Monitor Advice Please

[john5527]

I want a nice big monitor for the web and watching movies. I spend a lot of time online because I help manage a few different forums. But my biggest love is watching movies, usually bluray videos. I read many reviews and narrowed down my choice so far to this monitor,

(ViewSonic VP2770-LED 27-Inch SuperClear IPS LED-Lit Professional Monitor) which is 2560x1440 native resolution.

Okay, now my questions. I have read in a few places that you don't want this resolution for hd movies since they are 1080p. Is this true and will movies look just as good on this as they would on a 24 inch? I don't play games so that isn't an issue. I just want a nice monitor with good color and size for the web, adobe, and movies. Any advice to save me money or should I go with the one I have been looking at?

thanks for you help.

 

[Mike63]

If your primary interest is blu-rays, you need to get a 1080p monitor with a glossy screen and a VA panel. Assuming you can control your lighting so you don't have a problem with reflections, a glossy screen will give movies the clarity and "pop" that a matte screen could never provide. A VA panel will have much deeper blacks than the most expensive IPS screen and movies need a low black level for darker scenes. IPS panels also "glow" in the corners, which makes the greyish blacks even worse.

As of right now, the only large glossy screen monitor with a VA panel is the Dell S2440L.

A 27" IPS would be altogether the wrong choice for movies, since it will have to upconvert from 1080p and only have 1/3 the contrast of a VA panel. Given the emphasis on multimedia content now, I'm actually not sure why people keep leaning towards IPS, since the contrast ratio of these panels is stuck at 1000:1 and most of them only have 6-bit color. None of these newer IPS displays really produce the same image quality as older ones, but some people don't seem to have caught on to that fact.

 

[john5527]

Okay. thanks for the information. I did not know that.

 

[Church]

From my experience upscaled FHD to 1440p is perceived by me as somewhat same quality as on FHD with no upscale on same sized monitor. But one certainly can appreciate extra resolution on desktop and in games. So if OP asked for big monitor for web & movies .. how about 32" 1440p? Largest there currently is from "monitors" (TVs can be found bigger but they are limited to FHD or have 4K resolution that imho is too early to hop on). While 32" 1440 probably will cost higher then 27" of same resolution, it costs less then 30". And it's VA.

 

[Nikyo]

If your primary interest is blu-rays, you need to get a 1080p monitor with a glossy screen and a VA panel. Assuming you can control your lighting so you don't have a problem with reflections, a glossy screen will give movies the clarity and "pop" that a matte screen could never provide. A VA panel will have much deeper blacks than the most expensive IPS screen and movies need a low black level for darker scenes. IPS panels also "glow" in the corners, which makes the greyish blacks even worse.

As of right now, the only large glossy screen monitor with a VA panel is the Dell S2440L.

A 27" IPS would be altogether the wrong choice for movies, since it will have to upconvert from 1080p and only have 1/3 the contrast of a VA panel. Given the emphasis on multimedia content now, I'm actually not sure why people keep leaning towards IPS, since the contrast ratio of these panels is stuck at 1000:1 and most of them only have 6-bit color. None of these newer IPS displays really produce the same image quality as older ones, but some people don't seem to have caught on to that fact.

An 8-bit panel will offer no real world difference over a 6-bit + FRC panel for non color critical work. Not quite sure where you've gotten half of this information because it's all wrong.

Regardless, a 1440p monitor will play FHD movies with the same clarity as a 1080p monitor. Most 1440p displays use a semi-glossy(semi-matte) coating which is free from any grain and preserves image clarity without reflections. All 1440p displays are either 8-bit or 10-bit for that matter so his earlier argument (uneducated opinion) is all for naught.

If you're watching blurays then you most likely want to consider the BenQ BL2710PT or the AOC Q2770QPU as they offer 1080/24p playback, where the VP2770 does not. The VP2770 is also extremely overpriced and offers the same motion performance and color vibrancy as the earlier two I listed.

Another good option is the BenQ BL3200PT which uses an A-MVA panel and is free from IPS glow, has deeper blacks, but unfortunately suffers from black crush in the middle of the screen during extremely dark scenes, that of which causes loss in detail. The BenQ BL3200PT also has much higher input lag and inferior motion performance compared to the BenQ BL2710PT and the AOC Q2770QPU, which may or may not be a problem for you.

 

[john5527]

An 8-bit panel will offer no real world difference over a 6-bit + FRC panel for non color critical work. Not quite sure where you've gotten half of this information because it's all wrong.

Regardless, a 1440p monitor will play FHD movies with the same clarity as a 1080p monitor. Most 1440p displays use a semi-glossy(semi-matte) coating which is free from any grain and preserves image clarity without reflections. All 1440p displays are either 8-bit or 10-bit for that matter so his earlier argument (uneducated opinion) is all for naught.

If you're watching blurays then you most likely want to consider the BenQ BL2710PT or the AOC Q2770QPU as they offer 1080/24p playback, where the VP2770 does not. The VP2770 is also extremely overpriced and offers the same motion performance and color vibrancy as the earlier two I listed.

Another good option is the BenQ BL3200PT which uses an A-MVA panel and is free from IPS glow, has deeper blacks, but unfortunately suffers from black crush in the middle of the screen during extremely dark scenes, that of which causes loss in detail. The BenQ BL3200PT also has much higher input lag and inferior motion performance compared to the BenQ BL2710PT and the AOC Q2770QPU, which may or may not be a problem for you.

Thank you very much for the information. I appreciate it. Thanks for recommending a few monitors for me to look at. The BenQ BL2710PT sounds like what I looking for right now.

 

[john5527]

One other question. I have an older graphics card, a Nvidia 550ti. Will it be able to handle 2560x1440 resolution okay even for playing movies. I don't play games so that isn't something I'm concerned with, just the web and movies.

thanks

 

[rabidz7]

One other question. I have an older graphics card, a Nvidia 550ti. Will it be able to handle 2560x1440 resolution okay even for playing movies. I don't play games so that isn't something I'm concerned with, just the web and movies.

thanks

A 560 Ti will be absolutely fine. I regularly play 1080p movies on my PowerMac, and that has a 7800 GTX!

 

[Mike63]

An 8-bit panel will offer no real world difference over a 6-bit + FRC panel for non color critical work. Not quite sure where you've gotten half of this information because it's all wrong.

A gradient test will show banding on any 6-bit+FRC display - no matter how good the algorithm - and anyone with a good eye should be able to see a difference in real world content between 6-bit+FRC and true 8-bit color. I know I can, as I use both 6-bit and 8-bit monitors.

A 6-bit IPS actually offers little or no advantage over a quality TN panel except for uniformity, but that is offset for movies at least by IPS "glow." The OP did say his primary interest was watching movies, and you don't have to look far to find complaints about IPS "glow."

Regardless, a 1440p monitor will play FHD movies with the same clarity as a 1080p monitor.

There's always some loss of image quality with upconversion. A DVD, for example, will always look better on a SD tube TV than it will upconverted on a 1080p HDTV. Upconverting a Blu-Ray to 1440p will obviously produce less degradation in image quality, but you should still be able to see a difference at a normal viewing distance.

Most 1440p displays use a semi-glossy(semi-matte) coating which is free from any grain and preserves image clarity without reflections.

All else being equal, a glossy screen will always yield better image "clarity" than a screen with a semi-matte coating. It's impossible to diffuse a light source without some loss of clarity. (There's a reason Apple uses a glossy screen for its Thunderbolt display.) If the primary use for a display is watching movies, I don't really see the point of getting a screen with a matte or semi-matte coating unless you have absolutely no way of controlling your lighting. You will note that really high end HDTVs have glossy screens.

Also, screens with semi-matte coatings are difficult to clean without leaving scratches on the surface and the coating will degrade over time. A glass screen is more or less impossible to scratch and won't degrade over time.

All 1440p displays are either 8-bit or 10-bit for that matter so his earlier argument (uneducated opinion) is all for naught.

I never said 1440p displays were 6-bit.

The OP stated his primary interests were web browsing and watching Blu-Rays, and a 24" 1080p VA display would clearly be the best option for those two uses together. He wouldn't want a 1440p monitor because of the upconversion and also because 1440p is really too wide to fullscreen web content. That leaves a 1080p display, and he wouldn't want to go larger than 24" at 1080p unless he enjoys trying to read pixellated text. Since VA >IPS for watching movies - as evidenced by the popularity of HDTVs with VA panels - and since glossy>semi-matte for watching movies, we're left then with a 24" 1080p VA monitor with a glossy screen. AFAIK, the Dell S2440L is the only option right now unless maybe we're talking about Korean monitors.

 

[bcham]

theres also HP Envy 23. Dell S2415H HP23XI OR 27XI

 

[Nikyo]

A gradient test will show banding on any 6-bit+FRC display - no matter how good the algorithm - and anyone with a good eye should be able to see a difference in real world content between 6-bit+FRC and true 8-bit color. I know I can, as I use both 6-bit and 8-bit monitors.

A 6-bit IPS actually offers little or no advantage over a quality TN panel except for uniformity, but that is offset for movies at least by IPS "glow." The OP did say his primary interest was watching movies, and you don't have to look far to find complaints about IPS "glow."

No. No one is going to notice any difference between a 6-bit + FRC panel and an 8-bit panel for non-colour critical work. It will offer no real world visual difference to the regular user, and most certainly not you. By this logic, I suppose I should just recommend him something with a 10-bit LUT, because he's going to have grey-scale banding with anything less. The colour depth refers to the amount of colours able to be displayed. The colour gamut dictates the colours it can potentially cover and the colours that be seen with the human eye. Please refer to: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/speccontent.htm#colour depth

I'm sitting here with an EV2736W (8-bit) and a EV2336W(6-bit + FRC). The only actual difference I can spot between the two is that the EV2336W has a red tint after calibration, and the difference in the colour gamuts. You see the EV2736W covers 99.8% of the sRGB colour space after calibration, while the EV2336W covers around 96.5%. Colour reproduction is even further affected by how far the Delta E deviates from what's considered accurate. For comparison, your god-awful Dell S2440L only covers about 84.6% after calibration according to =DEAD='s review. Meaning your monitor covers much less of what the human eye can see than mine. 8-bit or not, my EV2336W is still going to look better. Please refer to: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/speccontent.htm#gamut and http://www.overclockers.ru/lab/50964_3/Za_steklom._Obzor_i_testirovanie_monitora_Dell_S2440L.html

There's always some loss of image quality with upconversion. A DVD, for example, will always look better on a SD tube TV than it will upconverted on a 1080p HDTV. Upconverting a Blu-Ray to 1440p will obviously produce less degradation in image quality, but you should still be able to see a difference at a normal viewing distance.

Nope, the interpolation on these monitors works well enough. You won't notice anything. In fact, I'm pretty sure you've never actually owned a 1440p monitor to comment on this.

All else being equal, a glossy screen will always yield better image "clarity" than a screen with a semi-matte coating. It's impossible to diffuse a light source without some loss of clarity. (There's a reason Apple uses a glossy screen for its Thunderbolt display.) If the primary use for a display is watching movies, I don't really see the point of getting a screen with a matte or semi-matte coating unless you have absolutely no way of controlling your lighting. You will note that really high end HDTVs have glossy screens.

HDTVs have larger pixels and are viewed from a distance, applying a real matte coating would make it unusable. Also, some TVs use semi-glossy coatings; what's your point?

The Apple thunderbolt display uses edge-to-edge glass, which makes blacks grey, and is extremely reflective (i.e, not good for movies).

Glossy would provide more clarity; however, a semi-glossy coating is more than clear enough for movie use, and the occasional reflection. Once again, I don't think you've ever owned a semi-glossy display.

Also, screens with semi-matte coatings are difficult to clean without leaving scratches on the surface and the coating will degrade over time. A glass screen is more or less impossible to scratch and won't degrade over time.

Um, what? No? This is the single dumbest thing I've ever seen posted on [H].

さすが、　マイクくん。 (TL note: さすが、　マイクくん means google microfibre cloth)

I never said 1440p displays were 6-bit.

The OP stated his primary interests were web browsing and watching Blu-Rays, and a 24" 1080p VA display would clearly be the best option for those two uses together. He wouldn't want a 1440p monitor because of the upconversion and also because 1440p is really too wide to fullscreen web content. That leaves a 1080p display, and he wouldn't want to go larger than 24" at 1080p unless he enjoys trying to read pixellated text. Since VA >IPS for watching movies - as evidenced by the popularity of HDTVs with VA panels - and since glossy>semi-matte for watching movies, we're left then with a 24" 1080p VA monitor with a glossy screen. AFAIK, the Dell S2440L is the only option right now unless maybe we're talking about Korean monitors.

Except none of what you typed is remotely correct by any stretch of the imagination. Too wide to fullscreen web-content, what? Pixelated text; except the 1440p monitor has higher ppi, it's the 1080p display which would be pixelated in comparison. And as I've already said, a 1440p will display 1080p blurays fine. You'd know this had you ever owned one.

But please, show me a user or review site that deems 1440p unusable for bluray content.

Your entire post is so misinformed it's laughable, where the hell do you get this information?

The S2440L isn't even a glossy display, it's edge-to-edge glass. It's basically a mirror. In fact, here's a review with some good pictures https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/dell-s2440l/ The Dell S2440L would be awful for movies because it's highly reflective. Dark scenes would be non-existent because you'd literally see yourself in them. You'd see yourself all the time, because it's literally a mirror.

And not to mention that some models of the Dell S2440L have been known to come with LED PWM dimming (Effects here) which would make movie watching worse as it can cause eye strain.

And since you know nothing about display technology, have clearly never owned any 1440p displays, and don't even know about the monitor you're recommending. I have to ask, why the hell even comment?

Actually, don't answer. I'd rather you didn't post ever again.

 

[Mike63]

No. No one is going to notice any difference between a 6-bit + FRC panel and an 8-bit panel for non-colour critical work. It will offer no real world visual difference to the regular user, and most certainly not you.

FRC means temporal dithering so that some pixels are flickering at 30 Hz. On 6-bit displays, I can definitely see pixels flickering on some static images and I actually find this effect worse than PWM.

By this logic, I suppose I should just recommend him something with a 10-bit LUT, because he's going to have grey-scale banding with anything less. The colour depth refers to the amount of colours able to be displayed. The colour gamut dictates the colours it can potentially cover and the colours that be seen with the human eye. Please refer to: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/speccontent.htm#colour depth

I never referred to color gamut.

For comparison, your god-awful Dell S2440L only covers about 84.6% after calibration according to =DEAD='s review. Meaning your monitor covers much less of what the human eye can see than mine. 8-bit or not, my EV2336W is still going to look better.

Tftcentral didn't think it was a "god-awful" display:

"We achieved a very high static contrast ratio of 3012:1 by default which was about what we'd expected from a modern AMVA panel. These panels aren't quite living up to their 5000:1 spec yet but this is still far more than any TN Film, IPS or PLS panel can offer."

"Colour accuracy had also been corrected nicely, with dE average of 0.6 and maximum of 1.3. LaCie would consider colour fidelity to be excellent now overall."

"Unlike most other panels in the market, this screen does not feature anti-glare (AG) coating. Instead it uses a glossy screen coating and as a result the colours look clean and crisp, the image quality is sharp and whites in particular look a lot more pure than they do on heavy AG coated screens like some of the IPS alternatives available."

The review really had nothing negative to report about the image quality of this monitor except that the screen is highly reflective.

Nope, the interpolation on these monitors works well enough. You won't notice anything.

as I've already said, a 1440p will display 1080p blurays fine. You'd know this had you ever owned one.

No, I don't own a 1440p display, but I've seen 1080p games played on a 1440p display and I can definitely see the effects of upscaling. Some people can't see a difference between 720p and 1080p. Even if you couldn't see upscaling on 1440p displays, buying an expensive1440p monitor to play Blu-Rays is a complete waste of money. Unless you have a real use for 1440p, a cheaper 1080p is a better choice for a computer monitor. If you want a relatively small screen to watch Blu-Rays, buy a 32" HDTV.

HDTVs have larger pixels and are viewed from a distance, applying a real matte coating would make it unusable. Also, some TVs use semi-glossy coatings; what's your point?

Uh, the point is that glossy screens produce better image clarity than matte or semi-glossy screens.

The Apple thunderbolt display uses edge-to-edge glass, which makes blacks grey, and is extremely reflective (i.e, not good for movies).

The blacks certainly don't look greyish on my S2440L and it also has edge-to-edge glass. Every IPS display will exhibit greyish blacks, "glow" in the corners, and have 1/3 the contrast ratio of a VA display. A deep black level is the most important factor for watching movies, and you're never going to get a decent black depth out of an IPS display. Samsung TVs are popular in the U.S. only because they have VA panels that produce better blacks than the panel technologies used by other manufacturers.

Glossy would provide more clarity; however, a semi-glossy coating is more than clear enough for movie use, and the occasional reflection. Once again, I don't think you've ever owned a semi-glossy display.

I've owned various semi-glossy, and glossy TVs and various matte, semi-glossy, and glossy monitors. Glossy definitely gives images more "pop." The trade-off is reflections, and people who can't tolerate reflections shouldn't buy a glossy display. If, on the other hand, what you're looking for is the best image "clarity" you can get, then a glossy display is the way to go.

Um, what? No? This is the single dumbest thing I've ever seen posted on [H].

さすが、　マイクくん。 (TL note: さすが、　マイクくん means google microfibre cloth)

A microfiber cloth is as bad as paper products for cleaning plastic surfaces. It picks up dirt as you wipe and becomes like sandpaper.

The more gloss a plastic surface has, the more likely it will develop scratches from cleaning. For example, the highly reflective semi-glossy panels used on a lot of Samsung TVs, are notoriously delicate. Of course some people view monitors and TVs as disposable items, so potential damage to a screen from cleaning isn't an issue. However, not everyone can afford to buy new TVs and monitors every product cycle.

Except none of what you typed is remotely correct by any stretch of the imagination. Too wide to fullscreen web-content, what?

If you surf the web in fullscreen mode, the text on some web pages will cover the entire width of the display, and that's not good for reading. Actually, some people don't even like 1920x1080p for web browsing and buy 1080p monitors that can be rotated into portrait mode. Just as there's no point in buying an expensive 1440p monitor to watch movies, there's also no point in buying one for web browsing.

Pixelated text; except the 1440p monitor has higher ppi, it's the 1080p display which would be pixelated in comparison.

I was clearly referring to 1080p displays, which are only 81 ppi at 27". (Either English isn't your first language or else you have trouble with reading comprehension.)

23" is 95 ppi, but 24" only drops to 91 ppi. 24" is obviously the largest you would want to go for a 1080p monitor, unless you simply don't care about text quality.

The S2440L isn't even a glossy display, it's edge-to-edge glass. It's basically a mirror. In fact, here's a review with some good pictures https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/dell-s2440l/ The Dell S2440L would be awful for movies because it's highly reflective. Dark scenes would be non-existent because you'd literally see yourself in them. You'd see yourself all the time, because it's literally a mirror.

That's only true if you watch movies in a brightly-lit room. Most web pages and productivity apps use dark text on a light background, so reflections aren't really an issue.

If glossy screens were bad for movies, manufacturers wouldn't be using them for really high end HDTVs.

not to mention that some models of the Dell S2440L have been known to come with LED PWM dimming which would make movie watching worse as it can cause eye strain.

I don't see any flickering on mine and I've set the brightness all way to zero.

Actually, don't answer. I'd rather you didn't post ever again.

Obviously you have no tolerance for people who post facts that contradict your opinions.

 

[Nikyo]

10/10 the dumbest post I've ever seen.

I really don't comprehend how you continue to argue something you're clueless about.

 

[Nikyo]

FRC means temporal dithering so that some pixels are flickering at 30 Hz. On 6-bit displays, I can definitely see pixels flickering on some static images and I actually find this effect worse than PWM.

This is actually the most hilarious part to me. You literally looked at the article I linked, googled frame-rate control, read the wikipedia page and then regurgitated it to me. What's funnier is that said "30-hz flicker" is only viewable on dark scenes, if viewable at all.

You must be a robot, because there's no one that can see this on a 6-bit + FRC display.

I suppose you're also able to spot the apparent overshoot which plagues the Dell S2440L during fast scenes.

Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto.

I never referred to color gamut.

You have no idea what color gamut is. It's also pretty clear you didn't read any of my links, and you also have no idea how color reproduction works.

Especially considering your post history: http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041134984&postcount=16

Can't have decent colors without 8-bit, uh k.

I also think you're upset that I said my EV2336W looks better than your Dell S2440L.

Tftcentral didn't think it was a "god-awful" display:

"We achieved a very high static contrast ratio of 3012:1 by default which was about what we'd expected from a modern AMVA panel. These panels aren't quite living up to their 5000:1 spec yet but this is still far more than any TN Film, IPS or PLS panel can offer."

"Colour accuracy had also been corrected nicely, with dE average of 0.6 and maximum of 1.3. LaCie would consider colour fidelity to be excellent now overall."

"Unlike most other panels in the market, this screen does not feature anti-glare (AG) coating. Instead it uses a glossy screen coating and as a result the colours look clean and crisp, the image quality is sharp and whites in particular look a lot more pure than they do on heavy AG coated screens like some of the IPS alternatives available."

The review really had nothing negative to report about the image quality of this monitor except that the screen is highly reflective.

Which is irrelevant because it objectively covers less of the sRGB colour space. It's also highly reflective and would be useless for movies, and colour critical work of sRGB content due to it's poor gamut coverage. Not too mention it would just be quite less vibrant than my EV2336W and most competing IPS panels in that range. Something like the Asus VN279Q could potentially produce color closer to the vibrancy of my EV2336W, but certainly not your Dell.

It would more than likely be useless for a handful of people on this forum. Most of the users opting for clarity pick PDC coatings at the cost of their blacks.

No, I don't own a 1440p display, but I've seen 1080p games played on a 1440p display and I can definitely see the effects of upscaling. Some people can't see a difference between 720p and 1080p. Even if you couldn't see upscaling on 1440p displays, buying an expensive1440p monitor to play Blu-Rays is a complete waste of money. Unless you have a real use for 1440p, a cheaper 1080p is a better choice for a computer monitor. If you want a relatively small screen to watch Blu-Rays, buy a 32" HDTV.

If you don't own a 1440p display your opinion is invalidated.

And where did you see this? I know you were browsing http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1712179 moments before posting this. Said thread has absolutely nothing to do with interpolation, however.

Also, by this logic, PS3 games must look absolutely awful on 1080p displays! I mean, the damn monitor has to interpolate that non-native 720p after all. /sarcasm

Also, it's the OP's money and he certainly wants 1440p display for movies + web browsing. You're moving off the original topic now to attempt to prove the point that 'you're right', when you are very wrong.

For what it's worth, my 'real use' of a 1440p display includes movies and web browsing. I guess OP and I are pretty similar guys.

And any 32" HDTV you buy is going to have PWM. If he's using it close to his face I really don't think he wants something with PWM.

Uh, the point is that glossy screens produce better image clarity than matte or semi-glossy screens.

And I said glossy screens are better for clarity; however, a semi-glossy screen is more than ok.

You also fail to address that they also use semi-glossy coatings on TVs.

And again, manufacturers are not going to pair a hard coating with large pixels. By contrast, this can be done on smaller displays because pixels are smaller.

Your point is kind of moot.

The blacks certainly don't look greyish on my S2440L and it also has edge-to-edge glass. Every IPS display will exhibit greyish blacks, "glow" in the corners, and have 1/3 the contrast ratio of a VA display. A deep black level is the most important factor for watching movies, and you're never going to get a decent black depth out of an IPS display. Samsung TVs are popular in the U.S. only because they have VA panels that produce better blacks than the panel technologies used by other manufacturers.

And VA panels are excellent at crushing blacks due to head-on gamma shift. IPS blacks are not grey, where are you getting this shit?

You'll notice I even recommended the BL3200PT originally citing deeper black levels, head-on gamma shift, lack of IPS glow, and slower pixel response time compared to an IPS or AHVA monitor.

You see, every monitor has it's downside.

I've owned various semi-glossy, and glossy TVs and various matte, semi-glossy, and glossy monitors. Glossy definitely gives images more "pop." The trade-off is reflections, and people who can't tolerate reflections shouldn't buy a glossy display. If, on the other hand, what you're looking for is the best image "clarity" you can get, then a glossy display is the way to go.

Please list all of the semi-glossy displays you've owned. And could you compare them to the coating on the BL2710PT or Eizo EV2736W while you're at it?

For example, my EV2736W is much more glossy than my EV2336W, but both are considered semi-glossy.

I also wasn't aware this was ever a debate about which coating is the way to go. I believe in your anger you've rushed to prove points that are not there. OP linked the VP2770, a semi-glossy monitor. I linked him comparable semi-glossy monitors with better features for his needs. But, again semi-glossy screens are plenty clear and meets his needs.

A microfiber cloth is as bad as paper products for cleaning plastic surfaces. It picks up dirt as you wipe and becomes like sandpaper.

The more gloss a plastic surface has, the more likely it will develop scratches from cleaning. For example, the highly reflective semi-glossy panels used on a lot of Samsung TVs, are notoriously delicate. Of course some people view monitors and TVs as disposable items, so potential damage to a screen from cleaning isn't an issue. However, not everyone can afford to buy new TVs and monitors every product cycle.

Source? Also, just use a new microfiber cloth; problem solved.

If you surf the web in fullscreen mode, the text on some web pages will cover the entire width of the display, and that's not good for reading. Actually, some people don't even like 1920x1080p for web browsing and buy 1080p monitors that can be rotated into portrait mode. Just as there's no point in buying an expensive 1440p monitor to watch movies, there's also no point in buying one for web browsing.

Uh, no. Please cite a user who finds 1440p "too wide".

Also, you don't own a 1440p display. How you can come to this conclusion I'll never know.

I was clearly referring to 1080p displays, which are only 81 ppi at 27". (Either English isn't your first language or else you have trouble with reading comprehension.)

23" is 95 ppi, but 24" only drops to 91 ppi. 24" is obviously the largest you would want to go for a 1080p monitor, unless you simply don't care about text quality.

And clearly you're incapable of reading my next sentence in which I tackle that blurays will look just fine.

The 1440p experience would be much more pleasurable for web browsing due to it's higher pixel density.

That's only true if you watch movies in a brightly-lit room. Most web pages and productivity apps use dark text on a light background, so reflections aren't really an issue.

If glossy screens were bad for movies, manufacturers wouldn't be using them for really high end HDTVs.

NCX doesn't seem to think so!

Yes, TVs are glossy, not edge-to-edge glass. The former is less reflective.

If you were able to read you'd see that I'm referring to edge-to-edge glass, not glossy.

An edge-to-edge glass display will appear reflective in any lighting situation, unless you're playing in the dark.

I've already told you why TVs would not be paired with a matte coating.

I don't see any flickering on mine and I've set the brightness all way to zero.

I said some models. Sick reading comprehension.

Dell is known for multiple monitor revisions. Older versions of the U2312HM used PWM, newer versions reportedly don't.

I imagine it's the same for the S2440L, but I don't know specifically what version uses PWM. It's literally a toss-up as to what you could receive.

Obviously you have no tolerance for people who post facts that contradict your opinions.

Facts with no sources. Okay.

I really don't know what you're attempting to prove at this point. You're wrong, it's very clear. It's clear you've read through a few pages to form an undereducated opinion on monitor technology you don't understand in which you've then attempted to throw in my face. However, when you don't understand something, and you regurgitate information you don't understand, you dig a hole for yourself in which you can't get out of. You've presented no sources for your claim, have fabricated a bombastic monitor history, and attempted to present this all as fact. Instead of helping the OP, you've thrown out misinformation, personally attacked me, and are being just plain argumentative for reasons unknown.

You're really grasping at straws here.

I really feel as though you should be banned for misinformation.

 

[john5527]

Nikyo, thanks for the information. You sound like you have some experience with monitors. Yes, I am not concerned with money, just a good 1440p monitor for my general use.

I went with the BenQ BL2710PT 27-Inch monitor. Can I use a dvi cable for 2560x1440 resolution with my GeForce 550ti? Also, what is a dual link dvi cable? Is an HDMI cable for television only viewing?

thanks

 

[Nikyo]

Nikyo, thanks for the information. You sound like you have some experience with monitors. Yes, I am not concerned with money, just a good 1440p monitor for my general use.

I went with the BenQ BL2710PT 27-Inch monitor. Can I use a dvi cable for 2560x1440 resolution with my GeForce 550ti? Also, what is a dual link dvi cable? Is an HDMI cable for television only viewing?

thanks

A dual link dvi cable basically just has a higher bandwidth to drive 1440p. Your 550 ti should support this so no worries, just use the the cable included with the monitor or buy one off amazon/monoprice.

Displayport could also be used to drive 1440p, but I don't believe displayport was included on most 550tis, and in my experience displayport colors on NVIDIA gpus are awful.

HDMI should only be used for TVs, consoles, bluray players and the like.

 

[the_real_7]

I have most my collection of movies in mkv format on a 12tb drive system. For watching movies in 1080p its hard to beat a glossy amva monitor like the Dell S2440L . 1440p doesn't look as clean and sharp for hd movies. Heres some samples of My Dell S2440L. Ive tried most of the korean panels and the blacks or just grey as can be, terrible for movies great for bright games

 

[Nikyo]

I have most my collection of movies in mkv format on a 12tb drive system. For watching movies in 1080p its hard to beat a glossy amva monitor like the Dell S2440L . 1440p doesn't look as clean and sharp for hd movies. Heres some samples of My Dell S2440L. Ive tried most of the korean panels and the blacks or just grey as can be, terrible for movies great for bright games

Then you're using an awful video renderer. Try madvr in conjunction with MPC-HC.

 

[Anti-Hero]

Displayport could also be used to drive 1440p, but I don't believe displayport was included on most 550tis, and in my experience displayport colors on NVIDIA gpus are awful.

Could you expand on this please? I am using DP between my Eizo EV2736W and GTX980 and curious if I'm somehow degraded the IQ compared to Dual-link DVI. I've not noticed any difference.

 

[Nikyo]

Could you expand on this please? I am using DP between my Eizo EV2736W and GTX980 and curious if I'm somehow degraded the IQ compared to Dual-link DVI. I've not noticed any difference.

DP colors look washed out for me, not sure why. I used my EV2736W with DP and was even getting a contrast result of below 800. Switching to DVI made everything look vibrant, and my contrast ratio was well over 900.

I then tried DP with my EV2336W and received a contrast ratio of 314:1. I said no thanks, and am now using an HDMI to DVI cable for it. Over HDMI it's around 1100:1

Oops, forgot to mention, I'm using a 750ti.

 

[NCX]

Nvidia GPU's think 1080p monitors are TV's when connected via HDMI and Displayport and send the wrong signal. Changing the refresh rate slightly (59.999) and overclocking the monitor make the gpu think the monitor is a monitor instead of a TV. This patch can also be downloaded to correct the HDMI colours.

----------

The S2440L's blacks look grey when the lights are on or coming in from outside, and the deep blacks can not make up for the awful colours and overshoot ghosting.

 

[Anti-Hero]

Interesting, maybe I'll just swap back to DVI so I don't have to worry about it. I'm just using a single display so it really doesn't matter to me whether I'm using DVI or DP.

 

[VulcaN]

DP is technically superior to DVI. If DP makes your colors look different (it shouldn't, in theory it has support for more colors if your monitor supports it) perhaps it thinks your monitor is a TV and limiting your color range.

Personally I'm never going back to DVI, the DP cables are nicer all around and easily carry the high bandwidth streams I require. Once more monitors / cards support daisy chaining it will be a treat.

 

[Mike63]

The S2440L's blacks look grey when the lights are on or coming in from outside, and the deep blacks can not make up for the awful colours and overshoot ghosting.

I don't see greyish blacks on my unit, but then I don't use this display in a brightly-lit room. I don't think the color looks "awful" either. The color gamut of this model is rated at 89%, while the color gamut of the smaller S2340L/M 6-bit IPS in the same model line is listed at 82%. The glossy screen gives colors a lot of "pop." This is one reason why I think - rightly or wrongly - that color on this display looks better than the color on 6-bit IPS displays, which tend not to have glossy screens. (The S2340L/M does have a glossy screen, but the one I tried had an ugly, uncorrectable yellow tint.) Admittedly, the S2440L isn't the best monitor out there for text or gaming or color critical work, but movies do look very good on it. Given its lack of a DVI port, it would seem it was designed for people who use their computer monitor as a TV.

 

[Nikyo]

I don't see greyish blacks on my unit, but then I don't use this display in a brightly-lit room. I don't think the color looks "awful" either. The color gamut of this model is rated at 89%, while the color gamut of the smaller S2340L/M 6-bit IPS in the same model line is listed at 82%. The glossy screen gives colors a lot of "pop." This is one reason why I think - rightly or wrongly - that color on this display looks better than the color on 6-bit IPS displays, which tend not to have glossy screens. (The S2340L/M does have a glossy screen, but the one I tried had an ugly, uncorrectable yellow tint.) Admittedly, the S2440L isn't the best monitor out there for text or gaming or color critical work, but movies do look very good on it. Given its lack of a DVI port, it would seem it was designed for people who use their computer monitor as a TV.

So you admittedly have no idea as to what you're talking about. If only you'd realized this earlier we could avoid unnecessary bickering.

=DEAD='s review of the S2440L mentions 76.1% sRGB gamut coverage, and 84.6% after calibration (I already linked the review). By contrast the other terrible monitor you mentioned; the Dell S2340L has 88.2% of the sRGB gamut covered, and 90.2% after calibration. You should also note that the 82% gamut coverage mentioned by Dell refers to the NTSC coverage at a different point than what's generally used.

In short, thank you for wasting everyone's time, but most prominently mine.