Still Looking for LCD Nirvana
If you're a bit confused by this "review" of the BenQ FP241VW, I apologize. As mentioned, the display was discontinued not long after I received it, but I felt the A-MVA panel was interesting enough that it warranted a technology piece - especially when you consider the current trends away from quality LCD panels. Right now, it appears that A-MVA gets you similar viewing angles to IPS and PVA displays, along with processing lag that competes very favorably with TN and IPS panels. In the case of the FP241VW, color accuracy and color gamut are lower than average, but that a better backlight could address that shortcoming.
When you get right down to it, most people won't notice the difference between IPS, PVA, or MVA unless they use a colorimeter and calibration software. Well, that's not entirely true, as in my experience you will definitely notice the display lag on S-PVA panels. The real question is what causes this lag and whether or not it can be fixed. I have a hunch that the lag has more to do with signal processing used to enhance the image quality rather than the LCD panel itself, in which case upgraded processors and microcode could address the situation. Ironically, earlier S-PVA panels showed less processing lag than the current high-end S-PVA panels that we've tested, so for whatever reason Samsung seems to be going in the wrong direction in regards to eliminating lag. I've discussed this with several manufacturers over the past year, and quite a few seemed totally unaware of this concern. Hopefully that will start to change, and that's part of the reason you're seeing this article.
Going back to a macro overview of the LCD market, it's disconcerting to see the trends that have developed over the past year or two. Four years ago, if you purchased a 24" or larger LCD you were virtually guaranteed a top quality LCD panel. Sure, the Dell 2405FPW originally sold for over $1300, but that price dropped quite rapidly to around $700, and the quality of the 2407WFP improved on the 2405FPW. Notice the trend: lower prices and better quality. That's what we want to see - or at the very least keep prices static while increasing quality or keep quality static while reducing prices. The last two years have unfortunately started a different trend: reduce prices on entry-level displays and ship them with lower quality panels, or increase prices on higher end displays without dramatically improving the overall quality.
Continuing with Dell as an example, the current 2408WFP will sometimes go on sale for under $500, but the normal price is still $600. In other words, Dell's 24" S-PVA LCDs have essentially maintained the same pricing for over two years. On the other hand, Dell also sells a newer S2409W 24" 1080p LCD with a regular price of $280, currently on sale for $200. That's half the price, but as you probably guessed it also includes a TN panel, fewer input options, no flash memory reader, and a far more limited base stand. It's not a bad LCD by any means, but don't expect $200 to get you a display that will rival a good $700 24" LCDs from several years ago. And let's not even get started on the trend towards glossy panels….
At this stage, I'm actually okay with the pricing on LCDs: you get what you pay for. What I'd really like to see going forward is a greater focus on improving quality, features, and performance rather than an apparently single-minded focus on reducing costs and pricing. The BenQ FP241VW is a prime example of the current trends, specifically in the fact that it is discontinued and yet still outperforms many of the new models. Granted, with an original MSRP of over $900 there was no way I'd recommend it - especially not with 30" IPS displays going for only slightly more - but with a price under $500 it would have some clear advantages over both TN and PVA displays. Hopefully BenQ - or someone else - can take the technologies in the FP241VW and make a newer, more affordable display without sacrificing other features. Oh yeah: forget the silly display stand while you're at it and give us height adjustment and rotate functionality at the very least. If they had a different stand, faster OSD, and better backlight (and the monitor were available at a variety of resellers for under $600), the FP241VW could have been Editors' Choice material.
If you want an inexpensive 24" LCD, it's safe to assume that you're not after top image quality. In that case, you can pick up virtually any of the new 24" 1080p displays and be happy with your purchase. Some will struggle with supporting non-native resolutions properly, but you normally don't want to run at anything but native resolution so that's not a huge concern. With prices starting at $250 (or $200 on sale), that's a heck of a lot of monitor for a very low price. Four years ago, I was writing Buyers' Guides and recommending 19" CRTs for about the same price, and there's no way I would choose a CRT today over an inexpensive 22" or larger TN-based LCD. However, we still need more choice, specifically in terms of quality.
We want to see - in no particularly order - high color gamuts, great color accuracy, good viewing angles, base stands that support height/pivot/rotate adjustments, a good selection of inputs (preferably multiple digital inputs), and no processing lag. We would also like to see more displays support higher refresh rates; right now you can get 120 Hz LCDs, but they're all TN panels. So give us all of the above, but keep the price close to (preferrably under) $500, and you'll have my ideal 24" LCD. All of the technologies exist to produce such a display, but the question is whether there's enough demand, and whether they can keep the price reasonable. As basic economics teaches us, demand affects pricing, so if most people are now happy buying inexpensive TN panels it's unlikely that we're going to see any dramatic changes. That being the case, we might just have to wait for OLEDs to come down in price before we see a true revolution in display technologies and quality.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
114 Comments
View All Comments
genegold - Saturday, August 15, 2009 - link
Jared - Take a look at HP's Business/Performance monitors for four new IPS models and two PVAs.While I've never seen a PVA monitor, one thing I've read in serious user discussions is how they are made for photo professionals and not for use with typical web/office/standard applications. For the latter, these monitors' colors are oversaturated and the text mediocre or worse. Users who have bought them for the latter frequently complain and are advised to return them for something more for the consumer market. The common theme is that these monitors are made for use with Adobe Photoshop and to some degree with other color-managed applications (of which Firefox is the only browser).
I did try a Dell 2209WA E-IPS recently, actually two samples, and found them to be very good monitors for everyday use, with the big exception for my purposes that the model's minimum brightness setting (0%) is equivalent to a bright office. That didn't work well with my moderate day lighting and evening darkness (and aging hazel eyes).
gking11 - Thursday, August 6, 2009 - link
I got my FP241VW a couple of months ago after I was lucky enough to find it for sale online, and brand new to boot!While I did get a dead pixel (fortunately it was low enough that it didn't hinder my viewing much), the display is the closest thing to perfection in terms of an all-purpose LCD, especially for gaming. With my Pantone Huey, I have it calibrated and, boy, do the colors come out!
Without further ado, here's the direct link to the site where I bought it from (it's $385 as of this post, I bought it for $400 then): http://www.entercomputers.com/benq-fp241vw-24-wide...">http://www.entercomputers.com/benq-fp24...l?SID=cf...
*Running away from stampede!*
rlx - Sunday, July 19, 2009 - link
Two points often disregarded in reviews.I bought a Samsung SM275T and although I am very happy with it, I find the readability of small anti-aliased text to be not as good as I expected. I find the reason to be that each pixel is in fact made of two pixels on that monitor. Both subpixels combine to double the number of different colors the monitor can display. I find that in some cases one subpixel is on while the one below is off.
This creates a dithering effect and somehow interacts with antia-liased text. The net effect is that I find small text to be harder to read )or I should say recognize). I compared with an analog monitor and with a 720P LCD tv and I am quite sure that using two subpixels the way Samsung does it is not the way to go for a monitor that is intended for general use.
The other point is that vertical viewing angles are very important to me on a portable computer screen. Since my vision is not that good I sometimes need to move my head closer to the screen and this movement changes the angle of view. This is why I find laptops (TN) very difficult to use. People with normal vision can do everything from a single position and the vertical angle of view might not be as important for them.
Richard
rlx - Wednesday, July 22, 2009 - link
I meant twice the number of gray levels of course (re. twice the number of colors) but why Samsung has done all that work of doubling the number of pixels just to gain one bit in the number of gray levels.If both sub-pixels have a slightly different number of levels, say sub-pixel No.1 has four levels of gray 0,1,2,3 and sub-pixel No.2 has 6 0,1,...,5 then the number of achiveable gray levels is 24 out of 31. They are 0, 3/15, 5/15, 6/15, ... up to 2.
The light coming through sub-pixel No.1 is l1/3 and the light through No.2 is l2/5. The total light through both is (l1*5 + l2*3)/15.
The 24 achivable levels out of the possible 31 are, (going from 0 to 30): 1001011011111111111111101101001.
If one scales those numbers up then one sees why Samsung can do much better than double the number of gray levels by using two sub-pixels instead of a single pixel.
Maybe I learned something from my typo.
rlx - Tuesday, July 21, 2009 - link
I just wish to clarify my statement about the readability of small size anti-aliased text on the SM275T. I double checked with my older analog SM950P that I run at 1600x1200. From a distance, the small text is definitely much easier to read on the SM275T.I am a bit annoyed by the dithering effect when I take my glasses off so I can get close to the screen. From that short range, small size text looks smooth on the analog screen while artifacts appear on the SM275T.
However even at this small range the text on the SM275T is still readable while it is not really so on the analog screen.
- Sunday, July 19, 2009 - link
Just wanted to say great review, it mirrored my sentiments exactly.P-MVAs (A-MVAs perhaps not as much) were incredible displays. Found in $300 24" soyos I was amazed how much better they were than pre-highgamut S-PVAs in every regard(color response and even slightly in gamma shift). When AUO stopped their entire MVA line it was party over for cheap high quality displays, as Samsung thinks alittle too highly of it PVA technology.
Although I still have an LG 24" with a P-MVA, my other two recent additions were H-IPS HP2475w. Great deals at $600 and worth every penny and then some, but still not bending the price curve down enough. TN has its place, but not in anything over $150 imho.
Sabresiberian - Thursday, July 9, 2009 - link
Beats the heck out of any LCD made to date. Yeah they were $2500 when they were made, but that would likely be much less now, especially if it were made for gamers not professionals and priced to sell properly to that market.Sorry, I just had to say it; maybe there's a Sony exec that reads Anandtech and will get sparked, lol!
Mr Bill - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
I bought this monitor last fall from BenQ for $400 just before they went out of production. I wish I had bought two. Its a very nice monitor.ocyl - Thursday, June 25, 2009 - link
Thanks, Jarred, for the efforts that you've put into writing this article. Here is a bit of idea sharing :)1. You might be interested to check out NEC's MultiSync P221W (S-PVA, 1000:1 contrast, black level control, GammaComp, sRGB preset, 4-way adjustable stand, 16ms response time; $500) and the newly announced E222W (looks like a PVA given its 178º viewing angle; 1000:1 contrast, sRGB preset, 4-way adjustable stand, 5ms response time; $270). I spent two weeks of time on research when I was in the market for a new TFT-LCD monitor last November. I ended up purchasing a NEC MultiSync LCD1990SX (LTM190E4 PVA, 1500:1 contrast, ColorComp, OmniColor, black level control, sRGB preset, 4-way adjustable stand, 20ms response time; $480) and couldn't have been happier.
2. As we know, scaling is one of the main contributors to processing delay. While I don't currently own a Radeon and therefore don't know if this can be done in Catalyst, it's possible to relieve monitor from scaling tasks in ForceWare. There are four options available at nVidia Control Panel -> Display -> Change Display (Flat Panel) Scaling: Use nVidia Scaling, Use nVidia Scaling with Fixed Aspect Ratio, Use My Display's Built-in Scaling, and Do Not Scale. I don't have measuring equipment so I can't perform any meaningful investigation, but perhaps it's something that AnandTech may find worthwhile looking into.
ocyl - Friday, July 17, 2009 - link
NEC announces MultiSync EA231WMi, a 23" IPS monitorhttp://www.techpowerup.com/99491/NEC_Unveils_Multi...">http://www.techpowerup.com/99491/NEC_Un...t_23_inc...