If you don’t have an LCD display for your PC by now, it’s time to get one.
It may seem odd saying that, but I still run across users who cling to their antiquated CRTs. For some specific corner cases, the higher end CRTs still offer slightly better image quality and black levels than average LCDs, but the differences are now small enough to not matter.
What does matter is the crossover between price and performance. You can still spend over $1,000 for a good 26-inch LCD, like NEC’s superb LCD2690WUXi2. If you need extremely good black levels, wide gamut color and a micro-levels of adjustability, then a professional grade monitor like the LCD2690WUXi2 may be a good fit.
But you really don’t need to spend $1,100 or more for a relatively decent, relatively large display. In fact, you can spend under $200.
I recently picked up an Asus VH236 from Amazon for a whopping $188. This is one of the new generation of 23-inch, 1080p displays, with a native resolution of 1920×1080. It won’t win any awards for display quality or feature sets; it is a TN panel, after all. But what Asus, Acer and other companies can deliver in the $190 – $249 price point is pretty impressive. Black levels look decent, but I haven’t really tested it.This particular display has DVI, VGA and HDMI inputs. It even has speakers, though I’d personally never use them. Neither does it have a webcam. What do you want for your $188?
The ASus VH236: $188 delivered
It won’t win any ergonomic awards, either. The on-screen controls are fairly easy to navigate, and more complete than many cheap monitors. But the stand tilts only; no swivel and, in particular, no height adjustment. You can’t rotate the display, either, unless you shell dollars for a more ergonomic stand. So no portrait displays for you. Still, it’s $188.
Here’s where we run into issues with very low cost displays. I had a problem with the first unit I ordered – it had a bright green, stuck pixel, about 1/4 of the way from the bottom, centered left-to-right. It was only noticeable in very dark scenes, but was very, very bright. Hey, for my $188, I at least want a working product. So for my $188, I had to deal with the aggravation of a return and replacement. The good news is that Amazon.com pays for return shipping for defective products.
Still, defects can occur with any electronic gear, so I shipped it back to Amazon and await its replacement.
But the point here is not that one monitor I bought had a minor, if show-stopping defect. What’s interesting is that you can buy a 23-inch display for $188. If you want something with more brand name cachet, Amazon also sells an HP 23-inch, 1080p LCD for $225, and there’s a Samsung for $249.
I’m not trying to be a shill for Amazon here – other resellers are selling similar displays at seriously low prices. Newegg is offering Acer and AOC units for $170, and a more robustly equipped LG W2343T for $220.
The other interesting bit about these units is the aspect ratio: it’s 16:9, not 16:10 – the same as 1080p HDTVs. And since many of these displays offer HDMI inputs, they can be used as small HDTV monitors – very nice if you’ve got an Xbox 360 or PS3 game console. This is a departure from past wide screen PC displays; 1440×900, 1680×1050 and 1920×1200 are all 16:10 aspect ratios.
Over time, these 23-panels will drive the lesser 22-inch panels and even quite few 19 and 20-inchers out of the market. At some point, $169 23-inch will drop to the $120 mark, which really compresses the price range for low end PC displays.
Why do these particular panels cost so little?
Geometry.
Pages: 1 2
Loading tweets...
5 comments
1 ping
Mark says:
August 13, 2009 at 1:16 pm (UTC -7 )
I’m one of those people you’re talking about….
I still use a CRT, and have yet to buy an LCD for any computer. Why?
Well, in my case the main barrier to entry is simple laziness. I’ve got two old CRT’s which still work, although one is limping a bit, so I don’t have a compelling need to change.
Assuming for the moment that something does change, however, I still might not buy into an LCD, for the following reasons:
1) I know I can get a cheap/serviceable LCD, but that’s not what I want or need. What I want/need is a display that gives me very clear text, because I spend a lot of time writing on my computer. I know from long experience that a CRT will give me what I want, and I’ve also seen plenty of instances where the native resolution of a given LCD constricts my choices — or actually makes text hard to read.
2) The ubiquity of LCD’s means that CRT’s are looked at as dinosaurs. Such that you can find these dinosaurs on Craigslist for a song — and here I’m talking about very, very good CRT monitors, which may have cost $500 or more when purchased new. Provided they have no issues, these monitors are a steal on their own, but when compared to the cost of similar-performing LCD’s it’s no contest.
Having said all that, I’d love nothing more than to buy one or two of those awesome displays you own (NEC LCD3090WQXi), but I can’t justify the cost. Obviously I’ll be having to take the leap at some point, but the price/peformance graph still favors old CRT’s for me.
Loyd Case says:
August 13, 2009 at 1:50 pm (UTC -7 )
LCDs, on average, have much sharper text than LCDs, assuming you run them at native resolution. This is made even better if you use Windows, and turn on ClearType. Oh, and connect via DVI, HDMI or some digital connection, not via analog VGA.
BTW, there is a middle ground. You can pick up a very good 1920×1200 24-inch display that’s better than most TN panels. Look for an S-PVA or H-IPS panel. They’ll cost between $400 and $700. For example, an HP 24-inch H-IPS display is $535 at Newegg.
Mark says:
August 13, 2009 at 6:44 pm (UTC -7 )
Loyd,
Thanks for the reply, and in particular for clearing up my misconception about the legibility of text on LCD’s. I know we live in the age of video supremacy (if not ADD inanity), but there’s still little that’s more important than the ability of a display to present clear text. As soon as I have the dough, I’ll be making the move.
Markeyse says:
August 15, 2009 at 11:14 pm (UTC -7 )
Yea just like people are still saying that old LPs sound better. The last thing I like to hear is scratching and pops from the music, as well as the limited frequency response from them. Same with LCD’s. I got a cheap 22″ Hannspree right now, and couldn’t be happier. I am looking to upgrade it because of better LCD’s for a cheaper price, but the fact of the matter is especially when people is saying that their old tech is better, once the new tech matures, it is usually better. I think that lot’s of people are afraid to not just approach technology, but to approach change in general. I don’t always like it myself, but at least with tech, bring on the new stuff!
Jobney says:
August 17, 2009 at 10:49 pm (UTC -7 )
I like my 16:10 1920×1200 24″ Dell LCD. It’s also nice to be able to run games in 1600×1200 if I need to with no filtering. Since most movies are wider then 16:9 I’m not seeing the user side benefit besides cost from this ratio (16:9) not counting the console gamers. It looks as if this choice of 16:9 mostly benefits the manufactures. I hope they don’t discontinue the 16:10 PVA monitors. I hate the color shift on the TNs. I’ll give up a few NS of speed for a better picture.
1080P LCD Monitors: the New Mainstream « All Topics « Improbable … | appreviewers.co.cc says:
August 13, 2009 at 5:42 pm (UTC -7 )
[...] the rest here: 1080P LCD Monitors: the New Mainstream « All Topics « Improbable … 1 Monitors all-topics aspect-ratio bright-future digital-media facebook gaming general-tech lcd [...]