HP L2335: Low Response Time and High Resolution LCD
by Kristopher Kubicki on July 8, 2005 7:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Displays
Subjective Analysis
For this portion of the benchmark, we will pit the HP L2335 display against monitors that we have looked at recently in the same size category. This is a subjective test that relies on our overall experience with the monitor after several hours of casual and thorough use. We also use test patterns and guidelines from the VESA FPDM 2.0 to rate each unit as fairly as possible.Here is generally how we rate a category:
5 - Outstanding; we have not seen anything to date that could rival our impression of this monitor's performance.
4 - Good, but room for improvement. There are units on the market that perform better.
3 - Average; this monitor performs well enough to maintain the status quo, but does not excel.
2 - Improvement needed; this monitor performs poorly in performance of this category.
1 - Unacceptable; this product does not pass even basic performance requirements.
| DisplayMate / CheckScreen / VESA FPDM 2.0 | |||||
| HP L2335 | Dell 2001FP | Dell 2005FPW | Apple Cinema 20" | Samsung 213T | |
| Intensity Range Check | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4.5 | 5 |
| Black Level Adjustment | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 5 |
| Wide Angle Viewing | 4.5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Defocusing, Blooming, Halos | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Screen Uniformity and Color Purity | 5 | 4.5 | 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Dark Screen Glare Test | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Primary Colors | 4.5 | 4 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Color Scales | 4.5 | 4 | 4 | 4.5 | 3.5 |
| 16 Color Intensity Levels | 4 | 4.5 | 4 | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Screen Regulation | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Streaking, Ghosting* | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Motion Blur, Black + White | 4 | 3.5 | 4 | 4 | - |
| Motion Blur, Gaming | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | - |
*Note: the streaking/ghosting mentioned in this portion of the analysis refers to streaking and ghosting as interference, not as a byproduct of poor response time.
Notes from the Lab
Even though the HP L2335 scored very well in this analysis, there is some room for improvement. The market has progressed so much since the unveiling of the Samsung 213T that outstanding intensity range in early 2004 is just accepted as the standard today in 2005. We just looked at the Dell 2005FPW and the Apple Cinema display, so those benchmarks are the most relevant of the bunch in our analysis. Even thought the differences are getting more subtle from display to display, there are a few obvious points that we can make. When we had the Samsung 213T in our lab, we did not include motion blur testing at the time, which is why those marks are left out from the table. Comparing the two displays for gaming is an easy task, however. The Samsung 213T uses a considerably slower PVA panel compared to the other four displays featured in the table, all of which use 16ms LG.Philips LCD panels.Our biggest compliment to the L2335 was the screen uniformity. Often, larger LCD displays (20" and higher) start to have more trouble keeping the backlighting consistent. This was not a problem for the L2335 even when the screen was completely black. Although color replication was very good, there is also some room for improvement here too. Our intensity levels were a little weak at times, although this was generally in the mid tones and not in the extremes as our measured contrast ratio tests on the previous pages have shown. Had this display gone on the market in 2003, we probably wouldn't have even mentioned anything, but as LCDs mature, so must our criticism.
Gaming on the L2335 was spectacular, but once we were past the 1920x1200 resolution, we started to analyze the tell tale problems of all LCD panels. Motion blur is evident in our tests, and there really is no advantage compared to a display like the Dell 2005FPW. We suspect that the response time is probably better than that of the Dell 2405FPW, since SIPS panels (like the one used in the HP L2335) generally outperform PVA panels here.
We should note that running large resolutions on this display in analog mode is extremely painful. At 1920x1200, it didn't take much interference for us to generate artifacts all along the edges of the signal, even when using one of our own high quality cables.
Another Special Note about Gaming
We took some flak during our last review when we mentioned that support for 1680x1050 on games was not as prevalent as it could be. We might have overstated a bit as most new games since 2004 generally have support for 16:10 resolutions including 1680x1050. A colleague of mine, Skip Clarke writes:While there have been notable exceptions in recent releases (including WC3, Pirates!, Rollercoaster Tycoon 3, and SW: KOTOR2), most new games support widescreen resolutions either natively or through easy hacks/tweaks. Recent major releases with native widescreen include: COH, WOW, EQ2, Guild Wars, HL2, GTA3:VC, Doom3, Sims2 (though a hack is needed for any res above 1600x1200), Warhammer 40k:DOW, UTk4. Recent releases that are hackable include America's Army, Battle for Middle Earth, COD, MOH, XIII, Painkiller, Rise of Nations, Elder Scrolls 3, Splinter Cell, C&C: Generals, and StarWars: Republic Commando.Skip has me outclassed here, so feel free to check out his website at http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/ for more details and patches!
In addition, some "old school" favorites such as the original Command & Conquer series (including RA, RA2, and Tiberian Sun), RTA2, Homeworld, Mehcwarrior 4, Doom I & II, Quake 2, Dungeon Keeper 2, and Max Payne support widescreen either natively or by hack. And, we host patches (created by forum members) to hack Sim City 4, SW:KOTOR, DAOC (pre-Catacombs, as Catacombs added widescreen), Myst: Uru, Tiger Woods PGS Tour 2004, and Prince of Persia: Sands of Time.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
49 Comments
View All Comments
Gatak - Sunday, July 10, 2005 - link
#32You are still wrong. A TFT need 12-14bits resolution per colour channel to be able to resolve the same levels as a CRT monitor.
The reason is simply because a TFT is linear in its response whereas a CRT is not (Gamma). The TFT must compensate for the gamma curve, which requires up to 14bits resolution (or more if you use higher gamma than 2.2).
So, these 14 bit LCDs/TFTs are the only ones getting _CLOSE_ to CRT native colour resolution. A CRT is inherently analogue too, which means it can utilize the 10bit resolution per channel that many modern graphics cards can produce (Matrox, ATi). Remember this is 10bit is with the gamma compensation already applied. For a TFT to reach the same resolution they would need much more than 14bits!
Therms - Saturday, July 9, 2005 - link
Just wanted to add that one of the biggest games of the summer, Battlefield 2, does not properly support widescreen.The best it can do is basically a zoomed 4:3 image which results in a display with the top and bottom parts of the picture chopped off. This means that widescreen users actually see less than standard 4:3 screen users.
semo - Saturday, July 9, 2005 - link
is there a big problem right now with all those different aspect ratios out there?i hear that 16:9, 16:10 and 15:9 are pretty much the same/compatible. why all the standards in the first place anyway?
DragonReborn - Saturday, July 9, 2005 - link
Hmm...interesting. I was definitely ready to buy the 2405...no way to really compare the two, huh? I game, but nothing crazy, and just want a nice big screen. Probably save the $300 and get a nvidia 7800 instead of the 6800... =)Gioron - Saturday, July 9, 2005 - link
"Also keep in mind that a 21" Trinitron has about the same viewable area of a 19" or 20" LCD."Mostly true, but you need to specify whether its widescreen or not, since you lose a bit of area on a widescreen display.
Screen area on a standard 4:3 display with a 20" viewable diagonal is 192 in^2.
Screen area on a widescreen 16:10 display with a 20" viewable diagonal is only 180 in^2. (If I haven't managed to screw up the math...)
If I were being pessimistic on your statement, a 19" widescreen would have a bit over 160 in^2, while a CRT with a 20" viewable diagonal would have 192 in^2. I wouldn't consider that "about the same".
The other thing that some people need to consider is whether you'll be displaying a lot of 4:3 content, in which case you throw away annother 20% of your viewable area to black bars along the side (unless you fill it out and distort the image). Admittedly, this isn't a huge factor for computer use, since most gaming and desktop resolutions can be adjusted to be correct, but its something to consider if you know you're going to be doing a lot of picture viewing or have video sources that are fixed at 4:3.
Pastuch - Saturday, July 9, 2005 - link
29 - Posted on Jul 8, 2005 at 5:59 PM by sviBut most engines stretch or clip a 4:3 picture to produce widescreen output. Source is an exception, and a big one, but you can't make a generalization like that based on a single case where widescreens are better.
Rebuttal:
I wont be buying BF2 until they add Widescreen support. EA WAKE UP! All of the following games have official support for widescreen: Halflife 2, CS Source, World of Warcraft, Everquest 2, Far Cry, Doom 3, GTA: San Andreas PC, and I've heard Dungeon Seige 2 will be fully compatable as well.
KristopherKubicki - Friday, July 8, 2005 - link
SilthDraeth: Icecrown Alliance. Biggest waste of money and time grumble grumble... ... er... Yeah I mean it's a fun game!kmmatney: Supposedly. Somehow I got suckered into an NEC NDA over a *year* ago which I may even still be bound to. NEC had some neat stuff to show me concerning LED backlit LCDs and medical-grade LCD monitors, but unfortunately NEC also has an elitist mentality that has completely barred them from competing on a retail level with anyone. 10-bit panels are not new, I actually saw my first one at *Comdex 2002*. Fortunately I just made a friend at Eizo and I will definitely be asking them for this display.
Thanks!
Kristopher
kmmatney - Friday, July 8, 2005 - link
There are LCD panels out now that surpass CRTs in image quality and color reproduction. See the links:http://www.warehouseexpress.com/news/digpop/698.ht...
NOte the spec: 16.77 million from a palette of 1.06 billion
Also see:
http://www.nec-lcd.com/english/whatsnew/press05030...
These are the real enthusiast monitors for graphic artists.
MrEMan - Friday, July 8, 2005 - link
Does anyone know if either HP or Dell has anything involvement at all with the design of their respective monitors?If they don't then I believe the credit should go to the monitor manufacturers and not the companies whose only involvement is to slap their name on the case.
SilthDraeth - Friday, July 8, 2005 - link
Kris what server on WOW do you play on? I play Deathwing, a pvp server, Alliance side.