what are the basis of your tests. and how do you decide the better ones.

adityanag wrote:

Hey, I review bunches of monitors all the time, and I've generally found that Dell is quite good. NEC is very good, but getting it in India.. hmmm.. Also, specific model numbers will help me tell you more. I use a Viewsonic at home myself, one I got from the US. This is a VX2025wm, part of their X series. Samsung is good too. In fact, I tested ten 22-inchers a few months back, and Samsung just beat out Dell. Also, BenQ has just launched a 20 inch with full HD (1920x1080).. at 13.5K.. This is pretty interesting, but I haven't tested it yet. Should be testing it soon. Be glad to help you out with your questions. You can PM here, post on this thread, or just email me at askexpert @ pcworld.in

Hi aditya,

I have an Acer 17" lcd (AL 1706)..my problem is that it supports only 16.2 million colors and a lot of games show blockiness in color gradient which is a bit annoying. I want to know which of the lcds u reviewed are capable of displaying full original 16.7 million colors just like crts so that my next lcd upgrade won't lack anything in their display.

If you want great color fidelity, you have to avoid a TN panel, and go for either an S-IPS panel (very expensive, like the Dell 2408wfp, nearly 50,000), or an M-PVA panel. (expensive, difficult to find)

These terms refer to the type of LCD panel inside, and it's tough to tell what's what.

If you're a gamer though, TN panels are good because they have fast response times.

Essentially, I would say you ought to buy either a Dell or a Samsung 22 incher for your next upgrade. I've gamed quite a bit on both, and they are pretty good. Benq has a nice 24-incher as well, the v2400W.

If you can afford it, the Dell 2408WFP is a fantastic monitor.

Basis of tests, you ask.

First of all, the monitors are calibrated. I use a Color Spyder Elite for this, and set them to 6500K, gamma 2.2.

Well, first of all, I test the actual brightness of the monitors. You can see this mentioned in the specs in candela per met squared, such as 300 cd/m2. These figures are often inflated, but sometimes, (notably with samsung and dell), the tested results are very close. The tests are done with a Konica Minolta CS-200 Chromameter, and ANSI screens from DisplayMate Pro.

After this, I test the contrast ratio. I test full contrast ratio, i.e black to white, and checkerboard ratio (this is a much better measure). These tests are also done with the CS200.

I then test color quality. Is Red actually Red? I use the SMPTE Standard for Monitors for the color values (XY values). I measure the color values with the CS200, and compare them against the standard values.

Also, I test color temperatures. Most LCDs above 20 inch are good at this, but some are exceptionally good, and some are ok.

After these tests, I use GamutVision to test the color gamut of the monitor. Can they meet the sRGB (and in rare cases, the Adobe RGB) standards? Do they exceed it? By how much? The color plots are nice to look at too

Then, I run them through about 50 test screens from DisplayMate Pro and Everest. I also use Pixperan, watch a few test movie scenes from the DTS Sampler, occasionally use a Blu-ray disk, and play a few games to get the real world results.

These are the performance tests. I also test features, design and stuff like that. Final scores are based on weights assigned to performance, design, price and features, normalized out of 100. The weights change depending on target market. For example, a Pro monitor, like the ViewSonic VP2130b will have less emphasis on price, since it's assumed that you're only buying this if you're a graphics pro, and able to appreciate and afford it. A budget home monitor will have price as a very important component.

So that's it. I try to cover real-world, as well as quantifiable metrics. Any feedback would be welcome.

@adityanag

u seem to be an expert in monitors and its calibration... good

How would you rate samsung 743NX monitor

Tested that last month. Very nice, bright and crisp, but a little expensive. You can read the review in the mag this month, and it'll be on the website soon as well. This did very well in our shootout of seven 17 inchers.

Yes , a bit expensive. BTW do you expect the prices to come down any soon?

After going through i think i will go for the DELL 2208WFP model. Is it a good choice? Thanks for all the help adityanag.

Prices will come down, as they always do, but exactly when, I can't say. Possibly near Diwali.

The 2208wfp seems like a good monitor. I haven't tested this exact model, but I tested the previous one, and that was very good. So, with that qualification, I'd recommend it.

Nobody online seems to have tested it, so if I were you, I'd wait a week or so to see if some reputable site reviews this, and what it says, before purchase.

Finally got my Hands on the 19" Dell SE198WFP monitor this afternoon.

I must say that I'm mightily impressed with this one. The LCD is connected to the display card via a DVI cable [ one was included in the box and not charged extra as was previously posted ]

I'm running the LCD in the native mode 1440 * 900 @ 60hz { The monitor can do 75hz at this resolution. However I've opted to run it in the native mode}

The brightness and contrast were set to extra bright @ 75 by default out of the box. Had to turn them down to 45 for both to maintain a resonable workable display.

Had to turn cleartype on though. The text is not that legible. Also needed to increase the font settings in IE and Mozilla for easier readibility.

Have played a couple of DVD's and a few XViD movies. At 5ms there is no motion blur to speak of. I'm not a gamer so haven't tested this LCD with games.

I am happy at the performance of this monitor for the price I paid { Rs. 9,500/- + 4% VAT } and would recommend

There are no dead pixels on the screen. Tested the LCD with Displaymate Utilities 1.25, everything works like a charm, haven't seen any colour bleeds or out of sync lines. Everything works as it's supposed to..

Cheers,
Zer0

I find your repor of the text not being so clear a bit worrying! 90% of my computer life is spent reading text, possibly 5% writing it and 5% looking at or editing photos. Anything further in this?


What's the general thinking on Wide Screen or not. I remember reading that a 22" Wide screen has fewer square inches than a 22" 'ordinary'. Obviously wide is good for movies, but I don't watch many.

@Nick-H

I'm upgrading from a CRT @ 85 hz 1024 * 768 and a Laptop LCD 1280 * 800 widescreen @ 60hz.

My eyes have been used to smaller screens for while now. It might take a few days perhaps for them to adjust to this new LCD. The monitor placement and the tilt angle also make a lot of difference as I have found out.

It would be best for you if you can go down to a retail store which has a 22" LCD on display, check them out and then order online or via a wholesaler to save on the cost.

I use the widescreen primarily for Text Based work and spreadsheets. The Widescreen makes a big difference for the work I do and allows me to have more horizontal columns on screen.

The lighting also makes a difference as I've found out.

I'm happy with the Dell Purchase.

Cheers,
Zer0

@ adityanag
Glad to see u here......

Would like to have detailed opinion, review, comparision of new Benq monitors supporting full HD resolutions ( specifically, cheapest of them)

Thanks..... and i am waiting

when i review them, i'll let you know