24" LCD Roundup

by Jarred Walton on 5/1/2008 8:00 PM EST


Back to Article

  • Bolas - Friday, July 31, 2009 - link


    Any chance of a 30" monitor roundup for those of us wanting to buy an extreme HD monitor to go along with the new high end gaming computer we're buying around Christmas time?

    I'm not sure which is best between the stuff currently on the market (or things coming out in the near future, say by Christmas). I've heard of:

    Dell 3007WFP
    Dell 3008WFP
    HP LP3065
    Gateway XHD3000
    Samsung Synchmaster 305T
    Apple Cinema 30"

    Am I missing any 30" monitors currently available? Which is the best, regardless of price? Which is the best in terms of bang-for-the-buck? Which is "future-proof", with good connectivity? I plan to use it to play Starcraft II and Warcraft III and maybe some Everqeust.

    I just turned 40, so as part of my mid-life crisis, I'm buying a high end gaming computer, probably a CyberPower Black Mamba or a Digital Storm of some kind, depending on how the stock market does.

    Basically an overclocked Core i7 with three-way or quad SLI. My computer budget is $4000 to $6000, not including monitor price, and I can get a nicely configured Cyberpower for about $5400 last I checked. But what to use to display all that computer goodness? I figure to spend $1000 to $2000 on a 30" monitor, but which one?!?

  • szore - Tuesday, June 23, 2009 - link

    I bought this for about $269 free tax and shipping and I love it for gaming. Reply
  • jpp - Monday, September 15, 2008 - link


    First of all a big thank you for these reviews - they are top notch.

    I'm currently trying to decise between the Samsung and the Dell. I'm not into gaming, so latency doesn't bother me. Nor for that matter do the plethora of inputs both provide - I'll just be using with the one DVI input at native resolution.

    Living in PAL country, I would be delighted if either of these monitors do 50Hz FR. I doubt it very much, but thought it worth asking. I know that my large Samsung 405T wasn't specified at 50Hz, but it is able to do it natively nevertheless which makes for judder free PAL DVD and FTA TV program watching on the screen.

    So, apart from this probably undefined/untested aspect, which would be the better choice, given as I say that I am not interested in gaming?

    I bring this comparison up here as this review does not list the Samsung in its comparison table. The Dell was the editor's choice, but the Samsung was reviewed after this 24in line up, so I was wondering if it could be included somewhere in the ranking?

    Thansk again for the tremendous effort that goes into the testing and reporting.


  • jpp - Monday, September 15, 2008 - link

    As I can't edit my previous post, just a correction wrt the timing of the 2 reviews.

    The Samsung review was done before the 24in panel review, yet it's not listed in this review. That seems a bit odd and I was wondering why that is the case?
  • billingsgate - Monday, May 26, 2008 - link

    I can't find reviews anywhere of Eizo LCD monitors. Eizo has a great reputation, but that's all I seem to be able to go on. A salesman gave me a really good pitch for the Eizo FlexScan S2401W. It's a Samsung TN panel (he claims), but somehow being an Eizo it's much better for color quality than any Samsung in the price range. It seems to be a good candidate for balancing accurate color and minimum input lag. But I can't be sure, since I can't test it in the shop for any of those things, plus the shops where I live are all little cubby holes in computer centers, with minimum choice in each shop, so it's impossible to do any side-by-side comparisons between Eizo, Samsung, NEC, etc., since they're never together in the same place.

    Any thoughts on Eizo's (relatively) budget line of FlexScans?
  • silvajp - Sunday, May 25, 2008 - link

    Today I bought a Samsung 2693HM for $600 - $50 rebate and I am blown away. It looks great - very bright and vibrant. I am wondering if it has the same low input lag as the 2493HM. The resolution is 1920x1200 so at 25.5" it's got bigger pixels which is just fine for my poor tired eyes.

  • billingsgate - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link

    Can someone help me with a recommendation? After reading billions of reviews of monitors I am confused as hell? is there a "best compromise" LCD monitor for both color accuracy and least lag time?

    I am not a gamer. I am an animation professional, and I heavily use Wacom tablets for drawing, loose and freehand, with Photoshop, Flash, and various professional animation programs. I've always used a CRT monitor and never once have experienced any lag between my stylus movement and lines on screen. I do own a Compaq tablet PC, and when I draw on-screen, the lag is perceptible enough to make the drawing very unnatural and inhibited. I just can't draw freehand that way.

    As my beloved, expensive flat screen Samsung CRT monitor is now dying after 7 years of heavy use, I'm in the market for an LCD. In my business I need both excellent color accuracy and zero or minimal lag time for stylus input. Where I live (Hong Kong) there isn't a single shop that would ever allow me to test such a setup, so it's a lottery for me. Plus, their in-store demonstrations for color "accuracy" are geared for Asian tastes, which is heavy HEAVY on oversaturated red (while westerners prefer oversaturated green).

    After poring through all the reviews, particularly on this site, I can't even narrow down the choices to 4 or 5 candidates. The Dell 2408 looks amazing except for lag time. The Samsung XL20 (not widescreen, but I don't really care) looks great for color and no lag time, but it has a noisy fan (irritating!) and is a bit smaller than I want.

    Can someone seriously help me to narrow the potential choices for something that has good or great color and minimal input lag? I won't ever use it for gaming or for TV or video viewing.
  • hjkelly - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link

    I'm in a similar spot - into editing photos and watching movies. I was almost set on the Dell 2408, but then I found out it has about four frames of lag, which wouldn't be fun for movies (or drawing with a Wacom tablet, I'm sure). I've finally settled on DoubleSight's DS-263N. If you want a quick summary, it's like an Apple Cinema display, but 26" and with a polarizer to get rid of the white haze at wider angles. It's also very fast, less than one frame's delay, I believe. It's around $700, but the catch is that it's hard to find in stock, so you'll have to be on your toes to get one. But isn't that just a sign of quality, really? =) Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link

    Surely you know someone over there that can let you borrow an LCD to test out? Honestly, I don't think you'll experience problems with input lag - we're talking about 50ms or so relative to a CRT, so 1/20 of a second. What you've noticed on a tablet PC probably has a lot more to do with the lack of processing power and other differences. All you really need to do is find someone with an S-PVA 24" LCD and you can see if you notice lag. I can game fine on the 2408WFP - the lag is just barely perceptible at times, but not enough to cause me problems. But I'm not a competitive gamer.

    As for DoubleSight, their 26" LCD is about to be phased out apparently - I asked them for a review sample and they said it was at EOL. It may become even more difficult to find in stock shortly.

    Anyway, I hear good things about a few MVA panels (that I haven't ever seen let alone tested), or if money isn't a serious concern just pick up something like the HP LP3065. For professional use, I have a hard time finding anything I would prefer to a nice S-IPS 30" LCD. And the 2560x1600 gaming resolution is nice as well.
  • billingsgate - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link

    Actually, I don't know anyone with an LCD screen to borrow, other than my son's cheap one which is fine for gaming but not even close to being color accurate, so not exactly a good example. I can tell you that I tried a Wacom Cintiq tablet, which is essentially an LCD screen you can draw on. It was connected to a G5 Mac, so no lack of processing power. The lag on that was a fraction of a fraction of a second. But I kept finding my hand slowing down to let the line catch up to the stylus, which sucked all the spontaneity out of my drawing. In other words, for a "sensitive artist", even a small lag is noticeable. With the Cintiq I attribute it to the signal having to travel round trip on a USB connection. But I am now quite concerned about buying the wrong LCD and being stuck with it. This isn't the USA. Once you buy something and leave the shop, there is no such thing as returning it.

    So, to repeat my question: can you or someone help to recommend a shortlist of monitors that are both good to great for color accuracy, and minimal for input lag?
  • AnnonymousCoward - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link

    I agree with Jarred on both accounts: you can't go wrong with the LP3065 or 3007WFP-HC, and input lag is far less than the lag time you experienced on the tablet. But if you're really sensitive to it, I'd avoid the Dell 2708, Dell 3008, Samsung 244T, and Samsung 245T, as those seem to have the worst lag of all.

    For unbeatable 24" color accuracy, the choice is obvious: NEC LCD2490WUXi (U.S.) or Hazro HZ24W (U.K.). I think they have mid-range lag (35ms?), which you probably wouldn't notice. The LP3065, 3007, and DoubleSight 26" are high quality IPS screens with very little lag, and for professional animation work, why not go bigger than 24"?
  • AnnonymousCoward - Sunday, May 11, 2008 - link

    Jarred, I'm glad to see input lag drawing so much attention. You seem well aware of this, but I wanted to point out that the LP3065 was a poor choice for a reference monitor. It likely performs the same as the 3007-HC, which has measurements that bounce from 0-20ms; 3 increments on your scale (maybe 2 considering refresh rate). Some LCDs out there consistently measure close to 0ms.

    The editor's comments are completely out of context! ("They're huge, heavy, and require more power, and the best ones were made over five years ago. Sorry - LCDs are where everything is heading.") A heavy, power hungry, old, and obsolete 15" CRT would still be an ideal reference.
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, May 13, 2008 - link

    It would probably be a faster reference, but I'm not going to try to dig one up. Sorry. My place is crowded enough without keeping around an obsolete CRT. I sold off a couple 19" CRTs two years ago, and that was the last time I had one around for testing. I had to junk my old 21" CRT (from 1997) because I couldn't even give it away. 85 pounds now at the junk pile.

    As it stands, I will continue to use the LP3065 as a reference LCD. If I test an LCD that scores better than the LP3065, that's not a problem: it will have a negative "relative input lag" score. A CRT might very well score 20ms faster; my problem isn't with 0ms vs. 20ms (assuming CRTs can score 0ms); it's with 0ms vs. 60ms and perhaps 0ms vs. 40ms.

    Personally, I'm certainly fine with the LP3065 - it is in use on my own gaming system and I've never been bothered with any discernible input lag. Image tearing caused by turning off VSYNC is a much bigger concern -- and that's one area where I'd like to see LCDs improve; a 120Hz refresh rate would help a lot. But then we'd need all new graphics cards and connectors to manage the data rates for 120Hz at 2560x1600.
  • AnnonymousCoward - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link

    I hear ya on CRTs being too big to keep around :)

    I thought your measurements would have more variation, like by 40ms, since in many lag tests I've seen, measurements varied by 20ms. But your variations were 20ms, including both the reference and the one tested. I'd have to agree that a CRT isn't necessary, since the variations are under control (but I'll still add 11ms to the final numbers, as you've talked about). I'm surprised your 245T results weren't higher.

    I have a 3007-HC and agree about the excessive tearing. And of course if the framerate can't stay above 60, I have to disable vsync and live with it. You gotta admit, it's quite nice that the 8800-series cards came out within a year of the 30"ers, and that those two separate technologies complement each other.

    I wonder why the DoubleSight is going EOL, if it's such a great monitor and hot seller! Does that indicate customer return problems?
  • ShocWave - Wednesday, May 07, 2008 - link

    Actually, I have a 2493HM.
    AV mode will display 720p and 1080p at the correct aspect ratio with overscan. What it basically does is fill the screen and crops out the sides.

    It's not 1:1, but better then nothing.
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, May 07, 2008 - link

    I just don't understand why anyone would *want* overscan. AV Mode takes 720p stretched to fill the whole screen and then overscans it, right? Or are you saying it only crops the left and right sides? (I suppose I could check if I dig the LCD back out.)

    I'm not a stickler on aspect ratios, especially 16:9 stretched to fit 16:10 - the information is merely listed for those who really do care. I still think the Gateway has a better approach and overall better design. The Samsung however offers better color accuracy and a non-glossy panel for the same price. It's a close second in the TN panel contest (out of tested LCDs).
  • 10e - Saturday, May 10, 2008 - link

    Yes, that's exactly what it does. Takes the 720p/1080p image and "zooms" it so that it fills the screen vertically, but gets cut off at the sides. So you have a 16:10 "window" looking at a 16:9 screen that is missing some of the image left and right (about 5%)

    I use an image from the "TigerDave" site that shows exactly the amount of 720p and 1080p overscan a display will suffer. It does actually cut off a very small part of the image top and bottom as well.

    I don't know what Samsung had in mind here. The newer revisions of the 245T and 275TPlus have a built in image setting for 16:9 now that supposedly works, so why they couldn't fix this in a technically newer design (2493HM) is confusing.

  • BattleRattle - Wednesday, May 07, 2008 - link

    Do input lag against a CRT... Its the analog of the CRT that matters Reply
  • viperboy2025 - Tuesday, May 06, 2008 - link

    How does this compare to other reputable LCD monitors, I can't help but think anandtech is commercializing Dell displays. I mean how about the profesional serious from viewsonic, VP2650wb. They don't have a 24" oddly, but they do have a 26", VP2650wb, at a similar price as the dell 24", costing $615 at onsale.com with free shipping at the moment.
    The specs of this monitor seem to be better at everything than the dell, as it has 26" (compare to 24"), same resolution, 3ms response time, same 110% color gamut, 4000:1 contrast ration (compare to 3000:1), only difference I see are the inputs, since the professional serious doesn't carry TV inputs. But viewsonic does has a line of the X serious, all of which have hdmi, component, composite, and s video components, which i even doubt most people would use anyways since they would be attaching this to a computer not using it as a TV.
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, May 06, 2008 - link

    Drop contrast ratio and response time from that list, as they are meaningless figures. Color accuracy with "dynamic contrast" is horrible on all the displays I've tested - you can see the screen get darker/brighter as you watch, and I find it extremely distracting. So what you end up with is a 26" display at a good price. Is it better or worse than the Dell? In color accuracy, I'd bet a lot of money that it's worse without calibration.

    For the record, Dell displays are already "commercialized". The only thing wrong with the 2408WFP that I can see is input lag. I made this quite clear. If you're looking for a good 24" LCD for professional work, I'd recommend it without reservation. If you want a gaming LCD, probably look around more.

    I can't review every LCD out there, in part because most companies don't send us samples. Viewsonic is one of those companies (I've emailed them at least six times in the past year without a single response). They can call something a "professional display" if they want, but that doesn't make it any more true than the "get rich quick" schemes you see floating around. It may or may not be a great LCD; I'd love to get one sent here for review. Note also that all it took was one email to LaCie and they jumped at the opportunity for this review. If you're looking for a true professional display and you want great support, I'd recommend them in a heartbeat. $300 more is a tough pill to swallow for casual use, but for professionals that should be a non-issue.
  • Rasterman - Friday, May 09, 2008 - link

    Yeah the figures reported are meaningless, if they were actually useful we wouldn't even need reviews :) I can't believe that a company as big as Viewsonic doesn't send a review site as big as Anandtech a review model, that is just ridiculous, they should be sending you guys a new model of every new monitor without even asking, maybe you aren't emailing the right person. BTW its awesome to see a reviewer actually answer questions and critics to a review, awesome job Jarred! Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 09, 2008 - link

    I'm sure I'm not getting the right person at Viewsonic (and other companies as well), but that's the trick: *finding* the right person. Without an inside contact, it can be tough to get started.

    Generic PR Person: "AnandTech? What kind of a name is that? http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail50.html">Baleeted!" I'll try to meet with them next CES or something....

    PS - Anyone from Viewsonic read this? If so, email me! :-)
  • 10e - Tuesday, May 06, 2008 - link

    Great review. This is what multifunction fans are looking for. I had this issue a year ago trying to find "THE" multifunction.

    You may want to mention that in terms of 720p and 1080p the Samsung stretches both to 16:10 with A/V mode off. I tested this and found that problem recently, which was unfortunate due to the fact that I liked it as a high quality TN.
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, May 06, 2008 - link

    I mentioned this on page 11, but I have highlighted (italicized) the pertinent text. I also clarified by indicating that 16:9 modes will always have the wrong AR. Thanks for reading and commenting! Reply
  • xerces8 - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    A picture says more than 1000 words :

    (I can't create a link, seems the post javascript is broken, I cant make bold or italics text either, tried FF and IE7)
  • JarredWalton - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    You mean, http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma...">pictures like this one? I don't see any large blowups of their comparisons available for download, so I have no idea exactly how they're testing. What I do know is that I provided images showing LaCie 324 and Dell 2408WFP clearly displaying a 40ms delay relative to an HP LP3065, and I've also provided a picture of the ASUS MK241H with a relative delay of 0ms relative to the same LCD.

    I've got nine other sample images from each of the tested monitors showing the evidence for my "input lag" conclusions. That's about as close to full disclosure as you'll get. All I get on that comparison you linked is a chart that apparently "proves" the ASUS MK241H has a 54ms average delay compared to a CRT, but then the same site lists the Dell 2408WFP as 69ms, the 2407WFP as 24ms, the LaCie as 41ms, and the Samsung 245T at 59ms. I got more or less the same result on the Dell 2407WFP and the LaCie 324, but nowhere near the same result on the MK241H, 2408WFP, and the 2493HM.

    Again, you've got at least one clear sample of my results for each LCD. Sorry, but I have to question their results without better evidence.
  • Dashel - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    Hi Jarred,

    Not sure if this is based on the same test or what but there is this:


    Which looks to be the same graph and results. To me your results seem to make the most sense if the 2408 is very similar to the 2407WFP-HC, then the input lag should be close too I would guess. I'm hardly an expert just tryint to be logical.

    The thing is I also see anecdotal claims of lag and people who have tested it getting in the 60ms range as well which leads me to wonder if there isnt some sort of defect or difference in some of the panels vrs others.

    Example of a test by an owner:


    I'd love to hear Dells thoughts on it as well as what and when their revision is due to hit.
  • JarredWalton - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    I'd like to know what software people are using as timers. I tried about 10 different "timers" and discovered that a bunch are limited to the Windows default timing resolution - about 54ms. So they either scored "0ms" or "54ms" on the delay. I know this because I had screen refreshes where the timer was split in half; the top half would show for example 40.067 and the bottom would show 50.121.

    3DMark03 at least looks to be accurate down to 10ms - there are again pictures where the timer is cut in half, only in such cases I would see 20.23 and 20.24, so I can be sure that the timer is updated in .01s increments rather than in something larger.

    Without a lot more details about what software people use and large images showing the results, I must say that I'm very skeptical. I feel "input lag" testing needs several things to be even remotely acceptable:

    1) Run at native LCD resolution in clone mode (because built-in scalers could have an impact)
    2) Disclosure of the test software that manages better than 54ms accuracy.
    3) You need a high-end camera with a fast shutter speed to capture the results. Simply choosing "Auto" mode and snapping a picture doesn't tell the whole story.
    4) Provide at least one sample image at a high resolution that clearly shows what the camera captured.

    I met all of those criteria I think. In looking around at other reviews, I have not been able to clearly answer any of those questions. Perhaps that's why some of the other results are so different. I also tested at 2560x1600 to verify that I wasn't hurting the HP LP3065 by running at a lower resolution; since the scaling is handled by the GPU rather than the LCD (the LP3065 doesn't have a scaler), there was no penalty.
  • DangerousQ - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    I cant believe this set of reviews is so one sided, why no P-MVA panels, I bought a BenQ FP241W about 3 monyths ago and the 6ms response time plus unbelievable colours make this panel really hard to beat, but you try finding any reviews on it. The one review I did find, a long time ago and have lost it now compared it to the 2407 dell and found it a better panel for less money! I know this cos I was going to buy the dell before I saw the review. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    Send me an MVA panel - or get one of the manufacturers to send me one - and I will be more than happy to review it. I don't have the means to go out and purchase $500+ test LCDs, so I review what I get sent. Dell, Gateway, Samsung, ASUS, and other major companies are great about working with review sites like ours. Other companies are not. Thus, I take what I can get. Reply
  • chrisdent - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    Should this be 16.2 million, or have they developed a new algorithm that manages to create an additions 500,000 colours from 6 bits? Reply
  • JarredWalton - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    The specs say "16.7 million", but I believe all TN panels continue to use 6-bit plus dithering. Since no one with absolute knowledge would answer the question, I put the question mark in there. I honestly can't spot the difference between true 8-bit and 6-bit plus dithering in 99% of situations; if you want best colors, though, get a PVA or IPS (or MVA) panel. Reply
  • soltys - Sunday, May 04, 2008 - link

    I'd like to remind about an excellent thread regarding LCDs:


    It's THE source of information before considering buying a new monitor. IMO.

    After all the panel lotteries and problems with Dell over last few years, I'd be very careful with purchasing any of its monitors these days. You might end badly surprised...
  • Honeybadger - Sunday, May 04, 2008 - link

    Thanks for the excellent review of the 24 inch screens. I'd been thinking about replacing my Sony CRT workhorse, and after reading your article, I went over to Dell coupons, and found a $75 off deal on the 2408 WFP for the first 150 users. Add to that an additional $18 off by using a Dell credit card and I made the purchase for $585 plus free shipping. Hugs and kisses! Reply
  • homebredcorgi - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    Okay...count me really confused as to how the lag measurements were made. How is input/output lag time being measured by comparing two monitors side by side? It seems that you are measuring a relative lag (lag as compared to some "really good" monitor) and not absolute lag where the true timing of the monitor getting a frame and then displaying it is measured. The difference between the two should be more clear as I would bet most people would see these and assume that an absolute lag was measured.

    While I don't doubt the trends you have found, the numbers seem sketchy. You state that the refresh rate is 60hz, so how could you ever measure a lag below 1/60 seconds (16.67 ms) using this method? Why are all of the lag numbers multiples of 10ms? Why are the numbers so scattered? This seems like it should be something constant, unique to each monitor and very repeatable. When I see measurements being made near an absolute limit and data that doesn't appear too repeatable I question the accuracy of the measurement and how it is being made.

    It seems that a true test of absolute lag would need to measure time between some input that changes the display to the monitor physically displaying the output, correct?
  • JarredWalton - Saturday, May 03, 2008 - link

    Short of spending a lot of money on some specialized equipment (and I'm not even sure what equipment I'd need), you have to measure relative lag. Why are the results scattered rather than a constant value? Precisely because of refresh rate issues. That was the point of the relatively lengthy explanation on how we tested. If I simply chose one sample point, I could put an input lag 10ms lower or higher than the average. That was why I showed all 10 measurements - the lag does not always seem to be constant for various reasons.

    Why don't I measure with something that's more accurate than 10ms? I looked (for many hours, including testing), and was unable to find a timing utility that offered better resolution. I found quite a few timers that show seconds out to .001, but they don't really have that level of accuracy. Taking pictures, I was able to determine that most timing applications were only accurate to 0.054 seconds - apparently a PC hardware and/or Windows timing issue. 3DMark03 has the added advantage of showing scenes where you can see response time artifacts.

    I would imagine that if I used a CRT, I might get a higher relative input lag on the LCDs - probably 10 to 20 ms more. Since the question for new display purchases is pretty much which LCD to buy and not whether to get a CRT or an LCD, relative lag compared to a good LCD seems perfectly acceptable. I'd also say that anything under 20ms is a small enough delay that it won't make a difference.

    Also worth mention is that technologies like CrossFire/SLI and triple-buffering can add more absolute lag relative to user input, especially if you're using 3-way or 4-way SLI/CF with alternate frame rendering. Input sampling rates can also introduce input lag. If your frame rates aren't really high - at least 60FPS and preferably higher - you could see an extra one or two frame delay with 4-way GPU setups. And yet, I've never heard gamers complain about that, so I have to wonder if some of the comments regarding LCD lag aren't merely psychosomatic. I've certainly never noticed it without resorting to a camera with a very fast shutter speed.
  • homebredcorgi - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    I completely understand about the budget constraints. However, if you are measuring something at levels close to or below the resolution of your measurement device, the results have little meaning. For instance: one monitor may have close to 9.9ms of lag and you could measure zero seven times and ten three times for an average of three. Another monitor could be around 2ms of lag and you might measure zero nine times and ten once for an average of one. These two appear to be within ~50% of each other but are actually close to 500% of each other.
    While the averaging helps to reduce your error on variables that have a normal distribution you are still stuck with the low limit on resolution. I would guess these measurements have a normal dist. with a std. dev. that is in the nanoseconds.

    I would look into avoiding the computer's timing altogether if I were to try to measure absolute lag (the computer that is generating the image, that is).

    My best guess at how to measure absolute lag would be to use a physical switch that turns the monitor from black to white (or white to grey?). Along with this switch would be an LED that lights up when the switch is turned on. A high speed video camera can be used to view both the LED and monitor (I hear there's a Casio point and shoot that can do 500 fps out there now...though in reality you would want one even faster). Then measure the delay between the LED turning on and the display changing.

    The only problem with this method is that it assumes whatever software is used to detect the switch going from low to high and then change the monitor output has a negligible timing difference. I *think* this would be the case, but if you want to eliminate that variable you would want to look into generating the signal on more specialized hardware.

    I would guess the way this is measured by the manufacturers involves a spectrophotometer or high speed camera and some specialized hardware/software that can switch the monitor signal while logging the output from the spectrophotometer or camera and monitor's input signal at high speed. Hell maybe even a dark room and some photo diodes could get the job done instead of the spectrophotometer or camera. That would allow for some absurdly high sample rates (10khz +)...not sure about the frequency response of spectrophotometers....

    Perhaps some emails to the manufactures regarding the details of this measurement are in order?

    Forgot to add - nice review overall...I'm in the market for a 24" and this helped narrow it down.

    And just to annoy you more, here are some other questions to ponder:
    What was the framerate of the benchmarking program? Did it ever drop under 60?
    Does using the second output on a video card in clone mode just split the signal, or is it actually generating the same image twice?
    Is lag (absolute or relative) a stable measurement? Could it get worse over the life of a monitor? Does brightness/contrast settings of the monitor impact this measurement?

    Good luck! Welcome to the bag of worms that is measurement systems.
  • JarredWalton - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    The big problem with input lag is that a signal is sent to the LCD at 60Hz. Technically, then, it seems to me that actual lag will be either one frame, two frames, three frames, etc. Or put another way: 16.7ms, 33.3ms, 50ms, etc. Either the lag is a frame or it is not. The averages seem to bear this out: ~18ms, ~32ms, etc. If I had a better time resolution I might be able to get a closer result to one frame multiples.

    Other lag is measuring something else, i.e. pixel response time, which can be more or less than one frame. I'd be curious to know precisely how some sites measure this, because to accurately determine response times requires testing of lots of transitions with sophisticated equipment. (I'm quite sure my camera isn't going to be a good tool for determining true response times.) But I'm okay with including pictures of some high-action scenes that show image persistence - and so far all of the LCDs seem to be in the 1-2 frame persistence range.

    You'll note that I'm not going to make a big deal out of a display that scores 0-3ms in my testing and one that scores 3-6ms; the bigger issue is between 0-6ms and 30ms+ that we see. Certainly I'm not going to recommend a 1ms "input lag" LCD over 5ms "input lag" purely on that factor; I firmly believe that lag of under 10ms isn't noticeable and those who think it is are deceiving themselves. I also understand that there's plenty of margin for error in these tests - as much as 10ms either way, though with the averaging it should be less than 5ms.

    For the record, I am running 3DMark03 to make sure frame rates stay above 60FPS even with a 1920x1200 resolution and 4xAA. Minimum frame rate ends up being something like 80FPS, with the average generally being over 200FPS. I tried both output ports on two LCDs -- i.e. HP LP3065 on port one with the 2408WFP on port two, and vice versa -- and the results were the same within 2ms over 10 samples. (I too was worried that internally one port might get the signal first.) Long-term, I have no idea if input lag will stay constant. Considering my HP LP3065 is over a year old and still seems to hold its own against new TN panels, I'd say that the lag appears to be in the integrated circuits and not in the LCD matrices. Thus, unless you think processors can become slower over time, input lag should remain constant.
  • JarredWalton - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    Thinking about it a bit more, I suppose internally the LCD could process a signal for less than 16.7ms. The problem is that you need a way to determine that delay, and since the frames are sent ever 1/60s, you could have a 5ms lag that ends up showing the previous frame. So the averaging does make sense as a way to remove that influence, but I'm still not convinced that the accuracy overall is any better than around 5ms unless you're willing to take about 50 pictures and average all those results. Reply
  • Rasterman - Tuesday, May 06, 2008 - link

    Yes, the lag could be anything, it is not tied to refresh rate at all. Internally the display can process and buffer the image how ever long it wants.

    The OP had a very good idea about how to measure it though using a high speed camera, but his suggested setup seemed pretty involved and pricey, I think I have something that is very simple, basically the only piece of special hardware you need is a high speed camera.

    Setup a computer so it splits a signal to 2 monitors, 1 will be the reference and the other will be the tested, actually you could shoot as many monitors as you could split the signal. Then simply shoot them with the high speed and compare.
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, May 06, 2008 - link

    But that's exactly what I did in this review. Unless you mean a high-speed video camera that can record the changes in response to external stimuli (i.e. someone clicking a mouse).

    I think way too many people are losing sight of the forest because they're obsessing over the trees. I've given relative input lag, and it's accurate to 10ms for sure (and with averaging it should be accurate to around 3ms). At some point I may find an LCD that has a negative lag relative to the HP LP3065, and that's fine. As it stands, the best LCDs equal that LCD's lag.

    Input lag as a whole is only one consideration of a display purchase, and differences of 3ms (or even 10ms) are not going to make you suddenly superior in games. 50ms? Sure, that's a potential problem, but anyone who has played online FPS games competitively knows that you have to learn to anticipate in order to compensate for network lag that may be anywhere from 50 to 150ms even with a high-speed connection.

    If you want a display that offers minimal processing lag, so far the TN panels and 30" LCDs do great. I'd assume all the 22" LCDs do reasonably well, but having none in house at present I can't say for sure. Then everyone with S-PVA panels can call you an LPB.
  • jmunjr - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    Though there are reports it now uses a TN panel, I am disappointed the Soyo Topaz S was not in this review. A bare bones S-PVA monitor for as low as $250 and easily $300 with no rebates? Ring me up! I have one and for the price it cannot be beat - period. At 24" TN monitors have too many shortcomings.

  • bupkus - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I read this article this morning and then my gf calls me an tells me she has a $100 Dell credit that expires tonight.
    I thought, why not sell my Samsung SyncMaster 225BW and get this UltraSharp 2408? Starting Price... $679.00, that's why.
    However, the E248WFP is on sale for $379.00. How does that compare?
  • Dashel - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    Count me among those who want to know if it's even possible a revision will address the input lag on the Dell 2408. That's all that is holding me back from buying this monitor.

    Can they even get it down to 2407 input lag levels?

    Finally BenQ G2400W, see if they wont give you one to review! That's my back up plan if the Dell doesnt pan out ;)

  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    The best S-PVA panel has a 20ms lag on average. Note also that the Gateway FPD2485W uses a Faroudja chip and ends up with 20ms while the TN FHD2400 uses a Faroudja and gets ~0ms and LaCie does the same and gets 40ms. My guess is that somehow in the interest of colors or something else the S-PVA tech is delaying what you see on the LCD. The built-in scalers may also be inducing some delay, but the TN panels have scalers as well and don't suffer from any lag. Reply
  • Dashel - Saturday, May 03, 2008 - link

    Isnt the 2407 an S-PVA as well though? You'd think they'd be able to at least match that level of input lag. That'd be enough to make me confident enough to buy one.

    As it stands, I'll have to see what revision A01 brings. I'll probably get one anyway. No 24" seems to have everything I want sadly. Good gaming non TN panel with plenty of inputs. The 2408 or that DoubleSight seems to come closest.

  • GTVic - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I would like to know if it is possible for game developers or hw manufacturers to develop controls in the games or in the driver control panel that would allow an adjustment for input lag. That way if you know you have a certain lag you can tell the game/driver to compensate. Reply
  • PPalmgren - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I highly doubt this would be possible.

    When I first hooked up my NEC 2470WNX, I played some DotA in (a Warcraft 3 map) and noticed after 5 minutes that I couldn't click on anything as well as usual. The funny thing is this isn't really aim-intensive, being an FPS. I tested it out and realized my mouse's response was delayed on the screen. I then noticed the same problem playing BF2 and NS a day later. It becomes impossible to aim quickly because you aim based on where your cursor is visible. However, your cursor is not where you see it on the screen, its still moving. Its a constant fight of over-compensation ruins your gameplay. The next week, I put my old Viewsonic 19' back up and still use it for games. I STRONGY suggest buying a TN panel for games, having experienced the short end of the stick.
  • GTVic - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I think it certainly should be possible.

    There a maybe a few types of lag. One is due to an overloaded graphics card that is not able to draw enough frames per second to properly update your mouse position so you don't know what you are shooting at. There is nothing to be done about that except buy a better graphics card or reduce the resolution/quality.

    The other type of lag is when the game thinks one frame is being displayed and due to delays down the chain an older frame is being displayed. The game records your mouse click (gun fire) and calculates whether you hit the target based on the wrong frame.

    The lag is not enough to cause the audio to be out of sync but if the game knew that the display was constantly 3 frames behind then it should be possible to correct the problem. Would be nice if Jared could investigate that with ATI/nVidia/game devs.
  • Dainas - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    Oh you don't have to go to TN, I have two 24" P-MVAs that suffer from none of the blatant lag in the aforementioned panels. Both are verifiably faster than the 20ms 2407wfp and coming from a CRT I had none of the loose feeling in fast FPS like CS:Source and CoD4. All these slow panels are more in the realm of 40ms.

    need only look at this to know TNs do not have an unavoidable technical advantage over VA panels and its likely the manufactures putting IQ over response in most cases ;


    But then again considering these panels are dissapearing from the market one might have to go TN afterall for gaming.
  • Rasterman - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I wish you would have reviewed an old CRT to compare the LCDs to. I still have my 22" beast and would upgrade if I knew if an LCD could beat its image quality. Comparing the best LCD to the best CRTs of 5 years ago would be interesting as I'm sure a lot people are still holding on to theirs given the results of the Valve survey suggesting more than 70% of gamers are using CRTs. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    The simple fact that new *quality* CRTs are not being made can't be overlooked. Five years back, you could get a high-end 22" CRT that would do 2048x1536 @ 85Hz (or 1600x1200 @ 110Hz). Now, most 21" CRTs only manage 1600x1200 @ 75Hz. Then throw in all the crap you have to deal with in terms of image centering and pincushion and trapezoidal distortion - all things that are completely non-existent on LCDs.

    When you consider size, weight, and cost, I'll take LCDs every time. OLED or some other display technology may replace LCDs, but conventional CRTs are brain-dead and the manufacturers are getting ready to remove life support.
  • Rasterman - Tuesday, May 06, 2008 - link

    I totally agree it makes no sense to buy a new CRT, but what I am asking is if its worth it to UPGRADE based purely on image quality. This is why I suggested comparing it to a CRT of 3-5 years ago and not a new one. Weight, size, and taking 10 seconds to align the image are all secondary to image quality. I don't see how you can ignore the fact that most people buying high-end LCDs are upgrading from high-end CRTs. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, May 06, 2008 - link

    I (and many others) upgraded from CRTs about three years ago. I have never regretted the decision. I think colors are better, I love not dealing with image distortion (i.e. pincushion, trapezoidal, rotational, etc. adjustments), the size reduction at the same time as you get a larger screen area (22" CRTs are the equivalent of 20" LCDs).... I could go on.

    I think most professionals upgraded to LCDs a long time ago; the people who remain with CRTs are those who are ultra-dedicated to high refresh rates and faster pixel response times. The only area where that really matters is gaming. Throw in the fact that the phosphor used on CRTs starts to fade after 4-5 years, and even if you have the best CRT ever produced it's probably time to upgrade.

    In short, I am not ignoring CRTs; I am simply refusing to beat a dead horse.
  • probert - Friday, June 13, 2008 - link

    This may be an old thread but I'd like to put in my 2 cents.

    Love your reviews but I think you're wrong about CRT's. They're used more than you think and for someone who does print work they are an excellent inexpensive alternative to a really good lcd.

    For example Pixar has stockpiled CRT's (trinitron FD tubes) and I suspect a lot of places do. It takes about 15 minutes to calibrate one and - as far as being bulky - I'll admit I won't take mine backpacking any time soon, but why would I want to.

    There are sites that still sell new and refurbed CRTs with the trinitron FD tubes (Generally Dells and IBMs). These are superb and cost about $200.

    They are great for print work You can adjust not just rgb but bias and gain on each channel. Their color accuracy and ability to render gradients may be matched by a top line NEC - but at 1/6 the price.

    My set up is a 21" crt and an 8bit lcd for web work and checking sharpening. (In fact, I don't calibrate the LCD presently to simulate the general web experience. This is driving me a little crazy and I may tighten it up.) The whole rig cost $400.00 - has plenty of real-estate and has very good monitor to printer accuracy.

    I'm happy that people who don't need this precision use LCDs, as it saves energy and materials, but the crt is a very viable alternative for someone who does need accurate color and good tonal range for short money.

    In fact, I'll toss the gauntlet and say that for this particular niche - they are better than, or, as good as, any LCD on this or any other planet.
  • icthy - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    Just curious, has anyone actively considered buying either two 24" monitors as a substitute for one 30" monitor (or the other way around). I know it depends what one does, but I'm so frustrated working on my one 20" monitor, I want to go big, big, big! But I'm unsure if the cost of the 30" is worth it. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I personally prefer one large LCD over two smaller LCDs. Working on large images in Photoshop, I can use all the resolution I can get. Splitting an image over two displays just isn't the same to me. That said, I know others that really like having two 24" LCDs. My dad is set up that way, so he can have web pages, documents, etc. on one side and spreadsheets, other web pages, and such on the other. In fact, my dad sometimes has both 24" LCDs in portrait mode, so he can have a virtual resolution of 2400x1920 and see long segments of text that way.

    Total cost of two 24" LCDs would be $900 to $1200 depending on brand (or $1800+ for two LaCie 324 LCDs). A single 30" would run at least $1000 I think (outside of used/refurbs), and some like the 3008WFP would cost as much as $2000. Total screen resolution and area is higher for two 24" LCDs: 12.5% more pixels and 28% more screen area. If you can live with the black back between the LCDs, two 24" LCDs is a more economical/flexible approach overall.
  • icthy - Saturday, May 03, 2008 - link

    Thanks. I'm tempted by the shear prettiness of one 30" monitor. But I tend to run Linux, and than use windows under Vmware. I suppose with two 24" monitors, I could have one Vmware-Windows display, and one for my Linux-computational stuff--although I don't know if the vmware drivers would support that. Reply
  • KLC - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    Your review confirms my experience with the Dell 2408, it is a great monitor and also an excellent value for its performance. Just look at comparably sized NECs and LaCies to calibrate your value gauges. I got it for $599 with free shipping.

    I've read the comments about pink tinges and banding and on and on and on in hardware forums, like Jarred I've had no such problems with mine. I mostly use my system for photoshop, video editing, office apps and websurfing, no games so lag time doesn't matter to me.

    The ergonomics are also outstanding. You can easily adjust height, tilt, etc. And like all Dell monitors I think they've done a great job of industrial design. If you like all of your tech to mimic a Transformer you'll have to look elsewhere, but if you like something elegant and functional Dell has few that surpasss them.

    It does put out a lot of heat, it is very bright, too bright, out of the box and I still haven't been able to use my Spyder3 Pro to fix that to my satisfaction. I'm going to use Jarred's RGB settings and see how that goes.

    One mildly irritating thing, after playing around with the On Screen Display and the Spyder for several days the white contrast marking on the front panel buttons has completely worn off. Jarred, did you see any of that on your sample?

    But I have no buyer's remorse over this purchase, and that is something I don't experience very often.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I haven't noticed any issues with the button labels wearing off, but then I might not be using them enough, or perhaps your fingertips have more oil than average and that's causing the loss. After the labels are gone, you can pretend to have a Samsung 2493HM and guess at which buttons do what until you get the layout memorized. :) Reply
  • feraltoad - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    Do you think a subsequent Dell Revision will fix this or as you suggest are we seeing possible limitations in that panel technology?

    Currently some users are reporting a "red tint" on the left side of their monitors. Has anyone experienced this?

    Owners of the Dell 2408 I would appreciate some opinions about this monitor, because I want to upgrade to a 24inch LCD (& get rid of a CRT on a second PC), but as I currently have a 21inch LCD (HP f2105) that I am mostly happy with I want to get something thing that will be a definite improvement. As Jarred states the Dell, sans any lemons, looks to be perfect except for the slight input lag, and that's the concensus I've seen among opinions on various sites. I don't think I could even notice but I would like to hear some people with experience with the 2408. I would value Anandtech readers' opinions more than reviews off Dell's site since we are probably more on the same page.
  • Gast - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link


    From this should come your dork binding monitor, which looks to be the DoubleSight DS-263N with the chance of a polarizer. I'm sad that the article neglected to even mention this great resource.
  • rcraig - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I, too, am waiting for a review of the DoubleSight DS-263N. I have read a lot about this monitor in another forum and it seems to be the one monitor to rule them all. Great colors for phtotgraphs, low lag for games, IPS for great viewing angles, and 26 inches for only $680! It only lacks the many input features some offer, but it does offer dual DVI, VGA, and 4 USB's. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I've sent a couple email messages to DoubleSight, so far with no response. Same goes for a variety of other manufacturers. I'd love to go out and buy the LCDs I want to review, but that's not financially practical. :-( Reply
  • XtAzY - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I'm just skimming through the article, but does it mention anything about GHOSTING? Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    You're talking about pixel response times. See page 12 and look at the images. Reply
  • musicman1352000 - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I have been waiting - desperately hoping and praying - that anandtech would review the dell 2408. It seems to be a stand out performer to me but I've been really put off buying it by the number of complaints of pink/red "tint", uneven brightness, colourful font halos, and bad input lag posted in forums. Reviews contradict each other and many people are waiting for a revision to solve the perceived problems like input lag (coming from an engineer, I am fully aware this particular problem can't be solved by a revision!). What I'd like to know is whether you noticed any of the problems I mentioned (not including the input lag which you obviously picked up on), and what revision of monitor you received (A00 or A01)? Also, Dell don't seem keen on telling users what versions of HDMI and displayport are used - do you know anything about this?
  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I noticed no problems with the quality of the panel on the 2408WFP I received, with is revision A00. However, that doesn't mean some panels don't have problems. If overall quality is that important, LaCie seems to do a better job judging by their reputation (and price).

    I imagine part of the problem users have is that the default brightness on many monitors is way too high, and sometimes color settings need to be turned down as well. You can see that at 80-80-80 RGB with 50 on brightness and contrast, the Dell achieved exceptional color accuracy even without calibration. Is this just a cherry-picked sample? I certainly hope not!

    I have no idea what version of DisplayPort the 2408 uses - and lacking any video cards with the feature I couldn't even test it right now. For HDMI, I would assume it's not 1.3, but I could be wrong. Probably v1.1 or maybe 1.2 - is there any easy way to tell? If someone can point me to a utility that will report the HDMI version, I'll be happy to test.
  • musicman1352000 - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    Mmm okay - thank you for replying.
    One of the worst things about living in New Zealand is the increased cost of buying computer parts, and the reduced ranges available (see http://www.pricespy.co.nz/cat_5.html#g147)">http://www.pricespy.co.nz/cat_5.html#g147). The Dell costs $1199.00 NZD here (and the Lacie is unavailable). That's approximately $930 when translated to USD. As I understand it the cost is ~$700 in the US?
    With regards to the HDMI/displayport versions: unfortunately I don't know of any way in which you could test the display to find out. Tektronix offers software for 1.3b compliance testing (trial: http://www2.tek.com/cmswpt/swdetails.lotr?ct=SW&am...">http://www2.tek.com/cmswpt/swdetails.lo...CDSA7160...
    but I think this is more engineering oriented. Maybe someone else has a suggestion?
    Thanks once again for your opinions :)
  • feelingshorter - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I hope anandtech reviews some of the cheaper monitors in the future also. The cheapest monitors reviewed, being the gateway/samsung at 450 is a steep price for some of us.

    Just to name the cheaper ones on newegg, SCEPTRE X24WG is at 300 (AR) and seems to be the poor man's 24, or the KDS K-24MDWB at 350 is also at a reasonable price. Plus wouldn't comparing the low end be a good idea to see if you can justify paying for a $1000 lacie (or 500+) gets you more?
  • Dainas - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    Well, it would not be as much fun as if they had done it 3 months ago. All the sub-$500 'jewels' have been dissapearing from the market. Just as well though, might as well review something that will still be easy to buy +6 months down the road. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    It shouldn't be too much of a surprise that the cheapest LCDs often have much lower quality. That being the case, most of the manufacturers of cheap LCDs are unwilling to send us review units. Hence, we end up with 24" roundups (and some upcoming 27 and 30" units as well).

    That said, I think more people should bite the bullet and splurge on a really nice display. I couldn't imagine running an SLI or CrossFire system without at least a 24" monitor, and having upgraded to a 30" LCD 18 months back I've never regretted the decision. I hope to continue to use my 30" LCD for at least another 5 years; try saying that about the rest of a PC. $500 sounds like a lot, but a good display can last through several PC upgrades.
  • Basilisk - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I have to agree with the original poster on this sub-thread. There's nothing about these four units that command my interest yet. If you're not shipped the units, I still find it surprising that you don't know folks who've bought the cheaper units -- I do -- or a store manager who might loan them. Whatever, you have your criteria, even if they edge your review towards irrelevance for me.

    "That said, I think more people should bite the bullet and splurge on a really nice display." Well... that's been my strategy in life, but I've now retired and the economic picture has changed; others haven't the coins to spare or a need that justifies the extra bucks. I game, but nothing requiring high speed LCDs; I work with pictures, but nothing that justifies full color gamut monitors. So... what is there beyond elitism to recommend spending an extra $200-$400 for something I won't use? Some might call that an immature purchase decision, not splurging. I'd have loved to see the OfficeMax Soyo 24" monitor -- recurringly sold at $275 -- included so I'd know why NOT to buy it, or to.

    Well, I'll probably skip the 24" size and make a 28" my next purchase anyway: at my age, size matters. :) The old orbs are becoming challenged using my 21" CRT and 22" WS LCD on detailed web pages.
  • strikeback03 - Tuesday, May 06, 2008 - link

    For our lab we have bought a few of the Westinghouse 24" monitors Newegg sells for ~350 (After rebate) and for the price I'd assume they use a TN panel, but it has very good viewing angles.

    Have not had a chance to try color calibration. Seems it's biggest problems are 1) no DVI, and over HDMI it goes to blue screen instead of sleep when the signal is cut; and 2) the controls for the OSD are awful, they are on the side of the monitor so you have to try and look at their tiny labels and look around at the screen to do anything.
  • Dainas - Thursday, May 01, 2008 - link

    Well its partly bullshit, there is a lolair MVA (different take on PVA) that has zero input lag and is lighting fast even among TNs.

    I can assure you of one thing, the lag in the PVA 2408WFP and LaCie is however definitely not due to the panel. Just as the 3008WFP IPS is as slow as mud next to the 3007WFP IPS due to its built in scalar. But Dell panels were never fast and I'm sure a PVA could be made as fast as the fastest MVAs, which are as fast as TNs as any sane gamer could be concerned.
  • Dainas - Thursday, May 01, 2008 - link

    No edit function, ugh. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I'm not at all sure that PVA can be made as fast as TN. If it can, then why do the Gateway LCDs behave so differently? The interface is practically the same and they both use Faroudja video processors. Why would Gateway use one scaler on their S-PVA and a different one on the TN - particularly if the TN scaler appears better?

    I don't doubt that they can reduce the lag, but you'll notice out of nine LCDs five have lag of 18ms or more and four have virtually no lag; the four without lag are TN and the five with lag are S-PVA. The circumstantial evidence is pretty significant.
  • Pirks - Thursday, May 01, 2008 - link


    Dying to see this reviewed!

    Puhleeeasseee with sugar on top

    Okay? :D
  • timmiser - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    This is my monitor I've been using for the past 6 months and I absolutely love it. I bought mine at Costco.com for the same price that most of those 24" were selling for at the time. One thing about is the fact that is has the same resolution as the 24" screens so everything is a bit larger but to me, that is a good thing. I had one 19" Hanns-G monitor prior to this and can agree on the cheapness but this one I feel is of very high quality and no complaints yet. Reply
  • Googer - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    I have read multiple HANS-G monitor reviews from other hardware sites in the past and the consensus is that HANS-G monitors are cheaply made to match the cheap price tag, typically resulting in a poor review. Reply
  • Basilisk - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    Ditto. But I expect Hanns is too low-priced to send a review sample. [Sigh.] Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    A request email has been sent to Hanns.G; whether they'll respond is anyone's guess. :-) Reply
  • benno - Thursday, May 01, 2008 - link

    I've got nothing better to do so I thought I'd point out there are two errors on the first page of this article. You Americans are as bad as us Aussies when it comes to butchering the English language :) Reply
  • benno - Thursday, May 01, 2008 - link

    HA! One of them just got fixed... Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, May 01, 2008 - link

    Sorry - speech recognition misses some stuff like "to" vs. "two" vs. "too". Since I'm also the copy editor and have been trying to finish up this article for the past two weeks, I admit to being a bit lazy about doing final proofing. Whine in the comments and I'll be sure to correct the errors. Figured most people would be more interested in getting the article than in getting 100% correct English. :D Reply
  • wordsworm - Sunday, May 04, 2008 - link

    Why don't you guys and daily tech split on a proof reader? Surely a proofreader would be able to catch all the errors without much problem. Reply
  • benno - Thursday, May 01, 2008 - link

    No worries. I didn't really care I just had nothing better to do. Maybe I should start a hobby... Reply
  • GaryJohnson - Friday, May 02, 2008 - link

    There's always kangaroo tipping. Reply
  • niva - Monday, May 05, 2008 - link

    No, you don't tip those things, they'd f u up if you try. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now