Comments Locked

37 Comments

Back to Article

  • gevorg - Monday, November 21, 2011 - link

    Its most likely to be eIPS and eIPS =! IPS. Don't mix the two under the same name.
  • keitaro - Monday, November 21, 2011 - link

    I agree on this. eIPS, while providing the much needed viewing angle that TN panels lacked, still falls short of IPS due to its 6-bit color design. I prefer that if any monitor is to be designated as IPS they should be proper/true IPS and not eIPS.
  • plonk420 - Monday, November 21, 2011 - link

    uh, eIPS is DEFINITELY not 6 bit...
  • jrocks84 - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    As far as I know, all eIPS panels are 6-bit
  • micksh - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    Not all. Old Dell 2209WA that I have shows no signs of dithering.
    This 23" LCD is most likely 6-bit. You can see panel list here:
    http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/news_archive/23.htm#co...
  • JlHADJOE - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    HP's ZR24 is eIPS and 8bit. I think 6-bit +AFRC started with Dell's U2211.
  • iwod - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    eIPS isn't IPS but if i ever have to choose between a stupid TN and eIPS i would choose eIPS anyday.
  • ImSpartacus - Monday, November 21, 2011 - link

    Since this is particular SKU is racing to the bottom, why does it include speakers or an extra HDMI input?

    Perhaps the extra input was only a few pennies, but the speakers and aluminium bezel seem unnecessary to me. I would've preferred a slightly better panel in a more pedestrian chassis sans speakers.

    Yet, it's IPS and it costs $200. It's a start.
  • Hrel - Monday, November 21, 2011 - link

    Notice how they don't mention response time. That's because while color accuracy, viewing angles and contrast are all fantastic on an IPS panel. Response time is absolutely useless. I think it's a big part of the reason people stopped playing guitar hero; no fun when the tv is out of sync. IPS is really only good for proffesional image editors, whether that's pictures or video. At least that's how I think of them.
  • B3an - Monday, November 21, 2011 - link

    Well clearly you live in an alternate reality to everyone else or you're somehow stuck in the year 2001. Because most IPS monitors are under 8ms these days. Why do you think phones and tablets also use IPS? If the response times were so bad people would be complaining about it, but no one ever does, because they're fine.
  • PseudoKnight - Monday, November 21, 2011 - link

    If it was a problem, people would be complaining about it! So stop complaining about it! ;)

    I'm one of those people that are especially sensitive to input latency. In fact, I can't believe so many people don't even notice. It's like all those console players who think 30FPS is all you need, but that extra 16ms is just intolerable to me.

    Even at equal prices, TN still has its place... unfortunately.
  • SilthDraeth - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    LOL. I love it. I doubt he even noticed he told the guy to stop complaining about something, because it doesn't exist or people would complain.

    Absolutely classic.
  • ananduser - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    IPS monitors are definitely not suited for fast paced desktop gaming, regardless what the mobile world chooses. Currently hot in the gaming desktop world are 120Hz monitors.
    The 8ms you rave about is just there on the label(G2G). Real world testing reveals something like 20ms+. Ghosting,tearing is pretty visible for the "trained" eye at that latency. Trust me, we all await fast IPS monitors but the tech isn't quite there.
  • Death666Angel - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    Granted, I'm not a league-professional player, but I have had no issues with an old Fujitsu-Siemens P19-2, which was a 19" TFT with IPS (and iirc an early implementation of overdrive) or with my HP w24h which is a TN panel.

    Also, tearing is not a monitor issue, but a graphics card and game issue, is it not? Enabling VSync fixes it easily.
  • ananduser - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    Dunno how to put it exactly. Vsync help with tearing but also adds input lag which may be noticeable for some. Secondly, in fast paced FPS games riddled with abrupt color transitions from frame to frame, the response time of the monitor is too high for the monitor to correctly display them colored pixels. Vsync has no business here. Simply put the monitor cannot switch colors fast enough to match the abrupt color transitions across successive frames and you get a blurring effect.
    There are good TN monitors and bad TN monitors. Apple uses in its macbook offerings some decent ones. So, TN is not necessarily bad, it is the IPS that it is better.
  • euler007 - Thursday, November 24, 2011 - link

    The 120Hz monitor are there mostly for 3Dvision type technology.

    I'm sure these gamers can "feel" these frames that the cells in their eyes don't react to.
  • CharonPDX - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    That still doesn't make older ones "useless". I played "twitch games" on early LCDs with no problems, and they had way worse response times than current cheap IPS displays.

    If you spend hours a day playing low-contrast, fast-paced games, sure, spend more on a high-quality display. But for general use, including all "light gaming", occasional heavy gaming, watching videos, etc; even a "slow" IPS display is perfectly fine. Not everyone is a pro-class gamer. (Just like how just because a Ford Fusion doesn't have an 800 HP V10 engine that does 0-60 in 2.9 seconds, doesn't make it "useless" to the vast majority of the population.)
  • InterClaw - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    Obvious troll is obvious. Don't listen to this guy.

    Panel technology is just one of several factors contributing to input lag. There's a long chain of events happening between you moving the mouse and the cursor actually moving on the screen, including OS processing of the USB input, game engine processing, screen processing/scaling, and panel switching.

    Fact of the matter is that virtually all _panels_ manufactured today have plenty fast switching for most games/gamers. There might however be considerable lag at other stages of the chain. But don't judge out a complete panel technology because of individual, historical screens that may have sucked, or sucked enough to be noticeably laggy in certain situations. If you'd read professional screen reviews, here and other places, you'd know this.

    Also, the comparison to Guitar Hero is just hilarious. :D Far from all TV:s employ IPS panels, and even if they do, lag in music/rhythm games can just as well be caused by your audio decoding (which it was with my setup when running Dolby Digital). In any case it is easily remedied with the syncing tools in the game (which at least Guitar Hero has).
  • JasonInofuentes - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    They do mention response time, 5 ms per their PR, but like the 50,000,000:1 contrast ratio, we don't lend a lot of credence to some of these reported metrics because we don't know how they were calculated. That's why we do so many technical measurements. We'll find out more when the review sample comes in.
  • Penti - Monday, November 21, 2011 - link

    I guess this is just one off several attempt to create a brand of their own as they don't own the rights to use the Philips brand on a long-term basis.
  • Camikazi - Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - link

    AOC has been around for a LONG time, they are not new in any way. They were founded in 1967 and have been big in TV and monitors the entire time.
  • Penti - Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - link

    AOC was bought up by TPV (Hong Kong) years ago which has been running Philips monitor operations since 2005 and is taking over all their TV-operations as well as manufacture on ODM basis for other OEMs. AOC is basically a useless brand, they need to step up if they want to sell anything when their rights to the Philips brand runs out in a few years (which is still fairly large in Europe, none existent in US TV-market as they sold of their rights to that market to Funai.). I couldn't care less about the AOC subsidiary it's history aren't the complete and all history of TPV which drives it today, they where a really small player before TPV took it over and started building own fabs, AOC by it self it's not where the business happens. AOC is itself just brand name. They don't manufacturer monitors and TVs their owner does.

    As the AOC company is distinguishable from TPV however they are the ones that needs to create a strong brand to continue selling products, when they can't use the Philips brand in China and Europe any more. Their relationship with Philips and others is what is taking them somewhere. Philips is huge for them and they have multiplied their revenue much thanks to them. AOC brand is of course weak compared to ODM manufacturing, previous manufacturing for Philips, taking over Philips operations and so on. They make more money ODM'ing TVs for others then making them for AOC. AOC does sales and distribution for their parent company, but as said just a small part of their sales. They sold/produced 56.5 million monitors 2010, AOC themselves only sold 16 million. They sold/produced 14.8 million TV sets 2010, AOC themselves sold around 2 million. Many more will come as they take over the manufacturing for higher-end Philips TVs and so on.
  • mi1stormilst - Monday, November 21, 2011 - link

    No DisplayPort = fail for me.
  • Visual - Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - link

    Why on Earth would you want it to have DisplayPort?
    To me that is a useless redundant "standard" having nothing better to offer than the established and proven DVI or HDMI, introduced with the only goal of creating market segmentation, used by no one with a clue and so failed as soon as it launched.

    Or perhaps you have an Apple?
  • Penti - Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - link

    So you have an laptop that does dual-link DVI without a docking station? DP is standard on HPs, Dells (business models) and so on as well as on their monitors since a couple of years.
  • vailr - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    This NEC 23" IPS & LED-backlit monitor does include Display Port, and with no useless speakers:
    http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop%20-monitors/ea...
    http://www.macconnection.com/IPA/Shop/Product/Deta...
  • Impulses - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    Wouldn't DP be cheaper and more convenient than a second HDMI? Weird...
  • Conficio - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    What are the characteristics of the stand included?

    Height adjustment? Tilt?
  • JasonInofuentes - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    Not specified. We'll look into it.
  • cheinonen - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    I believe it's only tilt, -4 to 14 degrees.
  • tx_shamrock - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    There is also the ASUS ML239H (189 on newegg before 20 rebate) that's been under $200 for months now. I have a feeling it shares the same screen as this AOC, just like it read somewhere that is is the same on the Viewsonic 23" IPS. If so, those are rated at 5ms (ML239H) and 14ms (VP2365wb) GTG response times. I wouldn't consider myself to have a trained eye for ghosting but so far have not noticed anything and I game almost everyday on it. Anyways, for me, i think i'd rather have great viewing angles, great color, and lose a few ms on response times. I love my ML239H, except for the fact that i know that there are no VESA mounts on the back. Oh well, got a monitor stand instead. Also, probably not the best looking as it is bit ugly under the screen, i prefer small bezel all the way around.
  • RaistlinZ - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    1920x1080. Someone please make it stop!
  • cheinonen - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - link

    It's not going to stop anytime soon though. The 16:9 ratio leads to better yields, lower costs, and better margins for manufacturers, as well as allowing panels to be used to home entertainment as well as PC use. Some vendors will continue to produce 1920x1200 but since that's not the most common format, it will continue to command a price premium and be less common and shows no signs up changing.
  • Rick83 - Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - link

    I just want some affordable 21.3" 4:3 displays with decent stands, USB-controls and decent panels and backlighting.
    Too bad that only the EIZO S2100K fills that order and tops 1000$ per piece :(

    16:10/16:9 is a travesty and utterly useless - unless your life consists of watching TV and direct-to-DVD videos all day long.
  • Penti - Wednesday, November 23, 2011 - link

    Nah, I think 2560x1600 is pretty sweet resolution.
  • Krater47 - Sunday, November 27, 2011 - link

    Reading these posts just remind me of how much I hate LCDs. Sure, CRTs had their issues, but it would have been nice to move to a technology that didn't have so many problems.

    How I miss the days of lighting fast, ultra-high rez, virtually zero input lag, unpixelated, smooth images. Sure, my old CRT wouldn't fit into the trunk of my car, had to sit on a steel reinforced desk, and took about $50/month in electricity to run... but really, I loved the performance compared to these POS monitors and their crappy cheep glossy bezels everyone has.
  • MadMacMan - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    This is great news! Hopefully, this is the beginning of a new trend. I'd love to see more competition in the 26"-30" displays.

    P.S.: S-IPS > H-IPS > P-IPS > eIPS > PVA/MVA > TN

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now