HP 2311xi IPS Monitor

by Chris Heinonen on 8/13/2012 12:15 AM EST
POST A COMMENT

68 Comments

Back to Article

  • Khenglish - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    When I saw that a 23" version of a 27" screen was being released, I was hoping that it would be the same 2560x1440 resolution. Sadly it was not.

    Why can't anyone make a monitor with a pixel density higher than my 2002 CRT? A 19" 2560x1600 screen would be awesome and I would pay a lot for it. I'd rather not have to turn my head to look from one corner to the other with a 27" or 30" screen.
    Reply
  • tecknurd - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Manufacturing a CRT to display high resolutions like 2560 by 1600 does not require much. The electronics are what is require to handle resolutions. LCD on other hand, silicon cost a lot to make that amount of pixels and the high performance panel driver is then needed, so LCD has two pricey hardware to make a finish product. CRT just need the electronics.

    Using a 27 inch or 30 inch screen, you just need to sit further from it to see it all at once.
    Reply
  • Sabresiberian - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Really, the problem of price isn't as much of a barrier as we've been lead to think, as the influx of $300 (including shipping for S. Korea) 2560x1440 monitors has shown. Also, there are inexpensive phones and tablets that have far higher pixel densities than the monitors currently available.

    As far as using a bigger screen and sitting farther back - wut? That's, uh, not very practical and really makes no sense.

    ;)
    Reply
  • Zoomer - Tuesday, August 14, 2012 - link

    These korean monitors get lower grade panels. In other words, panels that are rejected for inclusion in top brands like Apple, HP, Dell, etc. That's why they are priced at that point.

    Phones and tablets use must smaller screens, and therefore, exponentially easier to make without defects.
    Reply
  • scarhead - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    They will come before long. There's already a 15" laptop with 2880 x 1800. Reply
  • janderk - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    High res displays have been here for a long time. Problem is price.

    For the price of that Apple laptop you mentioned, you can buy 15 HP IPS monitors. What is a shame is that all other Apple laptops feature low quality TN displays.

    It is quite revolutionary that you can buy a good IPS display for $200. One with 1200 vertical pixels even. I remember paying 1600 Euro for my 23" HP 2335 IPS display some years ago.
    Reply
  • janderk - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Correction to myself: The display is 1080. Not 1200. Reply
  • KZ0 - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Macbook Pro Retina uses an IPS panel.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5998/macbook-pro-ret...
    Reply
  • janderk - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    That's why I said "all other". Reply
  • Tetracycloide - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    I believe that's the one scarhead was referring to and the one janderk was excluding when he said 'all OTHER Apple laptops.' Reply
  • eallan - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    So we're comparing full blow laptops with great specs to monitors now? Reply
  • darwinosx - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Yeah pretty odd comparison. Also Apple laptop displays have gotten great ratings on this very website. Reply
  • Sabresiberian - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    So you can't figure out he's just saying that there are high density monitors on the market already, and is just using the Apple Retina display notebooks as an example? Reply
  • piroroadkill - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    There are very high res TFT-LCDs. Check out the IBM T220/1, 3840×2400, 22.2", back in 2001...

    Just a very small market for them, or at least there is perceived to be a very small market.
    Reply
  • gegiarmo - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Why do so many companies refuse to put Displayport in such nice monitors? Does it really cost that much more to add in? Reply
  • jeremyshaw - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    I'm guessing, but maybe they reused an existing controller PCB to shave costs. Or an older controller ASIC without DP, that was cheaper. Reply
  • Bull Dog - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    yea honestly I started reading the article and saw, 'with no DisplayPort input' and I felt like not continuing to read any further. No DP input, no chance of my buying it or recommending someone else to get it. DP is the future, get with the times. Reply
  • Bull Dog - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    but after finishing reading this review it does appear to be a nice monitor for $200.

    My sister purchased a Dell U2312HM for $240 back when Dell had it on sale. She is quite happy with it and for the little extra $$ you get a much more adjustable stand, Display Port, VESA mounts and matte black plastic.
    Reply
  • tk11 - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    You said it... "DP is the future" but the now is still dominated by DVI / HDMI. Reply
  • Senpuu - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    A quick wiki search reveals that the first monitor with a DP port was released in January of 2008. Over the intervening years, it's gained rather widespread adoption, to the point that every modern GPU has a DP port. DP provides the most connection bandwidth of any standard, it's adaptable, and it's royalty free to incorporate into your monitor design. It seems a little silly at this point to exclude it from a new product.

    I'd say that DP is the present...
    Reply
  • tk11 - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Currently newegg.ca shows only 43 z77 motherboards that feature DP while 143 support DVI/HDMI. Likewise only 42 LCD monitors feature DP while 203 support DVI. Unless you're a gamer or hardware enthusiast odds are you still don't have a DP output.

    DP's release date, presence on any number of video cards, and lack of royalties can't make up for it's absence on the majority of both currently shipping and previously shipped products.
    Reply
  • AFUMCBill - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    I am going to make the extraordinary guess that for the low-price low-end market HP is trying to target, HP already knows that 95%+ of that segment neither knows what it is much less why they should care. Reply
  • theoldguy - Friday, August 17, 2012 - link

    Believe it or not VGA is still the most used input in the world.
    That along with the fact that too many people want something for nothing.
    You get what you pay for, like it or not, in the display world.
    HDMI is geared for the consumer retail customers (because of CE devices - ex. DVD players) and DP is geared for the commercial market.
    DP has essentially replaced DVI permanently. The benefits are too numerous to list.
    Check out DP features on the Wiki sites.
    There are some higher end monitors that ship to both markets and may have both HDMI and DP, but you'll pay a little extra for those.
    If CE devices would adopt the DP interface for TVs and DVD players then it would take off in the consumer space and HDMI would have a serious battle on their hands.
    But there's a lot of money backing HDMI and it won't go down without a fight.
    Reply
  • StrangerGuy - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    STOP USING GLOSSY PLASTIC FFS.

    JUST STOP, for the sake of the world.
    Reply
  • Leyawiin - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Indeed. I'm sick to death of that cheap looking crap on most monitors and TVs. Black matte finishes looks so much better and classier on bezels and stands. Reply
  • toronado455 - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Cheap stand + no VESA = FAIL Reply
  • althaz - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    This. I would buy two of these instantly if they had VESA mounting holes. I have a dual-monitor HP stand and I am not willing to give it up, but my existing monitors (freebie Acers) kinda suck. Reply
  • althaz - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Also, I couldn't care less about DP. More people have HDMI than DP (I have both free). Reply
  • eaw999 - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    take a look at the asus vs239h-p. <$200, ips, vesa mounts, vga, dvi, hdmi.

    http://usa.asus.com/Display/LCD_Monitors/VS239HP/
    Reply
  • mechBgon - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    An external power brick? 2001 called, it wants its monitor back. Reply
  • kyuu - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    What? External power bricks are quite common. You can make the monitor significantly thinner, and you don't have to worry about the additional heat generated by the power brick. Honestly, this is a weird complaint anyway. Reply
  • cheinonen - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    I completely agree with disliking the external power brick. I understand it makes it thinner, and easier to design, and possibly easier to ship around the world as you just replace the brick by region, but it makes wiring my desktop more of a pain. The trade-off in thinness isn't worth it to me, but I know some people don't mind, but some do. Reply
  • Impulses - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    It's definitely not for me... Poor stand w/no VESA mounting, 1080p res, and no DP are just too many compromises... But having decent IPS displays like this one available at $200 is great for the consumer in general, two years ago you were looking at $300+ for a display like this, three or four years ago it would've been $400+. Low cost IPS displays are finally in the same pricing realm of rock bottom TN displays, and that's not bad at all. Reply
  • Olaf van der Spek - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Isn't the U2412M more like a $300 monitor? Even the U2312HM is $260 on NewEgg.
    No DP & no VESA sucks. :(
    Reply
  • cheinonen - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    I mention that the U2412M is more expensive and that the U2312HM might be a better comparison, but as I haven't reviewed the 2312 but have reviewed the 2412 it was the best comparison I could make. Reply
  • mikato - Thursday, August 16, 2012 - link

    You can buy the U2412M for $270 right now from Dell with free shipping -
    http://slickdeals.net/permadeal/78498/dell-small-b...
    Reply
  • mikato - Thursday, August 16, 2012 - link

    U2312HM is $210 at Dell Small Business right now
    http://slickdeals.net/permadeal/78498/dell-small-b...
    Reply
  • ananduser - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Chris, when are you guys gonna review some 120Hz monitors ? Reply
  • StickerLover - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    ...needs more stickers !
    Oh, and more glossy plastic !
    Reply
  • DanNeely - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Would it be difficult to reorder the labels for the curves so that the upper left label was in the top left position, the lower right was in the lower right position, etc? Reply
  • fishman - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Sorry, but a 16:9 monitor? Great for a TV, but not for a general purpose computer. Reply
  • kyuu - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    And here I was hoping we'd get one monitor review without 16:10 snobs popping up... Reply
  • seapeople - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Ok, then go buy the 1200p monitor for the same price.

    Oh wait.

    You can't.
    Reply
  • risa2000 - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    I guess I might have googled it, but I wonder why it is not mentioned anywhere? Are there really no other panels than 60Hz nowadays?
    I am working now on old 19" ThinkVision (excellent LCD, with 75Hz refresh) and 60 to 75 makes difference.
    Reply
  • kyuu - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Yep, monitors are 60Hz pretty much exclusively nowadays, unless you're looking at monitors meant for 3D that do 120Hz. Reply
  • cheinonen - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Unless it is mentioned, I would assume 60Hz for a refresh rate. With the use of an HDMI input, and not specifically being an HDMI input that supports beyond 1080p, it's likely the internal electronics only support a 60Hz input anyway, even if the panel could support higher. Reply
  • Jumangi - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Bestbuy has this on sale for $169. Yea its got compramises but for that price the basic display you get is a darn good deal. Reply
  • jaydee - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Here are all the 23" IPS monitors that I've seen (there could be more) with features listed. It would be great to to get a roundup of all of them... AT has already reviewed the top two on the list.

    AOC i2353ph, 1080, DVI/HDMI, no USB, speakers
    HP 2311XI, 1080, DVI/HDMI, no USB, no speakers
    NEC EA232, 1080, DVI/DP, no USB, speakers
    Dell U2312HM, 1080, DVI/DP, USB hub, no speakers
    LG IPS231B, 1080, DVI/HDMI, no USB, speakers
    LG IPS235V, 1080, DVI/HDMI, no USB, no speakers
    Reply
  • EddieBoy - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    I think this is a good idea. How about putting together a round up of displays so it is easier to compare their pluses and minuses? Reply
  • mikato - Thursday, August 16, 2012 - link

    +1
    IPS monitor roundup! There are so many people out there with their eye on IPS monitors, but since they cost a bit more, these people are careful and do their research. They would definitely like a roundup like this.
    Reply
  • XonicEQ - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Cheapest I can find is on amazon for $234. Where do I find it for $200? Reply
  • cheinonen - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    Direct from HP.com was the price I used, and the date of that price should be mentioned in the specs. It might have changed by then, but it was from HP on the date I listed. Reply
  • EddieBoy - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    As stated above, Best Buy currently has this monitor for sale for $169.99. Plus free shipping. Reply
  • Leyawiin - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    HP's switch to crappy stands that don't adjust and lack of VESA holes on their lower end monitors is pretty disappointing. My last monitor was an HP w2207h - glossy screen, height adjustable, sturdy. Went shopping this summer for a new monitor and discovered how cheaply they're been making them now. Reply
  • micksh - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link

    I don't see it mentioned in the article. It it's 6 bit it isn't good for photo work. Reply
  • mikato - Thursday, August 16, 2012 - link

    It says panel type e-IPS so yes. It probably should have been mentioned in the article text though also. How good for photo work is subjective. Reply
  • OBLAMA2009 - Tuesday, August 14, 2012 - link

    25" is big enough if its only 1900x 1080. they should have released this at a higher resolution, no one needs this Reply
  • AdamK47 - Tuesday, August 14, 2012 - link

    Chris, did you make sure you were testing with correct backlight brightness this time? ;) Reply
  • MobiusStrip - Tuesday, August 14, 2012 - link

    Try making it look tackier next time, HP.

    Glossy plastic schlock. Embarrassing.
    Reply
  • Sub Zero - Wednesday, August 15, 2012 - link

    In the old days you had CRT that were 21" (20" viewable) at 2048x1536. To get anything close to that on the PC side for the longest time, I had to go 30" at 2560x1600, which I run at 2048x1536 most of the time.

    Why can't we have 2560x1600 on a 27" or 24" LCD? 2560x1440 isn't as productive. a 4:3 at 2048x1536 would be nice at 24" even.

    But one thing that does concern me as much is the lack of detailed OSD functionality. I would like to be able to set resolution scaling and aspect ratio IN the monitor hardware. I have a 30" LCD and when I try to set it to 1280x720 to create a YouTube training video, for example, it stretches all the way out, regardless of the Nvidia or ATI control panel settings. It does not do that for 1920x1080, but it does for most of the lower resolutions.

    Yes, I could get a Dell that has that built in, but I don't like Dell LCD's. I've tried one 30" and 24" of theirs, and both were returned. Both tinted to the blue side, both generated a LOT of heat and they didn't look as good - even after calibration - as a Samsung or Viewsonic in terms of color, contrast, accuracy and vibrancy.

    If I could just force a 1:1 aspect ratio and DO NOT SCALE in the hardware, regardless of what LCD I purchase, it would give me a lot more flexibility.

    I like that they include DVI connectors in most monitors - I would not want it to be dropped in favor or Display Port. Why not have DVI, HDMI and Display Port? Does it really cost that much more?
    Reply
  • mikato - Thursday, August 16, 2012 - link

    Different resolutions in LCDs other than the native resolution look so crappy I don't know why you would want to change it. I'm not sure what you're doing in your video work but can't you scale it in the video player instead?

    For inputs, I think it's important to have one of [DVI, HDMI] and also one DisplayPort. That's because DVI and HDMI are electrically equivalent. converters are cheap and easy to come by. That's why the Dell U2412M has 1 DP, 1 DVI (and 1 VGA). If you want multiple monitors, then DisplayPort is the best way to go. If I was buying new stuff now I'd make sure the monitor had DP.

    Just curious, do you remember what Dell monitors you had?
    Reply
  • Sub Zero - Friday, August 17, 2012 - link

    When you want to upload HD to YouTube, you have 1280x720 and 1920x1080. 1280x720 is generally preferred because of bandwidth and playback issues.

    So, if I want to present in 1280x720, I want to record in 1280x720 for the best quality. So, I set the screen to run 1280x720, and I want it to actually use 1280x720 pixels centered in the screen, as it should be. It works for me on 2 monitors, but not on my 30", even though I'm using the same Win 7 64 bit Nvidia drivers.

    You may not see the need to use other than native resolution, but for people that do record often, either video games or tutorial, such variable resolution scenarios are common.

    There is an entire industry on YouTube where gamers do playthroughs with commentaries and most do at 1280x720. Most want it to display at 1280x720 at 1:1 pixel ratio while they play it. I see no problem with that.
    Reply
  • theoldguy - Friday, August 17, 2012 - link

    Remember, back in the old days...say mid-1990's you paid $650 for an average 17in CRT with a max resolution of 1600x1200. Back then we had more money to design Good products. It's been downhill ever since. People are spoiled to cheap, cheap, cheap stuff so companies are exploiting it, but as more of a survival tactic than anything else these days. My former co. made some great displays at one time, but nobody wanted to pay for them. They'd rather pay $250 for a cheap piece of crap. You can't convince management to keep making great displays when you can't sell enough to recoup the development costs. It's just simple economics.
    You can still get a few good displays out there today, but you're going to pay for them. Look at the specs for some of the NEC and HP commercial stuff, especially the Dream Color 24in monitor with the 30bit panel. There's a 47in that can be configured with its own IP address (network control), can daisy-chain 25 of them from one DP output, has VOE (video over ethernet) and has gorilla glass protective screen with a 2mm bezel. Of course you'll pay around $5k for that one!! I saw a wall of six of those doing the AMD Eyefinity 4k resolution thing. Gamer's heaven.
    Reply
  • Oxford Guy - Wednesday, August 15, 2012 - link

    Once again Anandtech hasn't mentioned PWM backlight flicker, a factor that has been covered in-depth at prad.de and to some extent at tftcentral. Both of those sites now include PWM measurements. Disappointing, Anandtech. Reply
  • Krane1 - Wednesday, August 15, 2012 - link

    For some reason the advancement in resolution has come to a complete halt. Even as we speak nearly a half dozen manufacturers have cameras on the market with 4k resolution and beyond. And although it is possible to edit this video on a reasonable budget, there is no way to view the full resolution without move into the cost of a car purchase territory.

    I've no idea why none of the monitor market haven't brought a reasonably priced 4k or 5k monitor to the market by now. But Apple has stepped in where others fear to tread.

    Only Apple has moved past the 1080p wall so far. And although I've never really been a fan, I have to admit that their vision forward in display development is the best in the industry. At the moment, only they offer a laptop with a display greater than 1080p. It's Retina display (2880 X 1800 resolution), puts the Apple Macbook Pro is in a class all by itself.
    Reply
  • theoldguy - Friday, August 17, 2012 - link

    Chris, make sure you turn off the Gamma control if you're going to calibrate.
    I suspect since this is an IPS panel, they use gamma correction to improve the dark 2.2 gamma (common with IPS/PLS/MVA panels) to around 1.8~2 gamma so people can see the details in dark shading. Also, native panel color temp for HP monitors is the Custom RGB setting. This bypasses what may be a poor factory setup on the color presets.
    Reply
  • LEDnoob - Wednesday, January 09, 2013 - link

    Chris you mentioned all you did was set the color mode on the 2311xi to sRGB mode where did you set that? I don't see that option on OSD are you talking about setting it using operating system?

    Also for this monitor has anyone tried sharpness/gamma test on http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/sharpness.php
    at default factory setting the sharpness test and the viewing angle test doesn't blend in at all. Does these test even work for IPS?

    If anyone can help me with these question it would be appreciated or else I probably have to return it again sigh... :(
    Reply
  • XchiMeraX - Wednesday, January 30, 2013 - link

    I am planning to purchase this product in India (Bangalore). I checked with all HP distributors in Bangalore sadly its not available any where, not even online. So please let me know where can i purchase this monitor in Karnataka? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now