Power dissipation of hannspree HG19WNY "New York" LCD monitor?

[blackhead]

Thinking of purchasing the Hannspree HG19WNY New York monitor for a
self build computer system:

http://www.hannspree.com/global/NewsDetail.aspx?mid=109&n=36

Looks great value for money @ £100 approx $200 with 700:1 contrast
ratio, 5ms response time, DVI/RGB inputs, brightness 300 cd/m2, but
can't find its operational power dissipation. Anyone know where I can
get the info?

Thanks

 

[Jack R]

From the site you reference:
Power Consumption
ON Mode ? 36W
OFF Mode ? 1W


Jack R


Thinking of purchasing the Hannspree HG19WNY New York monitor for a
self build computer system:

http://www.hannspree.com/global/NewsDetail.aspx?mid=109&n=36

Looks great value for money @ £100 approx $200 with 700:1 contrast
ratio, 5ms response time, DVI/RGB inputs, brightness 300 cd/m2, but
can't find its operational power dissipation. Anyone know where I can
get the info?

Thanks

 

[Conor]

Thinking of purchasing the Hannspree HG19WNY New York monitor for a
self build computer system:

http://www.hannspree.com/global/NewsDetail.aspx?mid=109&n=36

Looks great value for money @ £100 approx $200 with 700:1 contrast
ratio, 5ms response time, DVI/RGB inputs, brightness 300 cd/m2, but
can't find its operational power dissipation. Anyone know where I can
get the info?

700:1 contrast ratio is quite franly, piss poor. I'd not touch anything
under 1500:1. At 700:1, it's going to have a washed out look.

Paying another £20 gets you this LG monitor which has 3000:1 contrast
ratio and a response time of 2ms

http://tinyurl.com/2vlyzz

--
Conor

As a Brit I'd like to thank the Americans for their help in the war
against terror because if they'd not funded the IRA for 30 years, we
wouldn't know how to deal with terrorists.

 

[blackhead]

700:1 contrast ratio is quite franly, piss poor. I'd not touch anything
under 1500:1. At 700:1, it's going to have a washed out look.

Paying another £20 gets you this LG monitor which has 3000:1 contrast
ratio and a response time of 2ms

http://tinyurl.com/2vlyzz

Thanks for the link. It's another £35, incl VAT but the monitor you
suggested has been getting rave reviews in the popular computer
magazines

 

[Paul]

700:1 contrast ratio is quite franly, piss poor. I'd not touch anything
under 1500:1. At 700:1, it's going to have a washed out look.

Paying another £20 gets you this LG monitor which has 3000:1 contrast
ratio and a response time of 2ms

http://tinyurl.com/2vlyzz

Actually, depending on what you do, you may prefer the 700:1 monitor.
To get numbers like 1500:1, they cheat. They change the backlight
level dynamically, according to the content sent to the screen.
That destroys Photoshop calibration, for people who rely on their
screen looking and behaving exactly the same way, for each picture
edited. So in fact, someone doing Photoshop should stay away from
the 1500:1 unit, as it is likely playing with the backlight.

Some monitor specifications include the "cheating" number and the
"honest" panel-related number for you. For example here, this monitor
lists 8000:1 "dynamic contrast", suitable for movie content, and
1000:1 for the actual contrast of the panel itself. As long as the OSD
has a feature so the user can disable dynamic contrast, then the
monitor can be used for things other than movies.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001254

As another example, they review and discuss some expensive monitors
here, and the basic contrast on one of them is still 500:1, the other
1000:1. But the monitors have some other qualities, that make them
worthwhile, such as 178 degree viewing angle (so color doesn't vary
from edge to edge while viewed). They might not make good gaming
monitors, but would be better for Photoshop.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/professional-monitors_2.html

Paul

 

[blackhead]

Actually, depending on what you do, you may prefer the 700:1 monitor.
To get numbers like 1500:1, they cheat. They change the backlight
level dynamically, according to the content sent to the screen.
That destroys Photoshop calibration, for people who rely on their
screen looking and behaving exactly the same way, for each picture
edited. So in fact, someone doing Photoshop should stay away from
the 1500:1 unit, as it is likely playing with the backlight.

Some monitor specifications include the "cheating" number and the
"honest" panel-related number for you. For example here, this monitor
lists 8000:1 "dynamic contrast", suitable for movie content, and
1000:1 for the actual contrast of the panel itself. As long as the OSD
has a feature so the user can disable dynamic contrast, then the
monitor can be used for things other than movies.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001254

As another example, they review and discuss some expensive monitors
here, and the basic contrast on one of them is still 500:1, the other
1000:1. But the monitors have some other qualities, that make them
worthwhile, such as 178 degree viewing angle (so color doesn't vary
from edge to edge while viewed). They might not make good gaming
monitors, but would be better for Photoshop.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/professional-monitors_...

    Paul- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thanks for the extremely useful information. Also, do response times
less than 12ms matter? The eye can barely see changes less than 12ms
in visual information so I don't see how a response time of 8ms will
make a difference over one say 5ms or even 2ms. The opinions on the
net are mixed; Those with old LCD monitrs with 12ms respinse times
saying they don't perceive ghosting, BLURRING or tearing in dynamic
images, others saying that one should get the fastest monitor
possible.

Does anyone here have first hand experience of the effects of LCD
response times?

 

[Paul]

Thanks for the extremely useful information. Also, do response times
less than 12ms matter? The eye can barely see changes less than 12ms
in visual information so I don't see how a response time of 8ms will
make a difference over one say 5ms or even 2ms. The opinions on the
net are mixed; Those with old LCD monitrs with 12ms respinse times
saying they don't perceive ghosting, BLURRING or tearing in dynamic
images, others saying that one should get the fastest monitor
possible.

Does anyone here have first hand experience of the effects of LCD
response times?

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/lcd-parameters.html

Paul

 

[blackhead]

From the site you reference:
      Power Consumption
      ON Mode ? 36W
      OFF Mode ? 1W

      Jack R


Thinking of purchasing the Hannspree HG19WNY New York monitor for a
self build computer system:

http://www.hannspree.com/global/NewsDetail.aspx?mid=109&n=36

Looks great value for money @ £100 approx $200 with 700:1 contrast
ratio, 5ms response time, DVI/RGB inputs, brightness 300 cd/m2, but
can't find its operational power dissipation. Anyone know where I can
get the info?

Thanks

Looking at the power dissipation of 17" monitors, some have a figure
as high as 45 Watts! whereas the Hanns-G 17" TFT LCD Monitor HW173AB
has an impressive figure of just 28 watts. Are there others anyone
would like to mention?