. My big issue modern budget to mid range monitors is that they are all 1080p resolution. I game at 1920x1200 and 1080 just looks squished to me, almost vertigo inducing. Is there any decent modern gaming monitor that has a native resolution of at least 1920x1200 and doesn't cost north of 900 bucks? I paided 475 for the Samsung in 2007. I'd like to keep it in the 500 or less range but I could go a bit higher if that's what it took to get what I want. Yes I know a 30 inch Dell ultrasharp will rock my world but who has a grand to spend on a monitor lol. |
|
Quoted:
... Is there any decent modern gaming monitor that has a native resolution of at least 1920x1200 and doesn't cost north of 900 bucks? I paided 475 for the Samsung in 2007. I'd like to keep it in the 500 or less range but I could go a bit higher if that's what it took to get what I want. ... My 8 year old Dell 24" IPS monitor died last month.  It was a great monitor overall, and great for games too. It got me spoiled gaming on 1920x1200. Back when I purchased it, 24" was not cheap, and 1900-1200 was considered big. Not anymore, but it still is a great resolution.
For a replacement I went with a new Dell U2412M. It is very similar to the old Dell I used for years, and still has the 1920-1200 resolution. Best of all is the price is under $300. I paid about $270 delivered from Amazon. This isn't the latest and greatest monitor, and does have older inputs (no HMDI). It does get great reviews, and should have a 3 year warranty from Dell (be aware who it is purchased from). Also, it could be a great option for a dual or triple monitor set-up in the future. Hardcore gamers will probably look elsewhere, but for a great overall 24" IPS 1920-1200 res monitor, at least give it a look. |
|
Unless you're using 3D, I wouldn't even worry about a refresh rate faster than 60Hz. There's no perceptible difference and those monitors all have their own issues. I use a Dell U2410. The colors are amazing, and 16:10 aspect ratio is FTW. Only downside is when you use the Game preset for lower input lag, it uses really fucked up colors and brightness. Turns out you can set it to game mode, then open the menu again, select one of the RGB modes but don't apply it, let the OSD time out, and then you have low input lag and accurate colors. Only downside is you have to do it again if the monitor is turned off or enters the power saving mode. |
|
Quoted:
Trying to decide on a 24" LED monitor. Can't decide between a Asus VG248QE and a the Benq XL2420T. Also interested in the differance between IPS and monitors with a 120MHz+ refresh rate. My budget is $300ish. So what are you guys playing on? Hi; I use nothing but ASUS monitors and have been very Pleased. A 27' and a 23.5.--Cheap and great for the $$ ASUS VE247H Black 23.6" 2ms Full HD HDMI LED BackLight LCD Monitor If you can afford it get the 27'. Asus VK278Q Black 27" 1920x1080 2ms Full HD HDMI LED BackLight LCD Monitor w/Webcam ETA: Amazon has the 27' for $286.00 Hope this helps--You don't need to spend a fortune on a good Monitor these days! |
|
Quoted:
It would be a mistake to use an ips panel for competitive gaming. You would be at a huge disadvantage. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Trying to decide on a 24" LED monitor. Can't decide between a Asus VG248QE and a the Benq XL2420T. Also interested in the differance between IPS and monitors with a 120MHz+ refresh rate. My budget is $300ish. So what are you guys playing on? I understand that you want a good monitor for gaming. Nothing wrong with that. But do you really want a monitor that is great for gaming but has shortcomings everywhere else? Which is what those high refresh rate monitors are. I'd suggest that you go for an ips or va panel monitor that will give you a good gaming experience in addition to being good at other tasks/uses. For glossy monitors here is a option: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Dell---24%26%2334%3B-LED-HD-Monitor/6814952.p?id=1218807855012&skuId=6814952 Sine its a VA panel you will have great black levels and a contrast ratio to go with your good viewing angles and color accuracy. But it is very glossy which could be problematic to you. If you prefer a matte screen and/or value viewing angles and color accuracy over contrast ratio and black levels then this is a good option: http://www.amazon.com/PA248Q-24-Inch-LED-Lit-Professional-Graphics/dp/B008DWH00K Thank you for responding. You clearly know much more about this then I do. I only do a few things on my desktop. Play games, surf the web and write in Word. Competitive online gaming is the primary use of my computer. So I am very interested in the smoother frame rate and faster response time that people claim to get using a monitor with a 120 Mhz refresh rate. It would be a mistake to use an ips panel for competitive gaming. You would be at a huge disadvantage. It would be a mistake to assume that these ips/va displays are like every other ips/va display on the market. They are the most responsive for their given panel technologies. Sure they might not be as responsive as the 120hz TN displays, but you have to give up so much with those displays to have that level of responsiveness. Go look at the reviews yourself if you don't believe me. |
|
Quoted:
It would be a mistake to assume that these ips/va displays are like every other ips/va display on the market. They are the most responsive for their given panel technologies. Sure they might not be as responsive as the 120hz TN displays, but you have to give up so much with those displays to have that level of responsiveness. Go look at the reviews yourself if you don't believe me. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Trying to decide on a 24" LED monitor. Can't decide between a Asus VG248QE and a the Benq XL2420T. Also interested in the differance between IPS and monitors with a 120MHz+ refresh rate. My budget is $300ish. So what are you guys playing on? I understand that you want a good monitor for gaming. Nothing wrong with that. But do you really want a monitor that is great for gaming but has shortcomings everywhere else? Which is what those high refresh rate monitors are. I'd suggest that you go for an ips or va panel monitor that will give you a good gaming experience in addition to being good at other tasks/uses. For glossy monitors here is a option: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Dell---24%26%2334%3B-LED-HD-Monitor/6814952.p?id=1218807855012&skuId=6814952 Sine its a VA panel you will have great black levels and a contrast ratio to go with your good viewing angles and color accuracy. But it is very glossy which could be problematic to you. If you prefer a matte screen and/or value viewing angles and color accuracy over contrast ratio and black levels then this is a good option: http://www.amazon.com/PA248Q-24-Inch-LED-Lit-Professional-Graphics/dp/B008DWH00K Thank you for responding. You clearly know much more about this then I do. I only do a few things on my desktop. Play games, surf the web and write in Word. Competitive online gaming is the primary use of my computer. So I am very interested in the smoother frame rate and faster response time that people claim to get using a monitor with a 120 Mhz refresh rate. It would be a mistake to use an ips panel for competitive gaming. You would be at a huge disadvantage. It would be a mistake to assume that these ips/va displays are like every other ips/va display on the market. They are the most responsive for their given panel technologies. Sure they might not be as responsive as the 120hz TN displays, but you have to give up so much with those displays to have that level of responsiveness. Go look at the reviews yourself if you don't believe me. Oh I believe you. I guess it depends what his definition of competitive gaming is. For me a 120hz tn is a bare minimum. It took me long enough to finally give up my 180hz CRT. |
|
Quoted:
Unless you're using 3D, I wouldn't even worry about a refresh rate faster than 60Hz. There's no perceptible difference and those monitors all have their own issues. I use a Dell U2410. The colors are amazing, and 16:10 aspect ratio is FTW. Only downside is when you use the Game preset for lower input lag, it uses really fucked up colors and brightness. Turns out you can set it to game mode, then open the menu again, select one of the RGB modes but don't apply it, let the OSD time out, and then you have low input lag and accurate colors. Only downside is you have to do it again if the monitor is turned off or enters the power saving mode. Difference between 60 and 120hz is night and day. Hell I can even tell the difference just moving my mouse around on my desktop (my second monitor is 60hz). |
|
$350 for a TN panel? No thanks. Too many good *VA and IPS panels out there these days to settle for TN. 120hz or not.
My last monitor was a 24" S-PVA panel (1920x1200), and it was great. Good balance of color, contrast, and speed. Now I'm using a 27" IPS panel(2560x1440). Overall the IPS is better, but the PVA panel had deeper blacks by a bit. Honestly, I don't think you can even look at a 24" TN panel straight on without seeing color shift in the corners. I had a little 17" TN panel years ago, and it was an issue. First and last TN panel I'll ever own. Buy this, and overclock it if you really need more than 60Hz http://www.amazon.com/QNIX-QX2710-Evolution-LED-Monitor/dp/B00BUI44US Huge thread at overclock.net about the QNix and X-Star monitors, everything you need to know |
|
I'm running an HP 2310m(HDMI) and Acer x223w(DVI-D). The 2310m is a bitchin' screen that I picked up gently used from CL for $90. The x223w was part of my original rig parts purchase and it has served me well, although the power button needs to be pressed a bit hard. I'll be replacing the latter at some point. |
|
Did a ton of research and ended up going a more unusual route. A Korean 27" QNIX QX2710 Evolution ll 2560x1440 LED PLS monitor which come standard at 60 Mhz but can be overclocked to 110 MHz and some can do better (luck of the draw?). Got it on ebay for $300 including next day shipping from S. Korea via FedEx. Should be here in a day or two.
From what I have read these are basically generic no name branded (Qnix, Xstar, Yakamaski, etc) Samsung screens and internal electronics slapped in a el cheapo bezel/case with crappy speakers and a chinzy stand. The popular and reputable sellers do test the monitors before they ship for dead pixels and excessive back light bleed through. I won't be using the speakers. I also ordered a more adjustable pedestal monitor stand since the stock one has no elevation adjustment (Amazon.com $35). These monitors fit industry standard VESA 100 x100 mounts. The chance of getting a "good" monitor is better than 90% and I guess I figured it was worth the risk of having to ship one back to S. Korea on my dime if I get a bad one. I'll post more when it gets here and I get it hooked up. |
|
Quoted:
Did a ton of research and ended up going a more unusual route. A Korean 27" QNIX QX2710 Evolution ll 2560x1440 LED PLS monitor which come standard at 60 Mhz but can be overclocked to 110 MHz and some can do better (luck of the draw?). Got it on ebay for $300 including next day shipping from S. Korea via FedEx. Should be here in a day or two. From what I have read these are basically generic no name branded (Qnix, Xstar, Yakamaski, etc) Samsung screens and internal electronics slapped in a el cheapo bezel/case with crappy speakers and a chinzy stand. The popular and rebutable sellers do test the monitors before they ship for dead pixels and excessive back light bleed through. I won't be using the speakers. I also ordered a more adjustable pedestal monitor stand since the stock one has no elevation adjustment (Amazon.com $35). These monitors fit industry standard VESA 100 x100 mounts. The chance of getting a "good" monitor is better than 90% and I guess I figured it was worth the risk of having to ship one back to S. Korea on my dime if I get a bad one. I'll post more when it gets here and I get it hooked up. I don't read the PC gaming/equipment enthusiast sites much (started to more lately), but is that the "Korean" monitor I keep seeing people mention? I've seen people say stuff like "I'm running two Koreans atm," or "Those Koreans are great monitors!" Me: Are they talking about Samsung? 
Edit: found this: http://techreport.com/review/23291/those-27-inch-ips-displays-from-korea-are-for-real I might have to get one! 
Edit 2: It looks like there are lots of issues with them. Most are fixable, but lots of things that would never go out without being fixed at the factory at a place with decent QC. I'm tempted, but I don't know if I want to fool around with fixing one so that it works perfectly. You would think if they spent an extra $30-$50 per monitor on QC they would have a massive gigantic hit on their hands. Edit 3: Microcenter sells them. They have a good return policy so if it's all folked up I can return it for a refund. Price includes free shipping. I wonder if the QC of their monitors is any better: http://www.microcenter.com/product/384780/EQ276W_27-Inch_IPS_LED_Monitor,_WQHD_2560x1440,_HDMI,_DVI-D,_DisplayPort,_USB |
|
Quoted:
I don't read the PC gaming/equipment enthusiast sites much (started to more lately), but is that the "Korean" monitor I keep seeing people mention? I've seen people say stuff like "I'm running two Koreans atm," or "Those Koreans are great monitors!" Me: Are they talking about Samsung?
Edit: found this: http://techreport.com/review/23291/those-27-inch-ips-displays-from-korea-are-for-real I might have to get one!
Edit 2: It looks like there are lots of issues with them. Most are fixable, but lots of things that would never go out without being fixed at the factory at a place with decent QC. I'm tempted, but I don't know if I want to fool around with fixing one so that it works perfectly. You would think if they spent an extra $30-$50 per monitor on QC they would have a massive gigantic hit on their hands. Quoted:
Quoted:
Did a ton of research and ended up going a more unusual route. A Korean 27" QNIX QX2710 Evolution ll 2560x1440 LED PLS monitor which come standard at 60 Mhz but can be overclocked to 110 MHz and some can do better (luck of the draw?). Got it on ebay for $300 including next day shipping from S. Korea via FedEx. Should be here in a day or two. From what I have read these are basically generic no name branded (Qnix, Xstar, Yakamaski, etc) Samsung screens and internal electronics slapped in a el cheapo bezel/case with crappy speakers and a chinzy stand. The popular and rebutable sellers do test the monitors before they ship for dead pixels and excessive back light bleed through. I won't be using the speakers. I also ordered a more adjustable pedestal monitor stand since the stock one has no elevation adjustment (Amazon.com $35). These monitors fit industry standard VESA 100 x100 mounts. The chance of getting a "good" monitor is better than 90% and I guess I figured it was worth the risk of having to ship one back to S. Korea on my dime if I get a bad one. I'll post more when it gets here and I get it hooked up. I don't read the PC gaming/equipment enthusiast sites much (started to more lately), but is that the "Korean" monitor I keep seeing people mention? I've seen people say stuff like "I'm running two Koreans atm," or "Those Koreans are great monitors!" Me: Are they talking about Samsung?
Edit: found this: http://techreport.com/review/23291/those-27-inch-ips-displays-from-korea-are-for-real I might have to get one!
Edit 2: It looks like there are lots of issues with them. Most are fixable, but lots of things that would never go out without being fixed at the factory at a place with decent QC. I'm tempted, but I don't know if I want to fool around with fixing one so that it works perfectly. You would think if they spent an extra $30-$50 per monitor on QC they would have a massive gigantic hit on their hands. There is a gamble when you buy any electronics. These are just a bigger PITA to return and it will cost you return shipping to S. Korea on a 12 lb package. I was willing to gamble on the reported 90% sucess rate of "good" monitors shipped at this price point which is bsasically half of what name brand monitors with similar features cost like Dell, Asus, Viewsonic etc. Guess we will see very soon! |
|
Quoted:
There is a gamble when you buy any electronics. These are just a bigger PITA to return and it will cost you return shipping to S. Korea on a 12 lb package. I was willing to gamble on the reported 90% sucess rate of "good" monitors shipped at this price point which is bsasically half of what name brand monitors with similar features cost like Dell, Asus, Viewsonic etc. Guess we will see very soon! Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did a ton of research and ended up going a more unusual route. A Korean 27" QNIX QX2710 Evolution ll 2560x1440 LED PLS monitor which come standard at 60 Mhz but can be overclocked to 110 MHz and some can do better (luck of the draw?). Got it on ebay for $300 including next day shipping from S. Korea via FedEx. Should be here in a day or two. From what I have read these are basically generic no name branded (Qnix, Xstar, Yakamaski, etc) Samsung screens and internal electronics slapped in a el cheapo bezel/case with crappy speakers and a chinzy stand. The popular and rebutable sellers do test the monitors before they ship for dead pixels and excessive back light bleed through. I won't be using the speakers. I also ordered a more adjustable pedestal monitor stand since the stock one has no elevation adjustment (Amazon.com $35). These monitors fit industry standard VESA 100 x100 mounts. The chance of getting a "good" monitor is better than 90% and I guess I figured it was worth the risk of having to ship one back to S. Korea on my dime if I get a bad one. I'll post more when it gets here and I get it hooked up. I don't read the PC gaming/equipment enthusiast sites much (started to more lately), but is that the "Korean" monitor I keep seeing people mention? I've seen people say stuff like "I'm running two Koreans atm," or "Those Koreans are great monitors!" Me: Are they talking about Samsung?
Edit: found this: http://techreport.com/review/23291/those-27-inch-ips-displays-from-korea-are-for-real I might have to get one!
Edit 2: It looks like there are lots of issues with them. Most are fixable, but lots of things that would never go out without being fixed at the factory at a place with decent QC. I'm tempted, but I don't know if I want to fool around with fixing one so that it works perfectly. You would think if they spent an extra $30-$50 per monitor on QC they would have a massive gigantic hit on their hands. There is a gamble when you buy any electronics. These are just a bigger PITA to return and it will cost you return shipping to S. Korea on a 12 lb package. I was willing to gamble on the reported 90% sucess rate of "good" monitors shipped at this price point which is bsasically half of what name brand monitors with similar features cost like Dell, Asus, Viewsonic etc. Guess we will see very soon! After making that post I saw that Microcenter sells them (and added the link). If I get one I'll probably get it there. |
|
I got the ASUS VN247H-P 24-Inch Screen LED-Lit Monitor from Amazon.
Originally it was going to run me $160, I got it for $150 on their warehouse deals because it was one of those that had an open box or messed up box or something. Got it, had a few dead pixels in a very noticeable place when on white screens and they refunded $30 to me. So, basically got a $200 LED monitor for $120. The pixels aren't really a problem unless on a white screen and I'm looking at the top. http://www.amazon.com/VN247H-P-24-Inch-Screen-LED-Lit-Monitor/dp/B00AVYNS7M I like the monitor, great picture, has speakers, everything's been working just fine. |
| I don't know how people put up with dead/stuck pixels. It'd annoy the shit out of me. No amount of money is going to make me want to use a monitor with them. The quality of the display is completely negated and irrelevant by borked pixels. A $200-$1000 monitor becomes a $30 monitor to me with them, not $150 or $950. |
|
Quoted:
I don't know how people put up with dead/stuck pixels. It'd annoy the shit out of me. No amount of money is going to make me want to use a monitor with them. The quality of the display is completely negated and irrelevant by borked pixels. A $200-$1000 monitor becomes a $30 monitor to me with them, not $150 or $950. OCD much? You aren't going to notice one in 3,686,400 pixels unless it is an all white screen. How often is your screen all white? |
|
Quoted:
OCD much? You aren't going to notice one in 3,686,400 pixels unless it is an all white screen. How often is your screen all white? Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't know how people put up with dead/stuck pixels. It'd annoy the shit out of me. No amount of money is going to make me want to use a monitor with them. The quality of the display is completely negated and irrelevant by borked pixels. A $200-$1000 monitor becomes a $30 monitor to me with them, not $150 or $950. OCD much? You aren't going to notice one in 3,686,400 pixels unless it is an all white screen. How often is your screen all white? It's not OCD. It's just distracting/annoying when you can see them. I'd rather pay full price for a 100% working pixel count is all. |
|
Quoted:
It's not OCD. It's just distracting/annoying when you can see them. I'd rather pay full price for a 100% working pixel count is all. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't know how people put up with dead/stuck pixels. It'd annoy the shit out of me. No amount of money is going to make me want to use a monitor with them. The quality of the display is completely negated and irrelevant by borked pixels. A $200-$1000 monitor becomes a $30 monitor to me with them, not $150 or $950. OCD much? You aren't going to notice one in 3,686,400 pixels unless it is an all white screen. How often is your screen all white? It's not OCD. It's just distracting/annoying when you can see them. I'd rather pay full price for a 100% working pixel count is all. Sad part is all monitors come with dead pixels. Find me a single monitor that the company does not say there is a range of 1~10 or so pixels can be bad? It happens. |
|
Quoted:
It's not OCD. It's just distracting/annoying when you can see them. I'd rather pay full price for a 100% working pixel count is all. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't know how people put up with dead/stuck pixels. It'd annoy the shit out of me. No amount of money is going to make me want to use a monitor with them. The quality of the display is completely negated and irrelevant by borked pixels. A $200-$1000 monitor becomes a $30 monitor to me with them, not $150 or $950. OCD much? You aren't going to notice one in 3,686,400 pixels unless it is an all white screen. How often is your screen all white? It's not OCD. It's just distracting/annoying when you can see them. I'd rather pay full price for a 100% working pixel count is all. Stuck pixels are the worst. My gf's tv has one that green most of the time. If any of my monitors were like that I'd definitely think about replacing it. I have one dead pixel on my secondary monitor, and that's why it's my secondary monitor! There's no way I'd put up with something like 10 dead pixels. |
|
Quoted:
Sad part is all monitors come with dead pixels. Find me a single monitor that the company does not say there is a range of 1~10 or so pixels can be bad? It happens. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't know how people put up with dead/stuck pixels. It'd annoy the shit out of me. No amount of money is going to make me want to use a monitor with them. The quality of the display is completely negated and irrelevant by borked pixels. A $200-$1000 monitor becomes a $30 monitor to me with them, not $150 or $950. OCD much? You aren't going to notice one in 3,686,400 pixels unless it is an all white screen. How often is your screen all white? It's not OCD. It's just distracting/annoying when you can see them. I'd rather pay full price for a 100% working pixel count is all. Sad part is all monitors come with dead pixels. Find me a single monitor that the company does not say there is a range of 1~10 or so pixels can be bad? It happens. Here is at least 1: http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/04/campaigns/dell-premium-panel-guarantee |
|
Quoted:
Here is at least 1: http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/04/campaigns/dell-premium-panel-guarantee Quoted:
Here is at least 1: http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/04/campaigns/dell-premium-panel-guarantee Opps, you missed it. A dead pixel refers to a pixel with a defect in its ability to display the correct color output. It may look like a tiny black or white spot on the screen. When the pixel remains permanently lit, it is known as a bright pixel. The Premium Panel Guarantee does not cover monitors with dark/ black type of dead pixels. Bright pixels =/= dead pixels. ETA: http://www.tested.com/tech/1337-we-uncover-the-dead-pixel-policies-for-every-major-lcd-maker/ |
|
Quoted:
Sad part is all monitors come with dead pixels. Find me a single monitor that the company does not say there is a range of 1~10 or so pixels can be bad? It happens. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't know how people put up with dead/stuck pixels. It'd annoy the shit out of me. No amount of money is going to make me want to use a monitor with them. The quality of the display is completely negated and irrelevant by borked pixels. A $200-$1000 monitor becomes a $30 monitor to me with them, not $150 or $950. OCD much? You aren't going to notice one in 3,686,400 pixels unless it is an all white screen. How often is your screen all white? It's not OCD. It's just distracting/annoying when you can see them. I'd rather pay full price for a 100% working pixel count is all. Sad part is all monitors come with dead pixels. Find me a single monitor that the company does not say there is a range of 1~10 or so pixels can be bad? It happens. Uhhh I suggest you educate yourself. You are flat out wrong. For one thing look at HP's policy: http://www.tested.com/tech/1337-we-uncover-the-dead-pixel-policies-for-every-major-lcd-maker/ HP?s dead pixel policy for monitors pretty much hits it out of the park. The company tolerates zero full dead pixel defects and is harsh on sub-pixels, too: a maximum of five combined bright/dark anomalies is within HP?s tolerances. Like Dell, HP also offers a premium guarantee for more expensive displays--its LP2475w, LP2480zx and LP3065 monitors are allowed only 4 dark sub-pixels and zero bright sub-pixels. Unfortunately, there?s an entirely different policy for notebook panels, and it?s not quite as awesome as HP?s monitor quality control. Their laptop rules tread pretty closely to the ISO standards. |
|
Quoted:
You said "bad" not dead. A lit pixel is a bad pixel. Quoted:
You said "bad" not dead. A lit pixel is a bad pixel. Directed at me? If so, I said dead. Don't read too into it. Dead means dead. When I say bad at the end of the sentence, you know what I'm talking about. Quoted:
Uhhh I suggest you educate yourself. You are flat out wrong. For one thing look at HP's policy: http://www.tested.com/tech/1337-we-uncover-the-dead-pixel-policies-for-every-major-lcd-maker/ HP?s dead pixel policy for monitors pretty much hits it out of the park. The company tolerates zero full dead pixel defects and is harsh on sub-pixels, too: a maximum of five combined bright/dark anomalies is within HP?s tolerances. Like Dell, HP also offers a premium guarantee for more expensive displays--its LP2475w, LP2480zx and LP3065 monitors are allowed only 4 dark sub-pixels and zero bright sub-pixels. Unfortunately, there?s an entirely different policy for notebook panels, and it?s not quite as awesome as HP?s monitor quality control. Their laptop rules tread pretty closely to the ISO standards. |
|
Quoted: Directed at me? If so, I said dead. Don't read too into it. Dead means dead. When I say bad at the end of the sentence, you know what I'm talking about. Quoted: Quoted: You said "bad" not dead. A lit pixel is a bad pixel. Directed at me? If so, I said dead. Don't read too into it. Dead means dead. When I say bad at the end of the sentence, you know what I'm talking about. Quoted: Uhhh I suggest you educate yourself. You are flat out wrong. For one thing look at HP's policy: http://www.tested.com/tech/1337-we-uncover-the-dead-pixel-policies-for-every-major-lcd-maker/ HP?s dead pixel policy for monitors pretty much hits it out of the park. The company tolerates zero full dead pixel defects and is harsh on sub-pixels, too: a maximum of five combined bright/dark anomalies is within HP?s tolerances. Like Dell, HP also offers a premium guarantee for more expensive displays--its LP2475w, LP2480zx and LP3065 monitors are allowed only 4 dark sub-pixels and zero bright sub-pixels. Unfortunately, there?s an entirely different policy for notebook panels, and it?s not quite as awesome as HP?s monitor quality control. Their laptop rules tread pretty closely to the ISO standards. |
|
Quoted:
Did a ton of research and ended up going a more unusual route. A Korean 27" QNIX QX2710 Evolution ll 2560x1440 LED PLS monitor which come standard at 60 Mhz but can be overclocked to 110 MHz and some can do better (luck of the draw?). Got it on ebay for $300 including next day shipping from S. Korea via FedEx. Should be here in a day or two. From what I have read these are basically generic no name branded (Qnix, Xstar, Yakamaski, etc) Samsung screens and internal electronics slapped in a el cheapo bezel/case with crappy speakers and a chinzy stand. The popular and reputable sellers do test the monitors before they ship for dead pixels and excessive back light bleed through. I won't be using the speakers. I also ordered a more adjustable pedestal monitor stand since the stock one has no elevation adjustment (Amazon.com $35). These monitors fit industry standard VESA 100 x100 mounts. The chance of getting a "good" monitor is better than 90% and I guess I figured it was worth the risk of having to ship one back to S. Korea on my dime if I get a bad one. I'll post more when it gets here and I get it hooked up. Gonna need a heavy hitting card to run at native on that screen. |
|
Quoted:
Gonna need a heavy hitting card to run at native on that screen. Quoted:
Quoted:
Did a ton of research and ended up going a more unusual route. A Korean 27" QNIX QX2710 Evolution ll 2560x1440 LED PLS monitor which come standard at 60 Mhz but can be overclocked to 110 MHz and some can do better (luck of the draw?). Got it on ebay for $300 including next day shipping from S. Korea via FedEx. Should be here in a day or two. From what I have read these are basically generic no name branded (Qnix, Xstar, Yakamaski, etc) Samsung screens and internal electronics slapped in a el cheapo bezel/case with crappy speakers and a chinzy stand. The popular and reputable sellers do test the monitors before they ship for dead pixels and excessive back light bleed through. I won't be using the speakers. I also ordered a more adjustable pedestal monitor stand since the stock one has no elevation adjustment (Amazon.com $35). These monitors fit industry standard VESA 100 x100 mounts. The chance of getting a "good" monitor is better than 90% and I guess I figured it was worth the risk of having to ship one back to S. Korea on my dime if I get a bad one. I'll post more when it gets here and I get it hooked up. Gonna need a heavy hitting card to run at native on that screen. Current card is a SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition OC 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 |
|
Quoted:
Current card is a SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition OC 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did a ton of research and ended up going a more unusual route. A Korean 27" QNIX QX2710 Evolution ll 2560x1440 LED PLS monitor which come standard at 60 Mhz but can be overclocked to 110 MHz and some can do better (luck of the draw?). Got it on ebay for $300 including next day shipping from S. Korea via FedEx. Should be here in a day or two. From what I have read these are basically generic no name branded (Qnix, Xstar, Yakamaski, etc) Samsung screens and internal electronics slapped in a el cheapo bezel/case with crappy speakers and a chinzy stand. The popular and reputable sellers do test the monitors before they ship for dead pixels and excessive back light bleed through. I won't be using the speakers. I also ordered a more adjustable pedestal monitor stand since the stock one has no elevation adjustment (Amazon.com $35). These monitors fit industry standard VESA 100 x100 mounts. The chance of getting a "good" monitor is better than 90% and I guess I figured it was worth the risk of having to ship one back to S. Korea on my dime if I get a bad one. I'll post more when it gets here and I get it hooked up. Gonna need a heavy hitting card to run at native on that screen. Current card is a SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition OC 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 The jump from 1920x1200 to 2560x1440 is 2.3M pixels to almost 3.7M pixels. A little more if you're currently on a 1080p monitor. That's a pretty significant increase in workload on your card. To run most modern games on max, you're going to need another one at minimum, and even with crossfire there's some games that will make them cry. I just made the jump from a Dell U2410 (1920x1200) to a Dell U2713HM (2560x1440) and had to follow that with a card upgrade (GTX480 to Radeon 7990). High refresh rates won't do you a bit of good if your card is averaging only 45 fps. You can always run lower than native resolution and scale down the eye candy get them playable, but once you see how fine the detail is at that high of a resolution you will not want to. I'll edit this and say it does depend on what games you're playing. My 480 had no problems with games like Borderlands 2, SC2, and others that are less graphically intensive. But if you're looking to run maxed out at Native on the likes of BF3/4, Crysis3, or (Gulp) the Armas, i'd start budgeting for a high end card. |
|
Quoted:
The jump from 1920x1200 to 2560x1440 is 2.3M pixels to almost 3.7M pixels. A little more if you're currently on a 1080p monitor. That's a pretty significant increase in workload on your card. To run most modern games on max, you're going to need another one at minimum, and even with crossfire there's some games that will make them cry. I just made the jump from a Dell U2410 (1920x1200) to a Dell U2713HM (2560x1440) and had to follow that with a card upgrade (GTX480 to Radeon 7990). High refresh rates won't do you a bit of good if your card is averaging only 45 fps. You can always run lower than native resolution and scale down the eye candy get them playable, but once you see how fine the detail is at that high of a resolution you will not want to. I'll edit this and say it does depend on what games you're playing. My 480 had no problems with games like Borderlands 2, SC2, and others that are less graphically intensive. But if you're looking to run maxed out at Native on the likes of BF3/4, Crysis3, or (Gulp) the Armas, i'd start budgeting for a high end card. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did a ton of research and ended up going a more unusual route. A Korean 27" QNIX QX2710 Evolution ll 2560x1440 LED PLS monitor which come standard at 60 Mhz but can be overclocked to 110 MHz and some can do better (luck of the draw?). Got it on ebay for $300 including next day shipping from S. Korea via FedEx. Should be here in a day or two. From what I have read these are basically generic no name branded (Qnix, Xstar, Yakamaski, etc) Samsung screens and internal electronics slapped in a el cheapo bezel/case with crappy speakers and a chinzy stand. The popular and reputable sellers do test the monitors before they ship for dead pixels and excessive back light bleed through. I won't be using the speakers. I also ordered a more adjustable pedestal monitor stand since the stock one has no elevation adjustment (Amazon.com $35). These monitors fit industry standard VESA 100 x100 mounts. The chance of getting a "good" monitor is better than 90% and I guess I figured it was worth the risk of having to ship one back to S. Korea on my dime if I get a bad one. I'll post more when it gets here and I get it hooked up. Gonna need a heavy hitting card to run at native on that screen. Current card is a SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition OC 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 The jump from 1920x1200 to 2560x1440 is 2.3M pixels to almost 3.7M pixels. A little more if you're currently on a 1080p monitor. That's a pretty significant increase in workload on your card. To run most modern games on max, you're going to need another one at minimum, and even with crossfire there's some games that will make them cry. I just made the jump from a Dell U2410 (1920x1200) to a Dell U2713HM (2560x1440) and had to follow that with a card upgrade (GTX480 to Radeon 7990). High refresh rates won't do you a bit of good if your card is averaging only 45 fps. You can always run lower than native resolution and scale down the eye candy get them playable, but once you see how fine the detail is at that high of a resolution you will not want to. I'll edit this and say it does depend on what games you're playing. My 480 had no problems with games like Borderlands 2, SC2, and others that are less graphically intensive. But if you're looking to run maxed out at Native on the likes of BF3/4, Crysis3, or (Gulp) the Armas, i'd start budgeting for a high end card. Son of a B****! I just bought this card like 2 months ago! 
|
|
Quoted:
Son of a B****! I just bought this card like 2 months ago! Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did a ton of research and ended up going a more unusual route. A Korean 27" QNIX QX2710 Evolution ll 2560x1440 LED PLS monitor which come standard at 60 Mhz but can be overclocked to 110 MHz and some can do better (luck of the draw?). Got it on ebay for $300 including next day shipping from S. Korea via FedEx. Should be here in a day or two. From what I have read these are basically generic no name branded (Qnix, Xstar, Yakamaski, etc) Samsung screens and internal electronics slapped in a el cheapo bezel/case with crappy speakers and a chinzy stand. The popular and reputable sellers do test the monitors before they ship for dead pixels and excessive back light bleed through. I won't be using the speakers. I also ordered a more adjustable pedestal monitor stand since the stock one has no elevation adjustment (Amazon.com $35). These monitors fit industry standard VESA 100 x100 mounts. The chance of getting a "good" monitor is better than 90% and I guess I figured it was worth the risk of having to ship one back to S. Korea on my dime if I get a bad one. I'll post more when it gets here and I get it hooked up. Gonna need a heavy hitting card to run at native on that screen. Current card is a SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition OC 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 The jump from 1920x1200 to 2560x1440 is 2.3M pixels to almost 3.7M pixels. A little more if you're currently on a 1080p monitor. That's a pretty significant increase in workload on your card. To run most modern games on max, you're going to need another one at minimum, and even with crossfire there's some games that will make them cry. I just made the jump from a Dell U2410 (1920x1200) to a Dell U2713HM (2560x1440) and had to follow that with a card upgrade (GTX480 to Radeon 7990). High refresh rates won't do you a bit of good if your card is averaging only 45 fps. You can always run lower than native resolution and scale down the eye candy get them playable, but once you see how fine the detail is at that high of a resolution you will not want to. I'll edit this and say it does depend on what games you're playing. My 480 had no problems with games like Borderlands 2, SC2, and others that are less graphically intensive. But if you're looking to run maxed out at Native on the likes of BF3/4, Crysis3, or (Gulp) the Armas, i'd start budgeting for a high end card. Son of a B****! I just bought this card like 2 months ago! It's not that you bought a bad card, it's just more of a mainstream card for more mainstream (1920x1080/1200) resolutions. Like i said you can dial back that monitor to 1920x1080 and run the exact same as what you're at now...you just won't be able to fully appreciate the monitor without an investment in your card. It will work at 2560x1440, but you're going to get significant chop and will be at a disadvantage in competitive/multiplayer against those with balanced hardware. Also, if they don't include one, you'll need a DUAL-LINK DVI cable to run at max res on that screen. |
|
Quoted:
My concern with getting a 7970 is bottlenecking with my older CPU an AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black 3.2GHz Quad-Core which is moderately overclocked with an aftermarket fan. Not sure if you'd have a big problem with that. I'm running my 7990 (two 7970s) with an OCed i7-920. Though i'm pushing the 920 pretty hard (4.0ghz) it's having no problem pushing those two GPUs to 100% usage. I'd crossfire the 7870 (if you've got the board to do so) before pitching the 7870 for a 7970. You'll get better performance. |
|
Quoted:
Not sure if you'd have a big problem with that. I'm running my 7990 (two 7970s) with an OCed i7-920. Though i'm pushing the 920 pretty hard (4.0ghz) it's having no problem pushing those two GPUs to 100% usage. I'd crossfire the 7870 (if you've got the board to do so) before pitching the 7870 for a 7970. You'll get better performance. Quoted:
Quoted:
My concern with getting a 7970 is bottlenecking with my older CPU an AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black 3.2GHz Quad-Core which is moderately overclocked with an aftermarket fan. Not sure if you'd have a big problem with that. I'm running my 7990 (two 7970s) with an OCed i7-920. Though i'm pushing the 920 pretty hard (4.0ghz) it's having no problem pushing those two GPUs to 100% usage. I'd crossfire the 7870 (if you've got the board to do so) before pitching the 7870 for a 7970. You'll get better performance. Quite a difference between the 920 and 955. And that is before any overclocking is done. |