TN matrix...

A

Apollo1020

Geek Trainee
As you all know - I'm going to buy a new display with new PC and it's on TN matrix... I wonder - how bad is TN... it's color reproductivity and stuff. Why I chose that type of display?... becuase TN has the fastest response time from all displays... but maybe there's a display with S-IPS and response time 5ms?... if you know such - please let me know. If you can - please describe the PROS and CONS of TN and please, give me a personal advice - should I buy TN display or not. I will primarly use it for games, but color reproductivity is very important for me too (and for my eyes especially). If I could find a display with S-IPS and response time 5ms - I would buy that instead of TN. Just tell me what are the TN's minuses... as far as I know - it's just a worst color reproductivity... but maybe it's not so bad as I think?

Also check out my new PC configurations threads, if you haven't did that yet. It's my first time composing a computer and I hope I've picked the right components... just need a specialist to take a look on it and tell me, if it's ok.

The display I'm about to buy is 19 inch and has 1280x1024 (if I remember correctly) resolution. I'm adding a graphics card on 512MB to it so this type of resolution will be ok for the graphics card... on Crysis with very high picture quality setting. If talking about Crysis - my opinion, that it's just a waste of money. Yes, the game looks very good, but I don't find nothing more special in it... some stupid scenario with adding of a shooter... lol, it's just my opinion. But I'm buying 512MB graphics card not for that, but for future games, that I think will be greater, than Crysis. Same with Bioshock - I think it's sucks. Modern games became so stupid, that I can't figure out why... only horror and blood... blah, not for me.

Well, let's take it to the beginning - I need to know what are the PROS and CONS of TN type display and personal advice if should I buy it. The price is $295... almost $300. For the TN it should be very good display, maybe the best, but if TN is the worst in color reproductivity - than I should consider finding a display with S-IPS and response time 5ms... or you could do me a favor and help me finding it. From my trusted company - Samsung, I couldn't find displays on TN matrix. Well... I will go now and search for S-IPS and 5ms response on Hot Line - Öåíû â Êèåâå. Thanks a lot for your help and support.

Edite: Good news! Just found Dell E198FP 19 inch display with 1280x1024 resolutions. It's S-IPS and 5ms response... but it's contrast is a little bit low - 800:1. Would this contrast be as enouph? I know, that the contrast is a black to white... so maybe this display's black colors is not so black as my previouse choice on TN. But, 800 is almost 1000 and 1000 sounds as enouph... don't know, maybe this one is better. The only thing left is to deside from a base of an expert's answer - which is better TN and 2ms or S-IPS and 5ms. Thank you very much! The TN's display contrast is 2000:1... S-IPS is almost 1000:1 (acually 800:1).
 
I'm impressed, you know your panel types, thats important. Ok, i have a TN display by Viewsonic, and they have very good response times, but very bad contrast ratios. I like mine, but there are definite points where i can tell where some darks aren't as dark as they should be, or certain colors hews are a little off, but its not too bad. However, LCD tech changes so fast and so often, panel types aren't a complete decided factor like they used to be. (a year or so ago) Anyways, a display i can highly recommend is any of LG's new LCD with their F-engine. From all that i've seen and read, there are no gimmicks there. 3000:1 contrast ratio's. However with variances in response times from 2 to 5 ms. Not completely sure on why that is, but it is, and they different displays cost the same to so just pay attention to that. Ok, final note, its really difficult to track down which displays have which panels, but theres a link in the LCD vs CRT sticky that has some panel types, granted its in german or something. Oh yeah, one other thing to consider is the manufacturing process. At which point the the companies get a hold of their dyes. Samsung, Dell and from what i know LG, make their own, so they are the first people to touch them. So you'll have better quality and less worry about dead pixels and inconsistencies.
 
Thanks very much... but I also need to know some more things. What contrast ratio is equal to perfect blacks? Will 2000:1 be enouph? Also, there's a dynamic contrast and passive (like I've understood)... please describe what both mean and how it works. Dynamic I guess is for games, but passive (or something like that, forgot name) is for web-browsing... am I right? Also, from an article Big B gave me - I know, that best color reproductivity is of S-IPS matrix and TN has the best response timings. I found a monitor/display from Dell with S-IPS matrix (19 inch) with response time of 5ms... alright, that's normal even for games I guess, but it has only 800:1 contrast ratio and I think it's for both passive and dynamic. My question - is 800:1 are enouph for perfect blacks or at least very good? From what I understand and guessing - I think, that it's not and, that for perfect blacks I'll need at least 2000:1 (both types of contrast). If I'm right about this one - I'll need to search within TN displays with big contrast ratios and of course I need to know all the pros and cons of TN. What color reproductivity it is (super bad or normal), brightness and every thing elso, that I forgot to mention.

Please, take time to help me on with this, because a display (or monitor) is a VERY important thing and you know that. Plus, my eyes are not very good and I need to make a comfort for them as much as possible. It is very importand, because I'm building a new PC too. Thank you very much.
 
hey, sorry i haven't gotten back to you sooner. First off is a display advertises a dynamic contrast ratio, i wouldn't have anything to do with it, its just a gimmick. What it basically does is block off the black portion of the screen so it reproduces a better darker colors, or blacks more so. Even then, i wouldn't have anything to do with that. I'm not quite sure on the whole passive thing, i've heard of a passive matrix panel, but i don't know other than that, but you might be thinking of native. Other than that, there is a display type that regulates the intensity of the light which will give darker darks without messing with the contrast, but i dunno. I don't like gimmicks or short term fixes, so i'm not to into all that stuff. As far as perfect blacks go, i don't really know off the top of my head, and i guess its a little up to the persons eyes as well. So far, the best things produced are SED TV's or a yet unreleased plasma model(s) which had contrast of a 1,000,000:1 and other which were currently unmeasurable. That said, if your really concerned about a REALLY good contrast, get a CRT, which produce perfect blacks, and a rreeaallyy fast as well.
-----------------------
on a final note, as i mentioned in the first message LG has the best desktop display out currently, thats just all there is there, they are pretty far a head of everyone else rate now, probably won't be long for others to catch up, but anyways. Like i also had stated, response times of 2 and 3ms, and contrast ratio of 3000:1, that is amazing. as far as 800:1 goes, if your going through al this for a display, i wouldn't bother with anything below 1000:1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top