2011 onwards most good quality LED TN have negligible colour degradation, only the cheap ones do. Main thing the colour and light is far better than TN, because of crystal mechanics and that will never change. The colour vividness and range is outright better, while still looking natural and not blown up. Here's the kicks, because of how In Plain Twisting works. The light is far better for your eyes, it's less polarized (not 100% though) making it more comfortable.
@leemisterkub In consequence IPS is just much better than TN. The colour is extremely naturally vivid not artificial blown out. Also the light from IPS is much LESS Polarised (one directional) making it very comfortable and natural on the eyes, less strain on your eyes.
For a computer monitor, why do you need a large viewing angle? I mean, if you are using it, you WILL be near your mouse and keyboard which are right in front of the monitor. For teenagers it's probably an advantage to use a TN panel so that their parent's can't see what they are doing. Personally I don't see how this shows IPS is superior. Find some other arguments.
@jimmyyu1112 Superior colour, natural yet vivid. Much healthier on our eyes is the key, IPS means that the light gates gradually twist rather than blocking. The light is much more natural NOT very polarized (one geometric plain), result is that if feels much natural and comfortable on the eyes than TN.
I own a HP ZR22W S-IPS Monitor which I love, but I've found with matte displays you get a grainy or sparkle effect.. That is primarily why I prefer glossy screens.. I'm a Web Designer, and when working with Photoshop or Fireworks It's difficult to distinguish certain effects one being Noise..
to me 16:10 is working the best. and connecting 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 display is great. just waiting for 4K displays, even EIZO have one. fullHD is not the future just commerce now.
If you guys want any "cheap" IPS panel I suggest you to get LG IPS panel. They're fairly priced and offers great color presentation.The best bang for a buck.
I bought a 1920*1200 monitor with pivot from Eizo, so I can read full document pages at a time and also see much more source code at a time. Works quite well. The only thing I regret is that it's using TN and not IPS. I wasn't even aware of the differences, and the problems with TN are noticeable when the screen is in portrait due to the distance between the eyes. Even so, it doesn't have the drastic brightness (etc) differences as shown in the video.
@ Ranjit, I have a critical question, The response rate in IPS panels are slow. So would it affect while playing games, and also movies with fast pace sections???
@namaabhishek I was worried about this when I was choosing IPS panel. After couple months of usage I can tell you that you won't probably notice a difference. The "blur" is very specific and doesn't look like blur at all, it isn't noticeable.(I play a lot of fast paced games.)
@namaabhishek Depending which one you get, it shouldn't really affect things that much. If you get one of the older generation 30" things like the Apple Cinema Display or the older Dell 30" UltraSharps then you may notice more "ghosting", but that's because those panels are using the older IPS tech with higher response rates (plus they're made for colour accurate design work rather than gaming). The newer ones should be fine. I notice no ghosting at all on my Dell U2410 24".
I returned a brand new laptop today because of the shitty TN panel. I noticed something was off about the colors and the contrast when I watched a music video on it. I didn't even want to use it anymore. And the thing is, I do a lot of watching on the computer (movies, music videos, and also computer graphics/photoshopping), so my main requirement is good display. Too bad most laptops nowadays have garbage TN panels. And IPS is pretty expensive.
They are pretty awful aren't they. I've been gaming on one for two years now and it's been painful playing on it, I'll get a new TV soon and it definately wont be a TN Panel. VA Panels are meant to be very good. What did you end of buying?
@craigyt1 I don't know how you put up with it for 2 years. I went to Micro Center the other week and the only laptops with decent displays were over $1000 (still not IPS but better than most TN panels). Guess I'll have to go for one of those. Since I don't like Apple and I don't want a Macbook (heard they have IPS panels).
Modern IPS panels are plenty fast enough for gaming. Pixel response is quite good (close to TN), however the input lag can be moderate on some IPS panels. That said, almost all IPS panels (including the models that lag the most) have the ability to disable the post processing algorithms to eliminate lag (some manufacturers call it "game mode").
The bottom line is that most games will love gaming on an IPS. Soon we will see 3D IPS displays becoming mainstream.
I trust that ips is the future, but my "TN" s23a750d has killer colors and the gamers should go with tn because much less lag and no ips from my understanding for monitors have 3d support yet..
I hate that it's so hard to find a screen that is not 1080p now. 1080p is retarded. It's a movie and tv resolution. It does not belong on a computer screen. It's just because the common user has been tricked into thinking that fullHD equals quality, when it has nothing to do with it. If I get a bigger computer screen, it's because I want more work area. If the resolution just stays at 1080p, I didn't get more work area. Also the 16:9 aspect ratio is too wide for a work area.
@realisticHomeboy: You do get IPS monitors with 1920 x 1200 px resolution, I have personally used one but compared to 1080p panels they are a bit more expensive.
@geekyranjit Well, an IPS display, equivalent to 300+PPI would be the holy grail of displays. 30" at 1920x1200 is idiotic (that's less than 100 pixels per inch!). 4800x3000 pixels would for 24" should become the standard. Of course, with consumers' complacency with current "standards" I don't see that happening in 10 years. Likewise, I don;t expect AT&T (and all who followed suit) to lift the artificially imposed data cap. Anyone to call that "progress"?
@LeoInterHyenaem Agreed. While I think +300PPI would be a beast for image editing and digital painting, it's not that good for gaming. All modern games (like bf3) would have major performance issues on resolution that big.
@realisticHomeboy What an elitist asshole you are. Just because its the standard for HDTVs does not mean it doesn't belong on a monitor. If you want a 1920x1200, go buy one. Workspace area is fine on a 1080p, I have one myself. If you want a significant improvement in area, get two monitors. Go cry elsewhere.
@13heavymetal Ignorant nonsense. Why would you get a bigger computer screen, if you don't get more space on it? There is ZERO sense in keeping the resolution at 1080p on computer monitors. Sounds like you are one of the little people who got fooled by the industry to thinking that 1080p means good. Go cry elsewhere about how bad that makes you feel.
@realisticHomeboy what are you talking about? You act as if 1080p is a resolution used on smaller monitors. I have yet to see a 1080p monitor under 20 inches. If your going up to the high 20s and 30s you are going with 2560 x 1400 or 2560 x 1600. And if you are not, you are not getting a significant increase in space. And what are you talking about "tricked"? The industry is leaning to a focus on multimedia, why wouldn't they put out 16:9? If you prefer 16:10, fine. Your preference is not law.
@13heavymetal Again, ridiculous nonsense. You don't buy a computer monitor just to watch movies on it. If you did, you might as well buy a TV. Furthermore you can use your monitor for multimedia no matter what resolution it is. 1080p is WAY too low a resolution for a 24 inch monitor. Again, if you get a larger monitor, it should always have a larger resolution. Otherwise, there was no point in getting it. You clearly only use your computer for games, and so you won't understand.
@realisticHomeboy Do you honestly believe that the entire population who finds a 1080p screen to their liking is being tricked, or is only watching movies or playing games? You have got to be joking. You act like having a higher resolution would give you a significant increase in workspace area. Most office complexes still use 17"-19" 1280 x 1024 LCDs. And what are you talking about "you only use your computer for games"? I'm a student jackass, I multitask and word process too!
@13heavymetal@13heavymetal Dude you are a moron, or you are too young to understand. People do not find a 1080p screen to their liking. They just don't know any better. And no, most office complexes don't still use 17-19 inc screens. You are living in the past. But many of them use 2 screens, in order to get more area. "I multitask and word process". LOL. That explains it. You don't use your computer for anything workspace related.
@realisticHomeboy Also, you must live on another planet to believe that 1080p is too small for a 24" monitor. Remember there were times that you would be lucky to find a 20" monitor with more than 1280 x 1024. I've worked with 4:3, to 16:10, to 16:9. I've used all of them for work and play, and I see great improvement. But then again, you think the entire industry should bend to your will, so go ahead and rant about 16:9. Cry all you want, it won't make them do away with 1080p.
1 - Why would you get a larger screen, if you don't get a larger work area? What would be the point? Your can play your games and see videos full screen no matter what resolution your screen is.
2 - No program requires a screen of a specific resolution. There is no point, in locking computer screens to all have the same resolution.
3 - If 1080p is appropriate for 20 inches, then clearly it's not too little for 24 inches.
@realisticHomeboy 1) Maybe you want a more immersive experience? 2) Hundreds of thousands of favorable reviews for large 1080p monitors will tell you that no one is settling. If everyone were settling, 1080p wouldn't be the go-to resolution. 3) Most offices use 1280x1024, no matter how many monitors they have, bringing me back to my original point, if you are such a hard ass about workspace, get two monitors, or stop bitching.
@realisticHomeboy Which, brings me back to my first point, no increase in resolution is going to give you this workspace you seem to be dreaming of. Theres no reason to bitch about 1080p when you can go and get up to 3 monitors and stick them together. If you were serious about your "work" whether it be video editing (which I have found to be perfectly fine on a 16:9) or CAD, then you wouldn't need to find a huge resolution on 1 monitor.
@13heavymetal 16:9 is fine for TV and games. For a work area, it's unpractical. They are not making computer monitors 16:9 because it's a good idea. They are only doing it, because they have managed to make it a trend.
@realisticHomeboy Well if you had a 800x600 screen everything is bigger to compensate for the lack of pixels. hence less overall space for other applications
@frogsta360 That is not relevant in this context. The point is, that they are keeping screens at 1080p. If you already have a 20 inch screen at 1080p, why would you get a 24 inch screen that is also 1080p? You don't get more area, so there is no point.
@ChristineG93 I want more than 1080p on a 22 inch or 24 inch screen. I don't want a 30 inch screen!!!! As explained, there is no sense in a 20, 22 and 24 inch screen having the same resolution.
There are 2 16:10 IPS monitors you could look for, the Dell U2412M and the HP ZR2440w. The HP is more expensive but it's also better in everything but response times. The Dell is cheaper, but faster. Maybe...one thing is online testing and reviews, another is when you start moving the mouse on the screen :P
@realisticHomeboy Yeah, really hard to find... Just go to i price comparing site and you get over 200 monitors that has 16:10... If it's more pixels you want there's 100 screens that has 1200p+. And did you know that there are people that uses a computer for entertainment? How crazy is that?! 16:9 is good for movies and games, which is what 16:9 screens are aimed at. If you don't use a computer for those things don't buy it! It's simple really.
1 - There are very few compared to how many 16:9 screens there are, and it's almost only online that you can find a non 16:9 screen.
2 - People can use any screen for entertainment. It does not need to be the exact resolution of movies. They will not see a quality difference. So no, wanting to also watch movies, is not a reason to get a 1080p screen.
3 - 16:9 is not aimed at people wanting to use their computer for games and movies. 16:9 is purely a marketing gimmick.
@realisticHomeboy 1 - In my country you can order online and test it out for 14days and return it so it's not a problem for me.
2 - Yes you can use whatever screen you want but if you use it for movies, why spend more money on 16:10 when the movies are 16:9/2.4:1? Your wasting your cash on those 1920x120 pixels that's going to be black.
3 - 16:9 became a "gimmick" because people bought alot of cheap 16:9 tn screens and then the prices went down and more people bought them!
1 - It's still a bunch of time and hassle. You have to pay for postage, and hope that the company accepts your return.
2 - If you use it for movies, why not buy a TV? It's even cheaper. 16:10 does not cost more than 16:9.
3 - No, 16:9 became a gimmick, because TV's started to become 16:9 and HD, and people started associating 16:9 and HD with high quality. Companies made sure to lead people on in this false belief.
3.1 - People that play fps games see more of the surroundings with 16:9, with 3 screens 48:9 even more. + gamers are cheap, looking for best bang for the buck, you get more screen space with 16:9 cause you can buy higher resolution, bigger screen or more monitors than with 16:10. That's why its aimed for gamers. Why do you think 120hz was used in 16:9 first? Because gamers want 16:9.
@shocker1337 No, you get less screen space for 16:9. 16:10 generally have the same width, but bigger height. So when you play on a 16:9, you lose some height. No, you cannot buy higher resolution with 16:9. ALL stationary 16:9 monitors have the same resolution, which is 1920x1080. No matter how big you buy it, they don't have higher resolution than that. 16:9 is not aimed for gamers. It's aimed at everybody, because people have been tricked into thinking that 16:9 means quality.
@realisticHomeboy There are 16:9 screens with 2560x1440 actually... Some games have fixed ratio, so when you have 16:10 it crops out on the sides to get the extra hight. Also why would i want to buy a TV, when i play on a tv it's delayed and i don't want to spend money on a tv just so i can have my computer at 16:10. Btw if i don't have the strength to scroll down a webpage i can just turn my moniter sidways so i have 9:16...
@shocker1337 lol, no it's not delayed when you play on a TV. You can connect a TV today to your PC, just like you connect your monitor, and there is not going to be any difference in delay. What does a TV have to do with having your monitor at 16:10? That's the opposite of the point. You want 16:9, so use a TV for your computer, INSTEAD of a monitor. And no, rotating your monitor is not an option. Monitor have crappy vertical viewing angle and it will be a stupid shape.
@realisticHomeboy Cheapest 120hz 24" computer screen with no inputlag = 270€, cheapest tv 120hz+ with no input lag = ????. Is there even such a tv? Last time i checked there wasn't.
Why are you saying that monitors have crappy viewing angle? TN panels are not good with it, ips, s-pva and all the others have good viewing angles and how can you say that i can't rotate? I can do what i want with my screen lol.
@shocker1337 I did not say that monitors have crappy viewing angles. I said they have crappy VERTICAL viewing angles. Doesn't matter if it's cheap or expensive.
I also never said you can't rotate it. I said it's going to look like crap, because now the poor vertical viewing angle becomes horizontal, and even the distance between your eyes, is going to make the picture look a bit different to each eye.
16:9 and HD is a shitty gimmick, nothing more. It belongs on TVs, nowhere else.
@shocker1337 "cheapest tv 120hz+ with no input lag " Any 1080p latest gen Plasma display has far better speed response than any LCD tech. It's just because of the way the two mechanism works. Twisting an LCD crystal takes far more time than firing a plasma. But i don't like Plasma because of power consumption.
@shocker1337 Let's not forget laptops. They are all 16:9 also now. They did not become wider. They all have the same width they used to, they just became less tall now. It's just too small a height for even just browsing the web and checking email.
3.1 - People that play fps games see more of the surroundings with 16:9, with 3 screens 48:9 even more. + gamers are cheap, looking for best bang for the buck, you get more screen space with 16:9 cause you can buy higher resolution, bigger screen or more monitors than with 16:10. That's why its aimed for gamers. Why do you think 120hz was used in 16:9 first? Because gamers want 16:9.
@realisticHomeboy You can change aspect ratio and switch to other resolutions or get other monitors/digital tv`s. Besides the world does not revolve around you and your work space pal.
@david111davies I can change aspect ratio? You seem to not understand what the aspect ratio issue is about. You can't change the aspect ratio of a screen.
And this is not about it evolving around me. It's about the industry having used a ridiculous format, as a selling point, by tricking the common user to think it's good.
@realisticHomeboy Yes the screen aspect ratio is bad. I have a graphics card that lets the screen have the picture in the old style and leave both sides blacked out. It looks just like the old style screens and except for the blacked out sides it looks just like my old dell monitor before they messed with aspect ratios. I`m sure a good graphics card would have options to manipulate the screen into doing whatever you want.
@realisticHomeboy You dont get it, the aspect ratio changes as well, it is no different than having the old style aspect ratio screen so what is the problem.
@realisticHomeboy get what you're trying to say. Unfortunately, with the digital home being more interconnected its a matter of compromise that 1080p 16:9 has been adopted as a general standard. I do a lot of work on photoshop so could use an almost infinite amount of work area however there needs to be a compromise at some point. To get affordability products need to appeal to the mass market and for most people 1920x1080 is just right because it fits in with consoles, blu-ray, etc.
IPS solves a problem that normal computer users will never notice. To fix my blacking out when playing racing games with a wheel, I simply put an empty packages of cigarettes under it to create the right angle.
@SolidGamerFilms Because it won't mather what picture or video you put on, the difference between the 2 will still be the same: IPS has waay better viewing angles than TN panels
@terrait I very agree with you my friend, but it's would be better if this mister showed us some "moving" footage, one picture is not realy nice for my taste :-)
Is black colour really black (not visible) on IPS panels ? Im about to buy a new PC with new monitor. I have a TN monitor now and when i watch movies on it (with lights turned off), the scenes that supposed to be completely dark are not because of monitors backlight. Im looking for a 24" monitor without that backlight.
ips is for the normal people who do normal things, the real difference between the two monitors is in the response time, the tn monitor has more than twice the response time than the ips, (in other words, tn monitors are much faster, perfect for gamers)
Sure you can get a $200 IPS and VA monitors now but they are entry level versions (e-IPS, c-PVA ) and still suffer from issues (c-PVA has black crush and severe ghosting) (e-IPS has uneven illuminations \ color casts \ weaker viewing angles for an IPS class) I have tried them out and decided to just get a high quality TN type instead. A lot of marketing bullshit here.
@yassarikhan786: Cool, the Dell U2410 is a excellent IPS panel, I wanted that at first but it was a bit out of my budget so went with this Dell U2311H IPS panel.
@guineapig55555 If you see one in real life you will see the difference pal. I have two monitors setup: one is a TN panel and the U2410 is IPS and I see a significant improvement in the U2410.
I found this video extremely helpful in that it clearly shows the difference between an IPS and TN panel. I current have a 9 year old Dell 17" monitor and am looking towards buying an IPS which I will use for every day use, HD movie watching & PC Gaming (FPS & RPG). Thank you for taking the time to compare these technologies. I recommend anyone to save up for the significant quality benefit of an IPS panel as opposed to anything else. Cheers!
Hey which TN panel BenQ model is it? You have a V2210 Eco BenQ you compare that to this Dell U2311H I agree that viewing angles are not great on TN but this Dell model has severe backlight bleeding issues & orange tint problem. I returned mine a while ago. I will buy it again if you're sure that yours doesn't give those type of problems maybe I got a faulty unit or what!?
@Sonu03785: I heard that this some ppl got faulty models of this DELL with back bleeding issues may be there were quality issues with the same, but the one I got is prefect and when I say its a good monitor coz I am used to Cinema display and IPS panels from apple but just cannot stand their glare due to the glass hence prefer this one...... BTW it is way better than the TN panel..... TN panel is okay if you are sitting just in front of the monitor but sit about 5 feet away at a angle.
@Sonu03785: trust me its not just this Benq I just used it for a example, I also have a Viewsonic TN panel and that also suffers with the same horrible viewing angle issue....... as I said TN pabel is perfectly okay but once you get used to a IPS panel, TN is just bad.
Only professionals(3D, video editing etc.,) would be benefited by IPS panels. Most of the PC users do play Games & watch movies, so they prefer TN panels only.
@raj1944: Yeah for gamers TN is a good choice due to low latency but for a person who watches a lot of videos or movies a IPS is ideal due to viewing angle issues of TN panel, if the person tends to watch it from a distance........ BTW not all LCD TVs are IPS most of the better ones are.
Only very cheap and old LCD TV's have a TN panel. Modern TV's usually have VA (MVA, PVA, S-PVA, etc), which provide better black than IPS. The difference between LCDs is fairly visible - TN has poor viewing angles. IPS and PVA have the angles very good, but if you look onto IPS LCD from bevel angle the black colour grow to violet a little bit. PVA stays black. IPS panels are mostly used in graphic LCDs and tablets. (but there are a lots of graphic LCD based on S-PVA too, f.ex. Eizo)
i want to ask...will apple announce ipad3 at the end of this year...?and will there be ipad 4...?if continue to be like this....then we never can buy a computer....right?
@YUKAICHUNG1: I do not know when the ipad 3 or the next ipad 4 will come but they will surely come....... In computers I have told you that you cannot keep on waiting if you do that you will wait forever coz every 8-12 months a new product cycle is released.......... so if you have the need for a device / product buy it and use it.
depends alot on TN panel i think , according to the specs on my TN its name view angle as a IPS
Cuteandbrutal 5 days ago
nice vid
TheBrianEffect101 1 week ago
2011 onwards most good quality LED TN have negligible colour degradation, only the cheap ones do. Main thing the colour and light is far better than TN, because of crystal mechanics and that will never change. The colour vividness and range is outright better, while still looking natural and not blown up. Here's the kicks, because of how In Plain Twisting works. The light is far better for your eyes, it's less polarized (not 100% though) making it more comfortable.
Neojhun 1 week ago
thanks. now i know ips and TN difference : )
leemisterkub 2 weeks ago 4
@leemisterkub In consequence IPS is just much better than TN. The colour is extremely naturally vivid not artificial blown out. Also the light from IPS is much LESS Polarised (one directional) making it very comfortable and natural on the eyes, less strain on your eyes.
Neojhun 1 week ago
thank you for compare, now i understand how is different between IPS and TN
zantoshi 2 weeks ago
For a computer monitor, why do you need a large viewing angle? I mean, if you are using it, you WILL be near your mouse and keyboard which are right in front of the monitor. For teenagers it's probably an advantage to use a TN panel so that their parent's can't see what they are doing. Personally I don't see how this shows IPS is superior. Find some other arguments.
jimmyyu1112 2 weeks ago
@jimmyyu1112
colours are much more bright.
druidieh 2 weeks ago
@jimmyyu1112 Superior colour, natural yet vivid. Much healthier on our eyes is the key, IPS means that the light gates gradually twist rather than blocking. The light is much more natural NOT very polarized (one geometric plain), result is that if feels much natural and comfortable on the eyes than TN.
Neojhun 1 week ago
I own a HP ZR22W S-IPS Monitor which I love, but I've found with matte displays you get a grainy or sparkle effect.. That is primarily why I prefer glossy screens.. I'm a Web Designer, and when working with Photoshop or Fireworks It's difficult to distinguish certain effects one being Noise..
appleloveTK 2 weeks ago
to me 16:10 is working the best. and connecting 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 display is great. just waiting for 4K displays, even EIZO have one. fullHD is not the future just commerce now.
chickensk 3 weeks ago
If you guys want any "cheap" IPS panel I suggest you to get LG IPS panel. They're fairly priced and offers great color presentation.The best bang for a buck.
L4ch74n 1 month ago
I bought a 1920*1200 monitor with pivot from Eizo, so I can read full document pages at a time and also see much more source code at a time. Works quite well. The only thing I regret is that it's using TN and not IPS. I wasn't even aware of the differences, and the problems with TN are noticeable when the screen is in portrait due to the distance between the eyes. Even so, it doesn't have the drastic brightness (etc) differences as shown in the video.
twitizer 1 month ago
@ Ranjit, I have a critical question, The response rate in IPS panels are slow. So would it affect while playing games, and also movies with fast pace sections???
namaabhishek 1 month ago
@namaabhishek I was worried about this when I was choosing IPS panel. After couple months of usage I can tell you that you won't probably notice a difference. The "blur" is very specific and doesn't look like blur at all, it isn't noticeable.(I play a lot of fast paced games.)
L4ch74n 1 month ago
@namaabhishek Depending which one you get, it shouldn't really affect things that much. If you get one of the older generation 30" things like the Apple Cinema Display or the older Dell 30" UltraSharps then you may notice more "ghosting", but that's because those panels are using the older IPS tech with higher response rates (plus they're made for colour accurate design work rather than gaming). The newer ones should be fine. I notice no ghosting at all on my Dell U2410 24".
TalesOfWar 1 month ago
@TalesOfWar Thank you. That really helped.
namaabhishek 1 month ago
Thank you, come again.
slovan 1 month ago 39
@slovan Harold and Kumar! :D
kamalay1 1 week ago
TN Panels are the worst. Best is IPS, then VA, Then TN.
craigyt1 2 months ago
crt wins!
VALLGOX 2 months ago
Nice accent :D
perlharb 2 months ago
I returned a brand new laptop today because of the shitty TN panel. I noticed something was off about the colors and the contrast when I watched a music video on it. I didn't even want to use it anymore. And the thing is, I do a lot of watching on the computer (movies, music videos, and also computer graphics/photoshopping), so my main requirement is good display. Too bad most laptops nowadays have garbage TN panels. And IPS is pretty expensive.
ShadowsMasquerade 2 months ago
They are pretty awful aren't they. I've been gaming on one for two years now and it's been painful playing on it, I'll get a new TV soon and it definately wont be a TN Panel. VA Panels are meant to be very good. What did you end of buying?
craigyt1 2 months ago
@craigyt1 I don't know how you put up with it for 2 years. I went to Micro Center the other week and the only laptops with decent displays were over $1000 (still not IPS but better than most TN panels). Guess I'll have to go for one of those. Since I don't like Apple and I don't want a Macbook (heard they have IPS panels).
ShadowsMasquerade 2 months ago
@ShadowsMasquerade It sucks doesn't it, the IPS displays are expensive that the only draw back.
craigyt1 2 months ago
Modern IPS panels are plenty fast enough for gaming. Pixel response is quite good (close to TN), however the input lag can be moderate on some IPS panels. That said, almost all IPS panels (including the models that lag the most) have the ability to disable the post processing algorithms to eliminate lag (some manufacturers call it "game mode").
The bottom line is that most games will love gaming on an IPS. Soon we will see 3D IPS displays becoming mainstream.
slamscaper64 3 months ago
Tilting the monitors seems brutally performed. :D
yojgee 3 months ago
I trust that ips is the future, but my "TN" s23a750d has killer colors and the gamers should go with tn because much less lag and no ips from my understanding for monitors have 3d support yet..
ibanez0830 3 months ago
I hate that it's so hard to find a screen that is not 1080p now. 1080p is retarded. It's a movie and tv resolution. It does not belong on a computer screen. It's just because the common user has been tricked into thinking that fullHD equals quality, when it has nothing to do with it. If I get a bigger computer screen, it's because I want more work area. If the resolution just stays at 1080p, I didn't get more work area. Also the 16:9 aspect ratio is too wide for a work area.
realisticHomeboy 3 months ago
@realisticHomeboy: You do get IPS monitors with 1920 x 1200 px resolution, I have personally used one but compared to 1080p panels they are a bit more expensive.
geekyranjit 3 months ago
@geekyranjit Yes, very very few. Go to a store, and it's almost impossible to find them. You gotta buy them online, or be very lucky.
realisticHomeboy 3 months ago
@geekyranjit Well, an IPS display, equivalent to 300+PPI would be the holy grail of displays. 30" at 1920x1200 is idiotic (that's less than 100 pixels per inch!). 4800x3000 pixels would for 24" should become the standard. Of course, with consumers' complacency with current "standards" I don't see that happening in 10 years. Likewise, I don;t expect AT&T (and all who followed suit) to lift the artificially imposed data cap. Anyone to call that "progress"?
LeoInterHyenaem 2 months ago
@LeoInterHyenaem Pardon, I wrote a comment, then paraphrased and posted without checking for mistakes.
LeoInterHyenaem 2 months ago
@LeoInterHyenaem Agreed. While I think +300PPI would be a beast for image editing and digital painting, it's not that good for gaming. All modern games (like bf3) would have major performance issues on resolution that big.
L4ch74n 1 month ago
@realisticHomeboy What an elitist asshole you are. Just because its the standard for HDTVs does not mean it doesn't belong on a monitor. If you want a 1920x1200, go buy one. Workspace area is fine on a 1080p, I have one myself. If you want a significant improvement in area, get two monitors. Go cry elsewhere.
13heavymetal 3 months ago
@13heavymetal Ignorant nonsense. Why would you get a bigger computer screen, if you don't get more space on it? There is ZERO sense in keeping the resolution at 1080p on computer monitors. Sounds like you are one of the little people who got fooled by the industry to thinking that 1080p means good. Go cry elsewhere about how bad that makes you feel.
realisticHomeboy 3 months ago
@realisticHomeboy what are you talking about? You act as if 1080p is a resolution used on smaller monitors. I have yet to see a 1080p monitor under 20 inches. If your going up to the high 20s and 30s you are going with 2560 x 1400 or 2560 x 1600. And if you are not, you are not getting a significant increase in space. And what are you talking about "tricked"? The industry is leaning to a focus on multimedia, why wouldn't they put out 16:9? If you prefer 16:10, fine. Your preference is not law.
13heavymetal 3 months ago
@13heavymetal Again, ridiculous nonsense. You don't buy a computer monitor just to watch movies on it. If you did, you might as well buy a TV. Furthermore you can use your monitor for multimedia no matter what resolution it is. 1080p is WAY too low a resolution for a 24 inch monitor. Again, if you get a larger monitor, it should always have a larger resolution. Otherwise, there was no point in getting it. You clearly only use your computer for games, and so you won't understand.
realisticHomeboy 3 months ago
@realisticHomeboy Do you honestly believe that the entire population who finds a 1080p screen to their liking is being tricked, or is only watching movies or playing games? You have got to be joking. You act like having a higher resolution would give you a significant increase in workspace area. Most office complexes still use 17"-19" 1280 x 1024 LCDs. And what are you talking about "you only use your computer for games"? I'm a student jackass, I multitask and word process too!
13heavymetal 3 months ago
@13heavymetal @13heavymetal Dude you are a moron, or you are too young to understand. People do not find a 1080p screen to their liking. They just don't know any better. And no, most office complexes don't still use 17-19 inc screens. You are living in the past. But many of them use 2 screens, in order to get more area. "I multitask and word process". LOL. That explains it. You don't use your computer for anything workspace related.
realisticHomeboy 3 months ago
@realisticHomeboy Also, you must live on another planet to believe that 1080p is too small for a 24" monitor. Remember there were times that you would be lucky to find a 20" monitor with more than 1280 x 1024. I've worked with 4:3, to 16:10, to 16:9. I've used all of them for work and play, and I see great improvement. But then again, you think the entire industry should bend to your will, so go ahead and rant about 16:9. Cry all you want, it won't make them do away with 1080p.
13heavymetal 3 months ago
@13heavymetal
1 - Why would you get a larger screen, if you don't get a larger work area? What would be the point? Your can play your games and see videos full screen no matter what resolution your screen is.
2 - No program requires a screen of a specific resolution. There is no point, in locking computer screens to all have the same resolution.
3 - If 1080p is appropriate for 20 inches, then clearly it's not too little for 24 inches.
realisticHomeboy 3 months ago
@13heavymetal
4 - 16:9 was created for movies. 1080p was created for televisions. No sense it transferring the standard to computer screens.
realisticHomeboy 3 months ago
@realisticHomeboy 1) Maybe you want a more immersive experience? 2) Hundreds of thousands of favorable reviews for large 1080p monitors will tell you that no one is settling. If everyone were settling, 1080p wouldn't be the go-to resolution. 3) Most offices use 1280x1024, no matter how many monitors they have, bringing me back to my original point, if you are such a hard ass about workspace, get two monitors, or stop bitching.
13heavymetal 3 months ago
@realisticHomeboy Which, brings me back to my first point, no increase in resolution is going to give you this workspace you seem to be dreaming of. Theres no reason to bitch about 1080p when you can go and get up to 3 monitors and stick them together. If you were serious about your "work" whether it be video editing (which I have found to be perfectly fine on a 16:9) or CAD, then you wouldn't need to find a huge resolution on 1 monitor.
13heavymetal 3 months ago
@13heavymetal 16:9 is fine for TV and games. For a work area, it's unpractical. They are not making computer monitors 16:9 because it's a good idea. They are only doing it, because they have managed to make it a trend.
realisticHomeboy 3 months ago
@realisticHomeboy 1080p is more work area technically...?
frogsta360 2 months ago
@frogsta360 More than what?
realisticHomeboy 2 months ago
@realisticHomeboy Well if you had a 800x600 screen everything is bigger to compensate for the lack of pixels. hence less overall space for other applications
frogsta360 2 months ago
@frogsta360 That is not relevant in this context. The point is, that they are keeping screens at 1080p. If you already have a 20 inch screen at 1080p, why would you get a 24 inch screen that is also 1080p? You don't get more area, so there is no point.
realisticHomeboy 2 months ago
@realisticHomeboy Oh, so you want more than 1080p resolution?
30" monitors are generally 2560xsomething lolz
ChristineG93 2 months ago
@ChristineG93 I want more than 1080p on a 22 inch or 24 inch screen. I don't want a 30 inch screen!!!! As explained, there is no sense in a 20, 22 and 24 inch screen having the same resolution.
realisticHomeboy 2 months ago
@realisticHomeboy Sorry boyfriend was on my account when he posted this -.-
ChristineG93 1 month ago
@realisticHomeboy
There are 2 16:10 IPS monitors you could look for, the Dell U2412M and the HP ZR2440w. The HP is more expensive but it's also better in everything but response times. The Dell is cheaper, but faster. Maybe...one thing is online testing and reviews, another is when you start moving the mouse on the screen :P
GholaTlx 2 months ago
@realisticHomeboy I can't agree more. 16:10 is the best ratio for about anything(photoshop/3D/gaming), but IPS panels at 1920x1200 are pricey.
"FullHD" is just another overused marketing word.
L4ch74n 1 month ago
@realisticHomeboy Dell U2412M
schawo2 1 month ago
@realisticHomeboy Yeah, really hard to find... Just go to i price comparing site and you get over 200 monitors that has 16:10... If it's more pixels you want there's 100 screens that has 1200p+. And did you know that there are people that uses a computer for entertainment? How crazy is that?! 16:9 is good for movies and games, which is what 16:9 screens are aimed at. If you don't use a computer for those things don't buy it! It's simple really.
shocker1337 1 month ago
@shocker1337
1 - There are very few compared to how many 16:9 screens there are, and it's almost only online that you can find a non 16:9 screen.
2 - People can use any screen for entertainment. It does not need to be the exact resolution of movies. They will not see a quality difference. So no, wanting to also watch movies, is not a reason to get a 1080p screen.
3 - 16:9 is not aimed at people wanting to use their computer for games and movies. 16:9 is purely a marketing gimmick.
realisticHomeboy 1 month ago
@realisticHomeboy 1 - In my country you can order online and test it out for 14days and return it so it's not a problem for me.
2 - Yes you can use whatever screen you want but if you use it for movies, why spend more money on 16:10 when the movies are 16:9/2.4:1? Your wasting your cash on those 1920x120 pixels that's going to be black.
3 - 16:9 became a "gimmick" because people bought alot of cheap 16:9 tn screens and then the prices went down and more people bought them!
shocker1337 1 month ago
@shocker1337
1 - It's still a bunch of time and hassle. You have to pay for postage, and hope that the company accepts your return.
2 - If you use it for movies, why not buy a TV? It's even cheaper. 16:10 does not cost more than 16:9.
3 - No, 16:9 became a gimmick, because TV's started to become 16:9 and HD, and people started associating 16:9 and HD with high quality. Companies made sure to lead people on in this false belief.
realisticHomeboy 1 month ago
@realisticHomeboy
3.1 - People that play fps games see more of the surroundings with 16:9, with 3 screens 48:9 even more. + gamers are cheap, looking for best bang for the buck, you get more screen space with 16:9 cause you can buy higher resolution, bigger screen or more monitors than with 16:10. That's why its aimed for gamers. Why do you think 120hz was used in 16:9 first? Because gamers want 16:9.
shocker1337 1 month ago
@shocker1337 No, you get less screen space for 16:9. 16:10 generally have the same width, but bigger height. So when you play on a 16:9, you lose some height. No, you cannot buy higher resolution with 16:9. ALL stationary 16:9 monitors have the same resolution, which is 1920x1080. No matter how big you buy it, they don't have higher resolution than that. 16:9 is not aimed for gamers. It's aimed at everybody, because people have been tricked into thinking that 16:9 means quality.
realisticHomeboy 1 month ago
@realisticHomeboy There are 16:9 screens with 2560x1440 actually... Some games have fixed ratio, so when you have 16:10 it crops out on the sides to get the extra hight. Also why would i want to buy a TV, when i play on a tv it's delayed and i don't want to spend money on a tv just so i can have my computer at 16:10. Btw if i don't have the strength to scroll down a webpage i can just turn my moniter sidways so i have 9:16...
shocker1337 1 month ago
@shocker1337 lol, no it's not delayed when you play on a TV. You can connect a TV today to your PC, just like you connect your monitor, and there is not going to be any difference in delay. What does a TV have to do with having your monitor at 16:10? That's the opposite of the point. You want 16:9, so use a TV for your computer, INSTEAD of a monitor. And no, rotating your monitor is not an option. Monitor have crappy vertical viewing angle and it will be a stupid shape.
realisticHomeboy 1 month ago
@realisticHomeboy Cheapest 120hz 24" computer screen with no inputlag = 270€, cheapest tv 120hz+ with no input lag = ????. Is there even such a tv? Last time i checked there wasn't.
Why are you saying that monitors have crappy viewing angle? TN panels are not good with it, ips, s-pva and all the others have good viewing angles and how can you say that i can't rotate? I can do what i want with my screen lol.
shocker1337 1 month ago
@shocker1337 I did not say that monitors have crappy viewing angles. I said they have crappy VERTICAL viewing angles. Doesn't matter if it's cheap or expensive.
I also never said you can't rotate it. I said it's going to look like crap, because now the poor vertical viewing angle becomes horizontal, and even the distance between your eyes, is going to make the picture look a bit different to each eye.
16:9 and HD is a shitty gimmick, nothing more. It belongs on TVs, nowhere else.
realisticHomeboy 1 month ago
@realisticHomeboy I recommend you to watch 0:34 to 0:40 ...
shocker1337 1 month ago
@shocker1337 "cheapest tv 120hz+ with no input lag " Any 1080p latest gen Plasma display has far better speed response than any LCD tech. It's just because of the way the two mechanism works. Twisting an LCD crystal takes far more time than firing a plasma. But i don't like Plasma because of power consumption.
Neojhun 1 week ago
@shocker1337 Let's not forget laptops. They are all 16:9 also now. They did not become wider. They all have the same width they used to, they just became less tall now. It's just too small a height for even just browsing the web and checking email.
realisticHomeboy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@realisticHomeboy
3.1 - People that play fps games see more of the surroundings with 16:9, with 3 screens 48:9 even more. + gamers are cheap, looking for best bang for the buck, you get more screen space with 16:9 cause you can buy higher resolution, bigger screen or more monitors than with 16:10. That's why its aimed for gamers. Why do you think 120hz was used in 16:9 first? Because gamers want 16:9.
shocker1337 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@realisticHomeboy NO, I AM NOT A HOMOSEXUAL AND I HAVE NO INTEREST IN MEETING YOU.
THERE ARE GAY DATING SITES ON THE INTERNET WHICH ARE BETTER FOR YOUR NEEDS THAN YOUTUBE.
PLEASE STOP CONTACTING ME, AS I HAVE ASKED YOU BEFORE.
gregboyds1 1 week ago
@realisticHomeboy You can change aspect ratio and switch to other resolutions or get other monitors/digital tv`s. Besides the world does not revolve around you and your work space pal.
david111davies 6 days ago
@david111davies I can change aspect ratio? You seem to not understand what the aspect ratio issue is about. You can't change the aspect ratio of a screen.
And this is not about it evolving around me. It's about the industry having used a ridiculous format, as a selling point, by tricking the common user to think it's good.
realisticHomeboy 6 days ago
@realisticHomeboy Yes the screen aspect ratio is bad. I have a graphics card that lets the screen have the picture in the old style and leave both sides blacked out. It looks just like the old style screens and except for the blacked out sides it looks just like my old dell monitor before they messed with aspect ratios. I`m sure a good graphics card would have options to manipulate the screen into doing whatever you want.
david111davies 6 days ago
@david111davies
Why on earth would you want to not use the full screen? You don't get more height that way. You just get less width.
realisticHomeboy 6 days ago
@realisticHomeboy You dont get it, the aspect ratio changes as well, it is no different than having the old style aspect ratio screen so what is the problem.
david111davies 5 days ago
@david111davies
That's ridiculous, and you really don't get it. You are not gaining any height that way. You are just losing some width.
I don't want the screen to be less wide. I want it to be more tall.
It would be stupid to not use the full area, that you monitor has.
And when you say old, I don't know if you are referring to 4:3, because I'm talking about 16:10.
Common 16:9 screen: 1920×1080
Common 16:10 screen: 1920×1200
realisticHomeboy 5 days ago
@realisticHomeboy Yes your right the height is bad.
david111davies 5 days ago
@realisticHomeboy get what you're trying to say. Unfortunately, with the digital home being more interconnected its a matter of compromise that 1080p 16:9 has been adopted as a general standard. I do a lot of work on photoshop so could use an almost infinite amount of work area however there needs to be a compromise at some point. To get affordability products need to appeal to the mass market and for most people 1920x1080 is just right because it fits in with consoles, blu-ray, etc.
person8203 1 day ago
IPS solves a problem that normal computer users will never notice. To fix my blacking out when playing racing games with a wheel, I simply put an empty packages of cigarettes under it to create the right angle.
chicane486 3 months ago
so ips can be viewed from the side of ur monitor how useful.....
tvaughanx 3 months ago
Need new monitor for gaming and movies etc. Thinking of these but wich one?
Samsung S27A650D
Asus VE278Q
sleepzou 3 months ago
How lame, he showing the difference with example of one picture, lol why dont he show us the REAL difference with gaming footage or just movies?
SolidGamerFilms 3 months ago
@SolidGamerFilms Because it won't mather what picture or video you put on, the difference between the 2 will still be the same: IPS has waay better viewing angles than TN panels
terrait 3 months ago
@terrait I very agree with you my friend, but it's would be better if this mister showed us some "moving" footage, one picture is not realy nice for my taste :-)
SolidGamerFilms 3 months ago
Is black colour really black (not visible) on IPS panels ? Im about to buy a new PC with new monitor. I have a TN monitor now and when i watch movies on it (with lights turned off), the scenes that supposed to be completely dark are not because of monitors backlight. Im looking for a 24" monitor without that backlight.
melomonster007 3 months ago
Excellent video. Thanks for the comparison, I have the u2311 and it is a great monitor
klmcwean 3 months ago
ips is for the normal people who do normal things, the real difference between the two monitors is in the response time, the tn monitor has more than twice the response time than the ips, (in other words, tn monitors are much faster, perfect for gamers)
papercut272 3 months ago
Which Dell IPS monitor is it in this video? Thanks
giro862 3 months ago
@giro862: Dell U2311H
geekyranjit 3 months ago
Really helpful video. Thanks for posting it!
Someguy676 3 months ago
I just ordered the BenQ VW2420H 24-inch which has a VA panel and not a TN with 8ms response time for £166, do you think it's a good purchase?
Muskateering 4 months ago
@Muskateering: Sorry no idea coz I have never used that particular model.
geekyranjit 4 months ago
@geekyranjit Ok thanks for replying so fast. Is VA similar to IPS in any way?
Muskateering 4 months ago
@Muskateering: VA is kind of in the middle between TN and IPS see my other video in which I talk about various Panels /watch?v=dthfqwvxiik
geekyranjit 4 months ago
i tought ips wanst tft?
lolzim8888 4 months ago
the only problem i have with the IPS panels right now is the poor response time.
PickYourVenom 4 months ago
Great job describing and showing differences. 2 thumbs up!
refugiorod 4 months ago
Thank you, come again. :)
slovan 4 months ago
That was a good showcase, thx alot
fetB 4 months ago
Sure you can get a $200 IPS and VA monitors now but they are entry level versions (e-IPS, c-PVA ) and still suffer from issues (c-PVA has black crush and severe ghosting) (e-IPS has uneven illuminations \ color casts \ weaker viewing angles for an IPS class) I have tried them out and decided to just get a high quality TN type instead. A lot of marketing bullshit here.
orpanyd 4 months ago
well tn panels have usually less input lag, means you see what happens without much delay
qiplayer 4 months ago
There's not that much of a difference anyway, apart from the price and size.
yassarikhan786 5 months ago
The IPS panels look much better, which is why I recently picked up a Dell U2410.
yassarikhan786 5 months ago
@yassarikhan786: Cool, the Dell U2410 is a excellent IPS panel, I wanted that at first but it was a bit out of my budget so went with this Dell U2311H IPS panel.
geekyranjit 5 months ago
@yassarikhan786
are you blind or something? IPS looks very bland.
guineapig55555 4 months ago
@guineapig55555 If you see one in real life you will see the difference pal. I have two monitors setup: one is a TN panel and the U2410 is IPS and I see a significant improvement in the U2410.
yassarikhan786 4 months ago
thanks for the info fat kiran, u been much help for me deciding a monitor!
supajive 5 months ago
no way i gonna buy tn panel again lol...
x0fiz 5 months ago
for gaming i would still choose ips
unless you have got legendary eyes you would notice the difference in response time
roshan9825 5 months ago
this video was helpful!
pnwood0 5 months ago
Dell monitors with IPS panels are amazing!
aku192 6 months ago
@aku192 what the price of hull hd dell ips monitors current...?
amitq99 3 months ago
This was a very helpful video. Thank You!
Georg1979 6 months ago
Great! Realy helped me out! Thanks! ;-)
robbert777 6 months ago
Good work!
lachescandinavu 6 months ago
Suhinder?
PlagaXTifi 6 months ago
Agree, really helpful video that is. Too bad I am allowed to 'thumb up' it only once... :)
SemcomP 6 months ago 18
@SemcomP: Thanks :)
geekyranjit 6 months ago
I found this video extremely helpful in that it clearly shows the difference between an IPS and TN panel. I current have a 9 year old Dell 17" monitor and am looking towards buying an IPS which I will use for every day use, HD movie watching & PC Gaming (FPS & RPG). Thank you for taking the time to compare these technologies. I recommend anyone to save up for the significant quality benefit of an IPS panel as opposed to anything else. Cheers!
jeremyofmany 6 months ago 18
@jeremyofmany
What you bought? and How was it?
jokujunahi 4 months ago
thank you ranjit , you are a great reviewer and a very smart person!
TheLozano066 6 months ago 6
Hey which TN panel BenQ model is it? You have a V2210 Eco BenQ you compare that to this Dell U2311H I agree that viewing angles are not great on TN but this Dell model has severe backlight bleeding issues & orange tint problem. I returned mine a while ago. I will buy it again if you're sure that yours doesn't give those type of problems maybe I got a faulty unit or what!?
Sonu03785 7 months ago
@Sonu03785: I heard that this some ppl got faulty models of this DELL with back bleeding issues may be there were quality issues with the same, but the one I got is prefect and when I say its a good monitor coz I am used to Cinema display and IPS panels from apple but just cannot stand their glare due to the glass hence prefer this one...... BTW it is way better than the TN panel..... TN panel is okay if you are sitting just in front of the monitor but sit about 5 feet away at a angle.
geekyranjit 7 months ago
@Sonu03785: trust me its not just this Benq I just used it for a example, I also have a Viewsonic TN panel and that also suffers with the same horrible viewing angle issue....... as I said TN pabel is perfectly okay but once you get used to a IPS panel, TN is just bad.
geekyranjit 7 months ago
If this video has been uploaded on Jun 5 why i get mail alert(subscribed) only today(Jun 7)
raj1944 8 months ago
@raj1944: No idea Raj......... Youtube must be acting wonky
geekyranjit 8 months ago
Only professionals(3D, video editing etc.,) would be benefited by IPS panels. Most of the PC users do play Games & watch movies, so they prefer TN panels only.
Do all the LCD TV's has IPS panels?
raj1944 8 months ago
@raj1944: Yeah for gamers TN is a good choice due to low latency but for a person who watches a lot of videos or movies a IPS is ideal due to viewing angle issues of TN panel, if the person tends to watch it from a distance........ BTW not all LCD TVs are IPS most of the better ones are.
geekyranjit 8 months ago
@raj1944
Only very cheap and old LCD TV's have a TN panel. Modern TV's usually have VA (MVA, PVA, S-PVA, etc), which provide better black than IPS. The difference between LCDs is fairly visible - TN has poor viewing angles. IPS and PVA have the angles very good, but if you look onto IPS LCD from bevel angle the black colour grow to violet a little bit. PVA stays black. IPS panels are mostly used in graphic LCDs and tablets. (but there are a lots of graphic LCD based on S-PVA too, f.ex. Eizo)
alfah4ns 6 months ago
i want to ask...will apple announce ipad3 at the end of this year...?and will there be ipad 4...?if continue to be like this....then we never can buy a computer....right?
YUKAICHUNG1 9 months ago
@YUKAICHUNG1: I do not know when the ipad 3 or the next ipad 4 will come but they will surely come....... In computers I have told you that you cannot keep on waiting if you do that you will wait forever coz every 8-12 months a new product cycle is released.......... so if you have the need for a device / product buy it and use it.
geekyranjit 9 months ago
only slightly difference.....ha....
YUKAICHUNG1 9 months ago
thats was really nice way to show difference...
tomyloveu 9 months ago
@tomyloveu : Thanks Tom
geekyranjit 9 months ago