Other Thoughts
One possibility that we didn't even touch on yet is the option to use an LCD HDTV in place of a computer monitor. There are pros and cons to taking such a route, but if it's something that you're interested in doing there's nothing to stop you. HDTVs do have a few really nice features compared to computer monitors, like built-in speakers that actually sound decent if not great, numerous input options, and a remote control for those times when you want to sit back in your chair. Perhaps one of the best reasons to consider an HDTV is that you can get a 32" 1080P LCD for a lot less than a 30" computer LCD, and you also get larger pixels so text might not be quite as difficult to read. Speaking from experience, those without great eyesight may find 2560x1600 on a 30" display to be difficult on the eyes when reading text -- I usually work at 150% magnification in Microsoft Word, for example. You could even go nuts and get a 50 inch or larger "display" and use a wireless mouse and keyboard from 5 to 10 feet away.
Right about now, you might be thinking that HDTVs as computer monitors sound like a great idea. While they certainly work, there are some important caveats that you need to remember before taking the plunge. First, LCD HDTVs typically don't have base stand with adjustable height/tilt, so you will need a desk that puts the display at eye level. Second, HDTV LCDs tend to weigh more than computer LCDs, in part because they include larger speakers and other features. Finally -- and potentially the real killer -- HDTVs often come with a large amount of the internal processing lag. 50 ms or even 250 ms really doesn't make any difference when you're just watching TV and videos, provided that the audio and video remain in sync. Before going out and purchasing an HDTV for computer use, you might want to browse around the web first and verify that processing lag is not an issue. Some HDTVs include a "game" mode to bypass the video processing, which is something else to consider.
Because of the type of environment most people expect when using a computer, we would stick with LCD HDTVs that are at most 32" -- although some people might be okay with up to 42" displays. Definitely stick with 1080P options, unless you don't mind having really big pixels. As far as particular models are concerned, Sharp makes some 32" LCDs that are quite popular for gaming/HDTV/computer use. Overall, HDTVs tend to excel in video playback but fall behind in other areas. Regardless, it's definitely an option to consider if you're looking for a large display. As usual, you get what you pay for, so don't just go out and grab the cheapest option you can find. The better HDTVs will use IPS panels, whereas inexpensive models again make use of TN panels.
To wrap things up, here's a table summarizing some of our LCD recommendations. This is by no means a comprehensive list, but we do feel all of the displays in the following table are at least worth considering.
| 2008 LCD Recommendation Summary | ||||
| LCD | Size | Resolution | Panel Tech | Price |
| Entry-Level | ||||
| Acer X223Wbd | 22" | 1680x1050 | TN | $170 |
| ASUS VH226H | 22" | 1920x1080 | TN | $210 |
| ASUS VW222U | 22" | 1680x1050 | TN | $230 |
| Midrange | ||||
| LG L226WTY | 22" | 1680x1050 | TN | $260 |
| BenQ E2200HD | 22" | 1920x1080 | TN | $265 |
| Samsung T220 | 22" | 1680x1050 | TN | $270 |
| ViewSonic X Series VX2260wm | 22" | 1920x1080 | TN | $280 |
| Acer X243Wbd | 24" | 1920x1200 | TN | $290 |
| BenQ E2400HD | 24" | 1920x1080 | TN | $330 |
| BenQ G2400WD | 24" | 1920x1200 | TN | $340 |
| Dell SP2309W | 23" | 2048x1152 | TN | $380 |
| Hanns-G HG-281DPB | 28" | 1920x1200 | TN | $380 |
| Acer G24 | 24" | 1920x1200 | TN | $390 |
| Samsung 2493HM | 24" | 1920x1200 | TN | $390 |
| Gateway FHD2401 | 24" | 1920x1200 | TN | $400 |
| High-End | ||||
| Dell 2408WFP | 24" | 1920x1200 | S-PVA | $482 |
| Lenovo L220X | 22" | 1920x1200 | S-PVA | $485 |
| HP LP2475w | 24" | 1920x1200 | S-IPS | $585 |
| BenQ FP241VW | 24" | 1920x1200 | S-MVA | $600 |
| Planar PX2611W | 26" | 1920x1200 | S-IPS | $765 |
| Dream | ||||
| DoubleSight DS-305W | 30" | 2560x1600 | S-IPS | $950 |
| NEC LCD2690WUXi | 26" | 1920x1200 | H-IPS | $1050 |
| Samsung 305T | 30" | 2560x1600 | S-PVA | $1125 |
| Dell 3007WFP-HC | 30" | 2560x1600 | S-IPS | $1200 |
| HP LP3065 | 30" | 2560x1600 | S-IPS | $1250 |
| NEC LCD3090WQXi | 30" | 2560x1600 | S-IPS | $2000 |
As a final thought, just remember that your computer display is one part of the computer that you constantly look at, so spending more money to get a higher quality display is definitely something your eyes will appreciate. Not only can it have an immediate and dramatic impact on how you use your computer, but also keep in mind the fact that computer displays tend to stay in use for five years or more, as opposed to being out of date the instant you buy them. That being the case, we recommend trying to spend more money and get a nicer display if at all possible.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
50 Comments
View All Comments
DBissett - Thursday, December 18, 2008 - link
Informative article, but the second paragraph under "$400-$800 High End Monitors" really needs some editing. The first sentence says we can find an S-MVA monitor. Then it says there is one available in the US but it's out of production. Then the monitor is discussed further, but the name of this product is never given. If it's available then name it, and if not then why discuss it at all? Too bad you couldn't get more to test. I too would be interested in the Eizo, although I've never seen one. I don't know where to see them in Houston.gorobei - Thursday, December 18, 2008 - link
they are probably referring to the hp lp2275. look it up on tft central. $360 at newegg right now.JarredWalton - Thursday, December 18, 2008 - link
Sorry... not sure how that slipped through the cracks, but the table on the table should have made is clear that I was discussing the BenQ FP241VW. Original MSRP was ~$900 I think, but I've seen it a few places for $600 now.OCedHrt - Thursday, December 18, 2008 - link
How does the Apple displays compare here (ie. what panel do they use)? I ask because my housemate is convinced that the demo photos look significantly more vibrant on Apple displays than on displays hooked up to a PC (he can't get the Apple display port display to hook up to a pc). Personally I feel it has to do with the different gamma settings that the photos are saved under as Apple displays are otherwise using the same sources for the panels.Rippar - Thursday, December 18, 2008 - link
Apple displays use Active Matrix LCD's, though I think there's more than that to separate them from other AMLCD's. They have great (read: jaw-droppingly awesome) color accuracy, but at the expense of bad input lag (on the order of 60-80 ms, I'd say).JarredWalton - Friday, December 19, 2008 - link
Ummm... everything is pretty much active matrix these days. Passive matrix LCDs are mostly used in cheap LCDs like digital watches. You can read about it on Wikipedia; I think there were some laptops with passive matrix tech about 8+ years ago, but I don't think any desktop LCDs were ever passive matrix.Rosaline - Thursday, December 18, 2008 - link
Regarding the Dell 3008WFP, you state that it has very high input lag, presumably because of the digital scaler. This seems like a real shame, since the digital scaler I felt was one of the main appeals of this monitor.Interestingly, it is currently actually slighter cheaper than the 3007WFP-HC for UK buyers.
Does this lag still apply when fed with a native resolution signal? Do you think that this lag is avoidable whilst still offering the advantages of the scaler?
JarredWalton - Thursday, December 18, 2008 - link
I never could get one for testing, so I'm speaking anecdotally. Most reviews I've seen show the lag as being roughly equal to the 2408WFP/2407WFP/2707WFP, which all have in the range of ~40ms lag. Since I never have found any other IPS 30" LCDs with that problem, I have to figure it's the scaler. And I agree, it's a shame. If you don't need to use the display as anything more than a computer LCD, just stick with the 3007WFP-HC or the LP3065 (or one of the other S-IPS with no scaler).superkdogg - Thursday, December 18, 2008 - link
I picked up the 22" Acer that you guys recommend a few weeks ago and couldn't be more pleased. Recognizing that you're not going to get the very top of the line for the lowest price, the monitor does everything I want from it, and the 16x10 resolution actually saves me more money because I don't have the itch to upgrade my graphics card constantly to take advantage of the the display.The drawbacks that I'd note on the Acer are that it does bleed light when sitting on an all-black screen like a blank desktop for example, and your comment about flimsy stand is dead on-if your desk isn't sturdy the stand may be flimsy enough to make you turn to a different monitor. If your desk is solid no problem at all, but if not it's an actual risk that your screen could tip over.
Mine also had a stuck blue pixel, but only one so whatever.
All-in-all, my desk is sturdy and I'm seldom sitting at my blank desktop where I can see the blue pixel and the light bleed so for practical purposes the monitor is awesome. I love it and consider it a great choice in the value segment.
Goty - Thursday, December 18, 2008 - link
It would be interesting to see what the matte finish on the 2401 does to the perceived color saturation vs the 2400. I bought an FHD2400 shortly after the release of the article here and couldn't be more pleased with it.