A Closer Look at the BenQ FP241VW

Okay, we've talked about LCD panel technologies, and based on some of the discussion you should have a fair idea of what the FP241VW brings to the table. Even though the display is discontinued, you might be able to find one on sale somewhere, and there's a reasonable chance we'll see the same A-MVA panel in displays from other manufacturers. If you happen to know of some A-MVA 24" LCDs that use the AU Optronics panel (any 24" A-MVA display should meet that criterion), please leave a note in the comments section.

BenQ FP241VW Specifications
Video Inputs DVI with HDCP support
HDMI
Analog (VGA)
Component
S-Video
Composite
Panel Type A-MVA (AU Optronics)
Pixel Pitch 0.269mm
Colors 16.7 million (8-bit color)
Brightness 500 cd/m2 advertised
Contrast Ratio 1000:1 advertised
Response Time 6ms GTG
Viewable Size 24" diagonal
Resolution 1920x1200 (WUXGA)
Viewing Angle 178 horizontal/vertical
Power Consumption <95W max stated
Power Savings <2W
Screen Treatment Matte (non-glossy)
Height-Adjustable No
Tilt Yes - 20 degrees back/5 degrees forward
Pivot No
Swivel No
VESA Wall Mounting Yes - but you can't (easily) remove the frame/stand
Dimensions w/ Base (WxHxD) 27.6" x 18.6" x 5.3" (WxHxD)
Weight w/ Stand 22 lbs.
Additional Features 2 x USB Ports
Audio Headphone/Line out (no built in speakers)
Limited Warranty 3-year limited warranty, M-F 8:30AM-5:30PM PST
Accessories HDMI, DVI, USB, VGA, and power cables
Price Online starting at ~$450 - (Original MSRP ~$850)

Like the upper-end 24" S-PVA displays, as well as some of the better 24" TN panels, the FP241VW comes with a large selection of input options. VGA, DVI, HDMI are there, along with component, S-Video, and composite connections. You wouldn't want to use S-Video or Composite if you can avoid it, but all of the other inputs are viable choices. We didn't complete our full set of tests for resolution support, so we can't say how well the display works in every situation, but we can say that resolution support is a bit more finicky than some of the better LCDs. The native 1920x1200 resolution always worked well, but other 16:10 aspect ratio resolutions did not function as well. 1440x900 in particular failed to work properly when we forced that mode via the display drivers. HDMI also appears to target 16:9 resolutions, despite the 16:10 AR, so 1680x1050 and many other resolutions didn't work well with HDMI and we would recommend 1920x1080 for the best overall image using that connection.

One item that immediately caught our attention in testing is the OSD (On Screen Display), and unfortunately it wasn't in a good way. The OSD is by far the most sluggish UI we've used on an LCD, often requiring over 1 second to change selections. You shouldn't need to use the OSD all that much after initial setup, but aspect ratio scaling options didn't always work as expected and overall the OSD feels like it needs a major overhaul - or at least a processor upgrade. It does offer plenty of options, as you can see in the above gallery, but option overload isn't the same thing as working well.

Gallery: BenQ FP241VW

Something else that will make this display immediately stand out from other LCDs is the base stand. Instead of a traditional stand, BenQ has a large frame that supports the LCD, connected to the panel on the sides. This might not seem like a big deal at first - and for some users it won't be - but it does create some drawbacks. The frame means that there is no height adjustment, no pivot or rotate functionality, and while the back of the LCD has a VESA wall mount, you can't (easily) remove the stand - so in other words, using the wall mount will look silly at best. It also means the LCD is bulkier than other 24" LCDs. The OSD controls are located on the left support of the base stand, so even if you do manage to remove the stand you will still have to keep that circuit board around - likely dangling by a wire. Frankly, while it's sometimes good to be different, in this case we think it would be far better to stick with the tried-and-true approach of removable base stands that attach to the back of the LCD.

Okay, we've said enough about the FP241VW, especially considering you can't easily find this display for sale anymore. Let's move on to the evaluation of the performance characteristics of this A-MVA panel and see how it stacks up against the competition.

Let's Talk Panel Technologies Display Lag and Response Time
Comments Locked

114 Comments

View All Comments

  • Gazz - Friday, June 19, 2009 - link

    I am useing a samsung 2493HM and have no problems at all with the monitor plays games fantastic although I have the speakers disconected Too small for what I am useing
    BUT it is hard to find one anymore so I checked out the Samsung site and found a range of monitors T220R,T240R,T260R with out speakers but it does not say what pannels they use
  • JarredWalton - Saturday, June 20, 2009 - link

    The http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=3...">2493HM is a TN panel, so you really can't get any "worse" in terms of panel type. There are better and worse TN panels, of course, and the 2493HM was actually good as far as TN goes. Like other TN, it also doesn't have any perceptible lag, which is another plus. If you're happy with the 2493HM, you should be okay with most other displays, provided they do well in other areas.
  • fredsnotdead - Friday, June 19, 2009 - link

    "... an apparently single-minded focus on reducing costs and pricing ..."

    Unfortunately, that seems to be all we Americans are interested in.
  • Geraldo8022 - Friday, June 19, 2009 - link

    I am someone who lives "off the grid". I get my power from solar and while I now have quite a number of panels and batteries I still want low power consumption. I wish more manufacturers would be more truthful about how much power their monitors use. I would like to see the websites who test monitors test the power consumption in variety of ways and consistently.
    I read a lot of gripes about monitors. It is surprising to me that there are not websites devoted exclusively to monitors.
  • darklight0tr - Friday, June 19, 2009 - link

    You mean like this one?

    http://tftcentral.co.uk/">http://tftcentral.co.uk/

    Its a pretty good site.
  • Geraldo8022 - Friday, June 19, 2009 - link

    Yes, I have followed that site, darklight. I think it is very good. It is the only one I know of.
    Jarred, thanks for that info. All I have to go on are things like the specifications at the 'Egg. Good to know.
    I realize power consumption can only be so low and most are interested in other aspects. I am interested in those things, too, Just weigh things differently.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, June 19, 2009 - link

    I usually test power draw, Geraldo, but neglected to do that with this LCD. Usually, the max power draw they list (<95W) is at least 50% higher than it what I've measured. I'd expect this LCD to consume more like ~60W at full brightness, or 50-55W with the brightness calibrated to around 200 nits.
  • Mumrik - Friday, June 19, 2009 - link

    "The reference Monitor is an HP LP3065, which we have found to be one of the best LCDs we currently possess in terms of not having display lag. (The lack of a built-in scaler probably has something to do with this.) While we know some of you would like us to compare performance to a CRT, that's not something we have around our offices anymore."



    Buy one then!
  • JarredWalton - Friday, June 19, 2009 - link

    Sorry, but no. It serves no point other than to add a large, heavy item to my already crowded office. I'm not comparing with CRTs because 99% of people aren't using or buying CRTs. Either a display has less lag than the LP3065 or it has more lag; it is merely a reference point. If you want to read about how LCDs compare to CRTs, plenty of sites have attempted to cover that topic.
  • james jwb - Thursday, June 18, 2009 - link

    At least one high profile site that can actually make a difference is paying this issue some attention, and i have to thank you for that!

    I particularly like the last part of the article which looks to the future, as in my opinion we still haven't hit a quality stage that truly knocks on CRT's door. Sure, in term of viewing angles, colour, brightness, etc, it's all there, and you can't deny the benefits of LCD's (foot print, etc). But 60hz is just plain poor and i honestly cannot wait for it to fade off the planet. 120hz is vastly superior.

    One last thing. It's possible most of these TN film users who just "don't care" about the sacrificial quality never came from a background of using high quality CRT's. It's very difficult, even today, to move from a 21" professional CRT to ANY LCD and not feel you've compromised in some areas, namely the smooth and snappy response these things have. I have a feeling 120hz will bridge the gap far enough that it'll be very hard to notice any downsides to LCD technology over CRT's. But for a 24" LCD to have 120hz, its going to need display port (or at least, not DVI), and with hardly any graphics cards supporting this yet, what TFT maker would introduce one? They are certainly coming, but right now, as you rightly say, the tech is there, ready and waiting, but the market isn't.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now