New led 24 inch monitor.

[FLEX1978 373]

Yeah but it depends on the type and make. Last year I had a sony 42" LCD and swapped it for a LG 42" LCD, the difference was huge, plus the LG screen had all these settings including one that gave it a realistic smoothing blur effect, wish I still had that LG TV but gave it to a friend in London.

 

You can't really judge screens until you test them yourself, the visual quality varies by a huge amount and it's not just as simple one is more expensive or newer then the other.

[jdk2 1]

Yes but there's always a difference between PC LED monitors and TV LED screens, or am I wrong? Doesn't the cockpit and everything look a little blurred because of the large pixel size?

 

 

 

LOL if I had a wife I really wouldn't care, it's my life, if I want to put a TV in my room then I do it! :LMAO:

Wait 'til you get one. Things have a way of changing... :Just Kidding:

[shamrockflyer 647]

 

That isn't the Razer Black Widow is it?

 

I was thinking of getting an LED screen... As my screen is 4 years old, LCD 22". Its still new but I just prefer better quality and no pix-elation

[EGLL77W 1,508]

I not long got my Asus laptop, looking to get an LED Monitor soon too as 15'' isn't always the best ha!

[con875 0]

I use a full HD 32inch LED TV. Unable to go any smaller now.

[ACA034137 37]

Oh and Chris you're lucky to live in Canada as Dutchman.

 

You're right, I could be living in Canada as a Frenchman!

[Tabs 2,790]

LED and LCD are still both LCDs in terms of how the display itself actually works. The term "LED" in monitors is really referring to the backlight technology, not to the screen itself. There are two other actual flat-panel display technologies - plasma, which still somewhat common in TVs and active-matrix organic light emitting diode (AMOLED), which you've seen if you have a Samsung Galaxy series smartphone and a few others like the latest generation Motorola RAZR) Those actually create and display the image in a totally different way than an LCD does, but LED in TV's is just talking about what generates the backlight behind the LCD.

 

Far more important is what LCD technology (the three major ones are twisted nematic (TN), vertical alignment (VA), and in-plane switching (IPS)) the screen actually uses. TN is fast in response but has pretty bad color reproduction and viewing angles - most "gaming" monitors and virtually any cheap monitor are TN panels. VA is a bit slower than TN but has much better color and viewing angles - my monitor uses this tech. IPS is generally regarded as the best type of LCD currently available - it's what's used on the high end monitors like the Apple Cinema displays or Dell's large UltraSharp monitors. It is a tad slower than the other two varieties and much more expensive unless you get one of the modified variants like eIPS, which uses a lower bitrate panel but still the IPS tech in the display.

[Daniel choen 23]

wow, thanks for the info Ryan, always good you're here.

[vc10man 732]

Ryan, by far the very best info I've ever read in these Forums. I'd already earmarked an IPS 24-in as my next buy for the very reasons you have detailed. Torn between an LG model or an Iiyama, as both have which received 5***** in various technical publications over here.

[Rocky_53 1,597]

Yes but there's always a difference between PC LED monitors and TV LED screens, or am I wrong? Doesn't the cockpit and everything look a little blurred because of the large pixel size?

 

You're right Arjen, it's no use getting a larger screen with the same pixel resolution unless you're going to view it from further away. If it's at the same distance, with the same pxels ie 1920x1200 then all you're doing is increasing the size of the pixels! the way forward is to increase the amount of pixels, such as the Dell Ultrasharp 27" and 30" models, which are just out of this world and run at 2560x1600. That way you get a larger screen but also retain the same effective pixel count as you would at the same distance running a 24" screen.