Low Power Monitors from Samsung and Lenovo
Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 8:13 pm
Discussions about Silent Computing
https://www.silentpcreview.com/forums/
https://www.silentpcreview.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=55691
oh really?:PIronically, the fact that they make no noise at all (with a few exceptions) takes them off our radar
you shouldn't settle for your monitor making noise. There are several ways you can troubleshoot the sound. When I first bought my 22" samsung, it was making a faint humming. After troubleshooting, I found out that increasing or decreasing the brightness ever so slightly would completely mute the sound it was once making.czesiu wrote:my dell 2209wa does buzz and whine a little...
brightness = 100 and yes it eliminates the buzz, slight whine is still there as it depends more on what it's displayedRoGuE wrote:you shouldn't settle for your monitor making noise. There are several ways you can troubleshoot the sound. When I first bought my 22" samsung, it was making a faint humming. After troubleshooting, I found out that increasing or decreasing the brightness ever so slightly would completely mute the sound it was once making.czesiu wrote:my dell 2209wa does buzz and whine a little...
Still, if that doesn't work, your monitor is either a poor design, or is defective in some way. Just goes to show the importance of researching before you buy
* TN
o Good response time
o Very good dynamic range (400:1 with older generation, 700 - 1000:1 with newer gen TNs)
o Poor vertical viewing angle (especially from below)
o Poor screen uniformity and stability (white can look "dirty"), which can reduce perceived contrast
o Lateral viewing angle is not great (darker/lighter details can appear and disappear depending on the angle)
o 8-bit gradient (16.7M colors) through dithering and FRC
o Lack of true 8-bit DAC causes color tinting, fringing, and burning in gradients and poor reproduction of darker tones
o Very unlikely to get image persistence
o Low input lag (lower latency in screen update)
o Economical, but more prone to backlight bleeding and QC (quality control) problems than other panel types, too
Target Audience:
Gamers, general use (Word/Excel) who don't mind a poorer viewing angle. Less suitable for movies and poor for photo editing.
* VA
o Decent response time (varies)
o Great dynamic range (1000:1 - 1500:1)
o Horizontal color shift (certain gray tones rapidly shift at just a few degrees, worse than TNs in many cases)
o Image details absent at perpendicular angle
o Good vertical viewing angle
o Good screen uniformity (white is uniform and does not shift at angles, contrast is decent)
o 8-bit gradient (16.7M colors) through true 8-bit DAC (although dithering is possible with certain models)
o True 8-bit DAC allows better reproduction of gradients and sometimes better dark tones than TN panels
o Unlikely to get image persistence
o High input lag (high latency in screen update)
o Good value, and the least QC problems of all panels
Target Audience:
Gamers, general use (Word/Excel) who want a more stable viewing angle. OK for photo editing, although beware of color shifting. Not bad for movies, but not always great due to color shift.
* IPS
o Decent response time
o Medium dynamic range (400:1) or higher for AS-IPS/H-IPS/A-TW-IPS (700:1)
o Minimal color shift at any viewing angle (only slight brightness reduction, and very little gamma/tint shift)
o Image details present across entire screen
o Good screen uniformity (white is uniform and does not shift at angles, contrast is amazing)
o 8-bit gradient (16.7M colors) through true 8-bit DAC (although dithering is possible with certain models)
o True 8-bit DAC allows better reproduction of gradients and sometimes better dark tones than TN panels
o More neutral grayscale reproduction and warmer, less harsh image (most like a CRT) than S-PVA panels
o Medium input lag (low or high depending on model)
o More susceptible to image persistence
o Tends to be very expensive although benefits can be visible to normal users
o Prone to quality control problems: read reviews
Target Audience:
Photo editors will crave this type of panel. IPS-type panels are suitable and generally better for anything else too, including gaming and general use. Some people may prefer an S-PVA for higher dynamic range but an IPS panel, due to its viewing angle characteristics, probably has a higher contrast (ability of the LCD to reliably reproduce tones and nuances).
It seems quite a few SPCR readers - myself includet - would not agree with this: Quiet / Noisy Monitor SurveyIronically, the fact that they make no noise at all (with a few exceptions) takes them off our radar
Am I too extreme for SPCR or is SPCR too mainstream for me?the article wrote:Ironically, the fact that they make no noise at all
I think it's the latter.lm wrote:Am I too extreme for SPCR or is SPCR too mainstream for me?the article wrote:Ironically, the fact that they make no noise at all
OK, OK, these things sometimes happen, we cover a lot of ground! Give us a break -- I am the one who started the monitor survey in the first place!rpsgc wrote:Someone up there must've forgotten about the Quiet / Noisy Monitor Survey.
Monitors are not our usual review subjects at SPCR. Ironically, the fact that they make very little noise (with a few exceptions) takes them off our radar; they're generally quiet and we like that, but we don't have too much else to say. That said, our interest in power efficiency (and some corresponding environmental concerns) has prompted us to take a closer look at a couple LCD monitors that bill themselves as "low power". (Editor's Note: CFLs and other electronics inside modern monitors do often exhibit high pitched whining or buzzing sounds, as our Quiet / Noisy Monitor Survey has helped to document for the past year. However, the monitors reviewed here did not exhibit any audible noise.)
We are a very difficult audienceMikeC wrote:OK, OK, these things sometimes happen, we cover a lot of ground! Give us a break -- I am the one who started the monitor survey in the first place!
She looks good from behind as well...
...but the input selection is kind of basic...
... and her buttons are hard to find.
But the Lenovo is obviously exceptional in this regard. We've never seen anything else even close.Lt_Dan wrote:...the power consumption is 24W a lot for just an 1" more then the Lenvo.
Get one that doesn't make noise?rpsgc wrote:I think it's the latter.lm wrote:Am I too extreme for SPCR or is SPCR too mainstream for me?the article wrote:Ironically, the fact that they make no noise at all
Someone up there must've forgotten about the Quiet / Noisy Monitor Survey.
Monitors make no noise at all... Ha Ha good one
Yes, they do. This is a side effect of having a greater contrast ratio than my camera was capable of reproducing, as well as some judicious exposure changes in photoshop after the fact. As it says clearly in the review, exposure / brightness was not calibrated -- only colour reproduction was controlled for, through white balance.croddie wrote:Nice idea to test color reproduction. However the color corrected images have too high contrast. On the Samsung the overall effect is worse than default. Probably not too important as people using these monitors are unlikely to correct color unless it's done automatically by the OS installing a profile.
Low power ratings of these reminded me about one thing: PFC.MikeC wrote:But the Lenovo is obviously exceptional in this regard. We've never seen anything else even close.Lt_Dan wrote:...the power consumption is 24W a lot for just an 1" more then the Lenvo.
Did you take them in JPEG?Devonavar wrote:Yes, they do. This is a side effect of having a greater contrast ratio than my camera was capable of reproducingcroddie wrote:Nice idea to test color reproduction. However the color corrected images have too high contrast. On the Samsung the overall effect is worse than default. Probably not too important as people using these monitors are unlikely to correct color unless it's done automatically by the OS installing a profile.
Yes I did ... the camera I used isn't capable of shooting in RAW. Like I said, the method I used was experimental, and far from perfect. However, the color casts *did* correspond to what I saw with my eye, so I decided that the visual benefit of posting them outweight the flaws in my methodology.EsaT wrote:Did you take them in JPEG?
In consumer cameras that limits dynamic range of image seriously below sensor's capability.
I'd totally forgotten about SED. When I still had my 2x(19" CRT 1280x1024@85Hz) dualhead setup, I thought I'd wait for SED before upgrading. But it seemed that SED will never come, because the company that invented it was spending its time on legal issues instead of actual product development. I guess I'll check the status of SED quickly now, cry at seeing them in square one just like always, and feel happy about my LCD.EsaT wrote:BTW, because of two polarizers every single backlighted LCDs needs to produce many times more light than necessary so instead of tweaking compromise technology it should be time to push for OLED/SED which also solve all response time and viewing angle problems of liquid crystals and backlight limiting contrast.
We’re looking for a low-power monitor with external power adaptor, as we aim to move to solar DC at home.Monitors with external power bricks have been around for ages…