Samsung Verses Samsung...

killadoob said:
What is your point on the lcd vs led? Did you have one or just another useless post?

I would love to try led but i cannot justify buying another new monitor :D.
Click to expand...

Well I did say before that I was thinking about getting an N8.. So need HDMI.. Well want it.. And it's always good to know more.. for future wise ^^
 
enigma243 said:
Rich. Coming from one of the masters of useless posts.
Click to expand...

Not rich.. I have to sell my old monitor first before getting this one.. So.. yeah.. If i was rich.. I would just buy it without even considering anything about the monitor..
 
LOL

Kaisterkai omg that is funny :D.

Dude if you want it then make it happen, sell your old monitor and buy it. The itch needs to scratched sadly for most of us :D.
 
No point going to 24" (23.6"?) from 23" IMO. Rather get 27". And LED is pure marketing gimmick; they are LED edge-lit LCD's and can actually be worse than LCD's in that LED edge-lit LCD's tend to suffer from uneven lighting and possibly more back-light bleed. No improvement in picture quality, perhaps a little brighter but no one sane is going to run it at "torch mode" to tell the difference - monitor will just die out sooner.
 
killadoob said:
LOL

Kaisterkai omg that is funny :D.

Dude if you want it then make it happen, sell your old monitor and buy it. The itch needs to scratched sadly for most of us :D.
Click to expand...

I want to.. but you know everything is money.. Just now I buy something that is WORSE than what I have now.. That would just be depressing :P
 
PostmanPot said:
No point going to 24" (23.6"?) from 23" IMO. Rather get 27". And LED is pure marketing gimmick; they are LED edge-lit LCD's and can actually be worse than LCD's in that LED edge-lit LCD's tend to suffer from uneven lighting and possibly more back-light bleed. No improvement in picture quality, perhaps a little brighter but no one sane is going to run it at "torch mode" to tell the difference - monitor will just die out sooner.
Click to expand...

LED could worse than LCD?

Wow.. mm.. Never though of that..

Anyone has the same thought?
 
I would not bother spending R2k for 0.6 of an inch and LED backlighting.

Next step up is the LG IPS monitors or if budget allows the Dells/HPs with proper stands etc.
 
Maddmatt said:
LED is just the backlight(s). It's still an LCD, doesn't mean anything in relation to picture quality.
Also, ignore dynamic contrast figures. Dynamic contrast is horrible.
Click to expand...

So what's the backlight on the 'LCD' model then? Incandescent?!

Seeing as this monitor does not exist on google, if the prices are approximately the same, my guess is that the one just has better backlighting (more LEDs/different spacing/etc).
 
kaisterkai said:
So 2 is better than 5?
Takes less time to refresh image?
Click to expand...

No refresh. :) 2 is better than 5 though. The 2ms basically means how quick the monitor can draw a black image to white, and back to black again. So the lower the response time, the quicker this happens = winning!! :D

kaisterkai said:
LED could worse than LCD?

Wow.. mm.. Never though of that..

Anyone has the same thought?
Click to expand...

It could be, but I'm still to see. Then again, most LED monitors if not all I have seen so far, has a glossy finish. Which can be a strain on the eye with to much glare happening. Some standard LCD's come with a matte screen that's not so bad on the eye. Where the LED makes up a little though is the brightness does help a bit. I can sit outside and browse with no major strain when setting my brightness to full.

Brawler said:
I would not bother spending R2k for 0.6 of an inch and LED backlighting.

Next step up is the LG IPS monitors or if budget allows the Dells/HPs with proper stands etc.
Click to expand...

Agreed. If it's such a marginal increase in size, don't bother. The LED tech alone does not justify the expense.

My motto "only upgrade if it makes you go "wow I love this", not "oh this is nice". :)

ps. Standard LCD is backlit by CCFL, Cold Cathode Fluorecent tubes.
 
Last edited:
UnUnOctium said:
So what's the backlight on the 'LCD' model then? Incandescent?!

Seeing as this monitor does not exist on google, if the prices are approximately the same, my guess is that the one just has better backlighting (more LEDs/different spacing/etc).
Click to expand...

CCFL.

Think he meant BX2450.

Better back-lighting is arguable. Better in that it allows the screen to be slimmer and use slightly less power. Worse in that LED edge-lit LCD's are more prone to back-light bleed and uneven lighting.

Again, no picture quality difference.
 
J0n0 said:
No refresh. :) 2 is better than 5 though. The 2ms basically means how quick the monitor can draw a black image to white, and back to black again. So the lower the response time, the quicker this happens = winning!! :D
Click to expand...

2ms screens tend to be lower rated than 5ms screens.

Seriously, I'll echo what was said earlier: As long as it's under 8ms, you won't be able to tell a difference. It's purely marketing gimmick.

It could be, but I'm still to see. Then again, most LED monitors if not all I have seen so far, has a glossy finish. Which can be a strain on the eye with to much glare happening. Some standard LCD's come with a matte screen that's not so bad on the eye. Where the LED makes up a little though is the brightness does help a bit. I can sit outside and browse with no major strain when setting my brightness to full.
Click to expand...

You're implying that you cant do this with CCFL LCD?

I call bs. LED edge-lit LCD's have higher dynamic contrasts ratios. Which basically means bugger-all. Basically you would only notice a difference under dark viewing conditions - not under normal viewing conditions where we have lights, ambient lighting, etc..

Again we see marketing gimmick. Higher dynamic ratio so the consumer thinks it's better or makes a difference.
 
It could be, but I'm still to see. Then again, most LED monitors if not all I have seen so far, has a glossy finish. Which can be a strain on the eye with to much glare happening. Some standard LCD's come with a matte screen that's not so bad on the eye. Where the LED makes up a little though is the brightness does help a bit. I can sit outside and browse with no major strain when setting my brightness to full.
Click to expand...

PostmanPot said:
You're implying that you cant do this with CCFL LCD?

I call bs. LED edge-lit LCD's have higher dynamic contrasts ratios. Which basically means bugger-all. Basically you would only notice a difference under dark viewing conditions - not under normal viewing conditions where we have lights, ambient lighting, etc..

Again we see marketing gimmick. Higher dynamic ratio so the consumer thinks it's better or makes a difference.
Click to expand...

okay srsly show me the bit where I said it's not possible please? Read what I wrote SLOWLY this time then rant again please. :)
 
J0n0 said:
okay srsly show me the bit where I said it's not possible please? Read what I wrote SLOWLY this time then rant again please. :)
Click to expand...

I suggest the same to you.

Re-read what you wrote.

And then re-read what I wrote, particularly the question mark.

Hint: What you wrote could be misconstrued as that LED edge-lit LCD's supposed increase in brightness would help you see better when outside. Not true. LED edge-lit LCD's are only brighter when in virtually pitch black viewing conditions without any lights or ambient lighting. Perhaps rewrite your post as it's misleading. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X