A Closer Look at the BenQ FP241VW
Okay, we've talked about LCD panel technologies, and based on some of the discussion you should have a fair idea of what the FP241VW brings to the table. Even though the display is discontinued, you might be able to find one on sale somewhere, and there's a reasonable chance we'll see the same A-MVA panel in displays from other manufacturers. If you happen to know of some A-MVA 24" LCDs that use the AU Optronics panel (any 24" A-MVA display should meet that criterion), please leave a note in the comments section.
| BenQ FP241VW Specifications | |
| Video Inputs | DVI with HDCP support HDMI Analog (VGA) Component S-Video Composite |
| Panel Type | A-MVA (AU Optronics) |
| Pixel Pitch | 0.269mm |
| Colors | 16.7 million (8-bit color) |
| Brightness | 500 cd/m2 advertised |
| Contrast Ratio | 1000:1 advertised |
| Response Time | 6ms GTG |
| Viewable Size | 24" diagonal |
| Resolution | 1920x1200 (WUXGA) |
| Viewing Angle | 178 horizontal/vertical |
| Power Consumption | <95W max stated |
| Power Savings | <2W |
| Screen Treatment | Matte (non-glossy) |
| Height-Adjustable | No |
| Tilt | Yes - 20 degrees back/5 degrees forward |
| Pivot | No |
| Swivel | No |
| VESA Wall Mounting | Yes - but you can't (easily) remove the frame/stand |
| Dimensions w/ Base (WxHxD) | 27.6" x 18.6" x 5.3" (WxHxD) |
| Weight w/ Stand | 22 lbs. |
| Additional Features | 2 x USB Ports |
| Audio | Headphone/Line out (no built in speakers) |
| Limited Warranty | 3-year limited warranty, M-F 8:30AM-5:30PM PST |
| Accessories | HDMI, DVI, USB, VGA, and power cables |
| Price | Online starting at ~$450 - (Original MSRP ~$850) |
Like the upper-end 24" S-PVA displays, as well as some of the better 24" TN panels, the FP241VW comes with a large selection of input options. VGA, DVI, HDMI are there, along with component, S-Video, and composite connections. You wouldn't want to use S-Video or Composite if you can avoid it, but all of the other inputs are viable choices. We didn't complete our full set of tests for resolution support, so we can't say how well the display works in every situation, but we can say that resolution support is a bit more finicky than some of the better LCDs. The native 1920x1200 resolution always worked well, but other 16:10 aspect ratio resolutions did not function as well. 1440x900 in particular failed to work properly when we forced that mode via the display drivers. HDMI also appears to target 16:9 resolutions, despite the 16:10 AR, so 1680x1050 and many other resolutions didn't work well with HDMI and we would recommend 1920x1080 for the best overall image using that connection.
One item that immediately caught our attention in testing is the OSD (On Screen Display), and unfortunately it wasn't in a good way. The OSD is by far the most sluggish UI we've used on an LCD, often requiring over 1 second to change selections. You shouldn't need to use the OSD all that much after initial setup, but aspect ratio scaling options didn't always work as expected and overall the OSD feels like it needs a major overhaul - or at least a processor upgrade. It does offer plenty of options, as you can see in the above gallery, but option overload isn't the same thing as working well.
Something else that will make this display immediately stand out from other LCDs is the base stand. Instead of a traditional stand, BenQ has a large frame that supports the LCD, connected to the panel on the sides. This might not seem like a big deal at first - and for some users it won't be - but it does create some drawbacks. The frame means that there is no height adjustment, no pivot or rotate functionality, and while the back of the LCD has a VESA wall mount, you can't (easily) remove the stand - so in other words, using the wall mount will look silly at best. It also means the LCD is bulkier than other 24" LCDs. The OSD controls are located on the left support of the base stand, so even if you do manage to remove the stand you will still have to keep that circuit board around - likely dangling by a wire. Frankly, while it's sometimes good to be different, in this case we think it would be far better to stick with the tried-and-true approach of removable base stands that attach to the back of the LCD.
Okay, we've said enough about the FP241VW, especially considering you can't easily find this display for sale anymore. Let's move on to the evaluation of the performance characteristics of this A-MVA panel and see how it stacks up against the competition.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
114 Comments
View All Comments
alantay - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - link
"For better or worse, LCDs are here to stay and CRTs are a dying breed"A bit off topic to the review itself, but since you mentioned it: At the time LCDs were taking over the market, they were 2-3 times more expensive than CRTs. They absolutely could not compete in speed (input lag was unknown before LCDs came around), they absolutely could not compete in viewing angles (idem), They could not compete in color and contrast, they absolutely could not compete in "natural look" (things look perfectly natural in a CRT monitor and very unnatural in a LCD one). And obviously, they could not compete in price. Yet, 90%+ of the people buying a new monitor were choosing an LCD. Why?
The obvious advantage of LCDs was exterior design. They're very good looking monitors when compared with the ugly and bulky CRTs. But then again, is exterior design so important for something like a monitor as to pay 3 times more for something 10 times worse??? Oh, LCDs were a new technology, I guess some people also like anything new (even if worse). But...
Still a mystery to me... (writing this using my -very- old CRT).
Rindis - Thursday, June 18, 2009 - link
"The obvious advantage of LCDs was exterior design. They're very good looking monitors when compared with the ugly and bulky CRTs."No, the obvious advantage is weight and volume. It is much easier to find a place to park a screen (especially a larger one), when you don't have have as much room in back of it as to the sides.
strikeback03 - Thursday, June 18, 2009 - link
Now I'll admit that I never used a top-quality CRT (best I have ever used were some large ViewSonics) but IMO the only advantage they hold over even 5-year old LCDs is the viewing angles (vs TN). LCDs don't vibrate all over the place, they don't need fooling around with the video card to keep refresh rates up, text is actually sharp, and, of course, you can get a decent sized one without worries about lifting it.TA152H - Saturday, June 20, 2009 - link
CRTs are much better than LCDs at certain things. The reverse is also true.If you have very good eyes, looking at an LCD is like looking through a screen door. You can see the small divisions between pixels easily.
By contrast, CRTs have much richer pictures, without these barriers.
I hated LCDs, but bought one anyway just to give them a try. When I am using it, I get used to all the flaws of it, and don't mind it at all. Then when I look at a CRT, I'm annoyed by the moire issues, and other irregularities. This is at higher resolutions though, at lower resolutions, the CRT is just better except for logistics. So, I really prefer the LCD when that's what I've been using. But, if I am using a CRT, and then go to an LCD, it looks lifeless and dull, and the screen door issue irritates the Hell out of me.
Anything at or less than 800x600 is clearly the advantage of the CRT. It's got few if no issues, and has much better color saturation. Above that though, where it really matters, it's really personal preference. No one can say that one is clearly better than the other, they are better at different things and we all have to make a choice (well, it's almost been made for us now). Heck, I can't even say which I prefer. I do like the low glare of LCDs a lot though, but now I see some with mirror like finishes. That's really strange. I don't know why people would want these, especially on a laptop with a lot of ambient light.
Griswold - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - link
No, you forgot the number one reason: no headaches and eyestrain compared to those god forsaken CRTs.The0ne - Thursday, June 18, 2009 - link
yep, good riddance to those CRT monitors. yay for my eyes! :)JarredWalton - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - link
It depends on what you're comparing: a top quality CRT to a typical LCD at launch, yes, the CRT would win in most areas. But...LCDs have perfect geometry when using a digital signal, they weigh less, brightness levels look better on most models, and did I mention size? LOL... Actually, the geometry adjustment stuff on CRTs is one thing I'm happy to NEVER have to do again. Trapezoidal, rotational, pincushion, etc. distortion sucked, and you had to adjust for each resolution and refresh rate.
What I miss - and the only thing I really miss! - is the 100+ Hz refresh rates. Even the current 120Hz LCDs don't generally do a 120Hz signal (that would require dual-link DVI at 1920x1200); they just refresh the content more frequently. (I might be wrong on this - some displays may actually support a 120Hz signal?) Oh, and I suppose I also miss true blacks on occasion, but with most games being developed on LCDs there were times when having "true black" was a problem (i.e. Doom 3 - I thought the game was unplayable until I tried it on my then-new 2405FPW LCD).
Mastakilla - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - link
you are right about most 120hz displays not being really 120hzyou are also right about real 120hz @ 1920x1200 requiring dual link DVI
there do exist some REAL 120hz 1650x1080 displays though (I think Viewsonic has one for example)
TA152H - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - link
If you want to find a quality monitor, review an Eizo. They've been the best monitors for 20 years, and you can't compare junk from BenQ, ViewSonic, et al with them. The only problem is cost, but, if you're just focused on quality, nothing comes close.Prove me wrong. Review one of their high end monitors and then see if you hit the UPS man over the head when he comes to take it back.
Once you get used to them, it's a hard habit to break, and an expensive habit to keep.
erple2 - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - link
That was true 20 years ago when we all had CRT's - it was very hard to beat an Eizo / Nanao in picture quality.However, the LCD era kind of changed all of that. Eizo makes some nice panels, sure, but they're really not the best. There's a couple of superb NEC monitor out there at the 1200-2200 price range (the 2490 and 3090 models), plus at least 2 HP 24" monitors (the 2475w and 2480zs) that are as good or better than anything Eizo puts out.
I think the "problem" now is that there are only a few manufacturers of the panels, so there's only so much any reseller can do.