Buying a monitor soon.. but which one?

[neorichieb1971]

I read about a few monitors but I really don't know what is best for what I want/need!!!

Eventually I ended up liking this one -

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00MCX4Q2G/r ... Y8E9&psc=1

I want a good monitor, preferably 1920x1080 which I can use for video editing on my PC but also need compatibility with my Micomsoft XRGB2.


I'm not really about the best, but I do like having something above average.


If you have any candidates for consideration please let me know. I will consider a 2 monitor setup for each purpose. I already have 2 CRT TV's so I don't need to go into that debate of CRT vs LCD.


Thanks everyone.

Richie.

[Ed Oscuro]

There is the Display Advice thread for monitor advice, however I don't recall any discussion of scaling options, which might be important. The good news is that quite good monitors are available that aren't ridiculously expensive!

I want a good monitor, preferably 1920x1080 which I can use for video editing on my PC but also need compatibility with my Micomsoft XRGB2.

The XRGB2 is an old, unsupported device. It's not even an upscaler. A newer monitor supporting it directly is not going to offer the best quality (because 640x480 compatibility is just mode compatibility, meant just to get a picture in the worst case; but even this may soon disappear), and might limit your options severely. There are lots of good monitors that don't have a VGA connection at all. You might be able to use a dumb VGA to HDMI plug to get the XRGB2 output onto more monitors, but again some monitors don't have HDMI anymore either. I think that better options will be appearing in years to come. For the moment you have two options that I can think of (discounting use of a CRT):

1) Find a monitor that still has a VGA plug (they are still being made for cheap economy PCs at least), and hopefully something more future proof, like HDMI or DisplayPort. There are some downsides to VGA's 15 pin analog connection, like image quality and the lack of future proofing, but it should do for now.
2) Give up using the XRGB2, and get a FrameMeister (or something similar) and a monitor that supports it (i.e., a 1920x1080 monitor with HDMI). Of course, if you select a panel with more than 1920x1080 resolution, then once again the monitor will have to fiddle with the results, though it shouldn't be too bad.

The only options that allow you to avoid image scaling are a monitor that can:
center pixel output (which normally will result in a tiny view - 640x480 in the middle of 1920x1080!), or
pixel multiply it (?), or
the Framemeister + 1080p monitor combo.

Amongst the other options, scaling quality will differ. I never found XRGB2 output (even on a CRT) to be that great; on my PX2611w (which is 1920x1200 via VGA) it's okay, but scanlines might be out. Good news is that it seems to run at least some 55Hz games, but this isn't guaranteed on newer displays.

[Xyga]

Most available full-hd monitors still feature a VGA input and shouldn't be a problem in terms of basic compatibility with devices like the XRGB-2.

For instance check the pictures here, the guy has an XRGB-2 directly connected to an ASUS VN279QLB
http://forum.shmup.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... &start=870
No issues, he was very happy with that setup.

The question asking which monitors in that category (1920x1080) have the best upscaling quality for 480p is a tough one.
Indeed you don't want 1:1 because it will only display a ridiculously tiny picture, so you will have to do with whatever justified or stretched options the display offers.

Websites reviewing monitors rarely check the upscaling quality of lower resolutions, and when they do it is usually on a single input (DVI or DP, rarely HDMI, and never VGA) using at worst a 720p resolution and definitely not 480p. They're not helping us.

We are on our own... from my experience the LG monitors offer decent ratio and scaling, but most other name brand models supposedly do more or less the same.

A great workaround is to couple the XRGB-2 with a DVDO VP30, VP50 or VP50pro, since those have full resolution, aspect, pan/scan, overscan, and zoom controls.
Their upscaling quality is not the best but in my experience it's above what average monitors can do by themselves, so a DVDO is still a very nice upgrade for an 'old' XRGB.

But those are expensive and could severely inflate your 'new display setup' investment.
Moreover, remember the XRGB-2 doesn't output the best picture quality to begin (XRGB-3 is significantly more sharp and clear), and since there isn't much hope for a 'loss-less' scaling scenario of it, you will have to deal with lessened quality to a degree whatever you purchase.

XRGB+DVDO 'combos' are the best possible setups equaling, or even in some aspects like lag, outclassing the Mini.
But again that's quite an investment (display+xrgb+dvdo) which almost completely gets ridiculed by emulators now.

As for the choice of a particular monitor, well we can discuss that here or bring it to the 'display advice' thread as you wish.
Anyway let me just say that BenQ XL2430T you linked is exactly what you should avoid.

[neorichieb1971]

Looked at the framemeister. Was a bit confused because it doesn't say what it supports. I have Jp21 cables for most consoles, even consoles I don't own

So what if I bought a framemeister and the Asus monitor linked above?

Like I say I am not looking for perfection, I just don't want to walk into a trap out of ignorance.

[Xyga]

The Mini is excellent of course (best picture quality with XRGB-3 just behind) but it also produces more lag (about 1.5 frames) compared to the lagless XRGB-2 & 3.
The 3 and Mini are also more complex machines when the 2 is almost plug-and-play and more arcade board-friendly.

Now monitors...

VA panels
The Asus VN279QLB monitor is quite good but a bit old now, the Iiyama XB2783HSU-B1 is a slightly superior product, but it's not available in all areas.
An alternative to both would be the BenQ BL2700HT which is not reviewed but knowing AUO/BenQ's quality is expected to perform just as well as the other two.

IPS panels
Those rarely come with an included rotation stand, which is annoying but you can buy one separately if the monitor's VESA mounting compliant.
Only one I know with a rotating stand is the 27MB65PY, which is a 'business' version of the 27MP65HQ (a pretty good standard 1080p monitor)
Again as I've already said in various threads I recommend the LG monitors since those tick most of the boxes,
2014:
27MP55HQ
27MP65HQ
27MP75HM
2015:
27MP57VQ (or ******HT, or ******HQ)
27MP67HQ (or ******VQ)
27MP77HM

Other IPS alternatives I can think about are the 24" 16:10 monitors such as the Asus PB248Q or Eizo EV2455.

You'll find more details about the differences between VA and IPS as well as product variants in the Display Advice thread.

Word of advice;
None of the doublers and upscalers will provide a picture even close to a real CRT's, and none of those monitors will be perform as well a CRT in various fields.
Alternatives for a better 'flat panel' retrogaming experience include oldish discontinued plasmas, Sony W series TV's, LG OLED TV's, and emulators with advanced CRT pixel shaders (RetroArch w/ CRT-Royale).
How much you want to put into this stuff is your choice but don't expect stellar results without breaking the bank (and even so it's not easy).

[neorichieb1971]

I already have a KDL40W4500 Sony TV. Its my main TV still but I don't think I want to retro game on it.

I will look into your suggestions. If I bought a framemeister and a monitor I would expect close to CRT results.. Otherwise whats the point?

[Xyga]

If I bought a framemeister and a monitor I would expect close to CRT results.. Otherwise whats the point?

The device-based upscaling and fake scanlines stuff is nice but only imitates the overall form factor of the standard low res crt's, not the phosphors / points/triads with variable intensity and shape etc.

The only thing that gets close to that is advanced crt pixel shaders like I've mentioned. Haven't noticed pictures around the forums ?
It's pretty obvious when you compare both solutions.

But going emulation means your actual games and gear would take the dust, naturally...

[ZellSF]

I have to ask... Why 1080p?

[Xyga]

I have to ask... Why 1080p?

If you're going the doubler-scaler route it's the right choice as there's no scaling support for higher resolutions anyway.
(well the DVDO VP's can do up to 1200p but that's a niche)
Plus that's good for current consoles and BR if that counts, so in a way it's still the only 'multimedia' resolution that makes sense.

For emulators though 1440p all the way (if you have a beefy-enough computer).
4K is still a bit early I think, current monitors and TV's still have issues that make them not really worth the price IMHO.

[ZellSF]

4K = 2x 1080p / 3x 720p
1440p = 2x 720p / 3x 480p

Higher resolution panels should scale everything you throw at them pretty perfectly (and offer lots of flexibility for other uses). It's model specific sure, but I'm wondering why he's ruling out all non-1080p monitors.

[bobrocks95]

Are there any 1440p monitors that even accept a 480p input, much less ones that do a perfect (i.e. no bilinear interpolation) 3x integer scaling? Genuinely curious since I don't know much about them, but I really doubt that's the case, as nice as it would be.

[ZellSF]

Are there any 1440p monitors that even accept a 480p input

All of them except G-Sync ones.

much less ones that do a perfect (i.e. no bilinear interpolation) 3x integer scaling?

No clue, I've read about a 4K monitor here and there that does perfect 2x, so it stands to reason that there are 1440p monitors that do the same.

Even if not, higher resolution = more scaling space. How bad 480p scaling looks on a 1080p display really is not good reference for how it looks on a 1440p display.

Point is, there's not exactly a shortage of content that won't scale nicely to 1080p either. The higher you go with resolution the more room the scaler has to go on for ALL content.

[Xyga]

Most displays do shit interpolation and wrong scaling giving the finger to math.
Most 4K are either turds or good but overpriced.
Going 1080p guarantees clarity and sharpness for 1080p sources (1440p & 4K definitely don't), plus there are a shitload of competent and affordable available.

Now people are free to buy what they don't need... I'm okay with that.

[SGGG2]

4k displays should scale 1080p content perfectly with 4 pixel clusters, are TV manufacturers applying interpolation?

[ZellSF]

4k displays should scale 1080p content perfectly with 4 pixel clusters, are TV manufacturers applying interpolation?

Some are sadly doing that, and others aren't.

Going 1080p guarantees clarity and sharpness for 1080p sources

But 480p and 720p sources will look worse.

[Xyga]

4k displays should scale 1080p content perfectly with 4 pixel clusters, are TV manufacturers applying interpolation?

Some are sadly doing that, and others aren't.

Going 1080p guarantees clarity and sharpness for 1080p sources

But 480p and 720p sources will look worse.

Guys, again that completely depends on the model, whatever the scaling factor the resulting picture is completely dependent on the choices the manufacturer of the display's built-in scaling chip made.
And since the appearance of flat panels on the market hey have made bad choices, massively. Stop thinking about math and think about the products for what they really are.
Most of the time when it's right and good it's an accident (or a good engineer), yes I've seen very good 720p and even 480p on many 1080p monitors too. Heck even my TV does an excellent job. Well the same applies for higher resolution displays.

Scaling chip manufaturers + actual display assemblers do fuck up things as simple as 2x, and that's with most models on the market.
Getting the right 1440p isn't particularly easy, choices for 4K at the moment are even fewer, and if you add the upscale quality as a major point in your search that's even less models which you could probably count on a single hand.
We're basically looking at monitors doing everything right. Well, go check the reviews on prad.de who have tested the most 1440p and 4K monitors in recent times and see what they found, and how much you should expect to pay for the few that do an actual good job (NB: not 'perfect', and not necessarily while being good monitors for gaming).

I'm pointing at 1080p monitors because they're the much, MUCH easier (and obvious) way to get a crisp and sharp picture if you consider both external scalers (which neorichie does) an other HD external sources.

Not saying the few good ones wouldn't be enjoyable, but counting the pros and cons as a retrogamer, film amateur, console gamer, and owner of a mid-range PC: there are obviously a fuckton of pros for 1080p !

The only areas where 1080p is not a good choice: office and photo work.

[ZellSF]

Since you quoted me I'll answer...

I'm not sure what your point is. That there are bad high-res displays doesn't change that the good ones will do better scaling for 480p/720p. Yes for 1440p that definitely means 1080p will look less sharp. 4K will look good.

Yes, you'll have to look for a good display, but if you're going to go pick up the first 1080p panel you'll find you'll be equally disappointed as if you picked up a random 1440p or 4K panel.

Yes, 1440p and 4K panels are more expensive, which was why I asked OP why 1080p. I was wondering if it was budget concerns or some misconception about the image quality or input latency of higher resolution screens.

[Ed Oscuro]

I'd think that only having 1080p would be limiting with video editing, since you have to have overlays, can't have UI elements around the video. Alternatively, larger resolution would let you fit larger video windows side by side, above a timeline, etc.

If you can find a higher-resolution panel cheaply enough to hit your price point, why not? I see some 1440p IPS panels at around 25"-27" and $250-$300 USD; they shouldn't be too bad in GBP.

I guess there's the possibility some particular panel's scaler will be bad somehow (nobody really tests for lag and quality of upscaling on PC monitors), but if there's VGA support, then the panel should be able to scale the XRGB2 output with no (or very minor) problem.

[neorichieb1971]

1080p because my camera is 1080p/50 and I would like to view my video unscaled and 1:1 pixel mapped.

To be honest I don't want to be asked a million questions because I am coming here for expertise.

The sort of answer I am looking for is -

"Your best option if using the Framemeister is to connect it to xxxxx and yyyyy and this is close to the best you can get" "This monitor will also be a great candidate for your video editing".


Throwing choices at me isn't helping because your throwing the ball back in my court.

My budget is about £300 for the monitor around the 24" size.. I don't mind buying a framemeister... 4k is something I will consider down the road when the cameras, TV's and PC's that can video edit at 4k all come down in price because if I do it now I will find myself spending about £5000, which I can do.. But i'm thinking that in 12-18 months time I can half that, and thats £2500 well saved. I can pass monitors down to the kids later on if need be.


If any of you can give me a choice of 2 monitors I will just choose one based on your expertise. Thanks everyone.

[Ed Oscuro]

I hope we aren't throwing a million questions at you - but more information leads to better suggestions. What I was able to quickly find with a general web search (1080p monitor review) included a well-reviewed monitor that CNet still (April 9th) considers a great value, originally from 2012/2013:
http://www.cnet.com/products/asus-pa248q/
TFT Central reviewed it in Aug. 2013:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_pa248q.htm

The wrinkle is that it's a 1200p monitor, with 120pixels more top and bottom. This is not a negative for video editing (1080p video stays the same; if anything you can now add extra controls without squashing the image) and nobody raises issues when using it with 1080p. In fact:
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1752128

So basically, here are the checkmarks we tick for this monitor:

- Good display quality
- Low lag, including response times (TFT Central does a good job with this)
- Supports 1080p inputs no problem
- Supports 1080p50 resolution, if you use that instead of 60Hz.

Basically any decently-reviewed 1080p monitor should give you a good monitor, so long as you make sure it has the inputs you need and meets these specs. The buzzwords are IPS (better colors) or VA (better contrast and blacks, I understand) technology, and avoid TN panels. The real challenge is that you want speedy reponse, but also good colors; those things don't go together naturally, but the situation isn't too bad.

You should be able to use TFT Central's "Selector." I filled out some categories, and the first hit was 1920x1080. Unfortunately, you have to guess on resolution. Use or modify these choices:

Price range: Below £300 (I selected 200-300 pounds)
Size of monitor: 23.5 - 24 inch (of course you should try to choose larger too)
Widescreen Aspect Ratio = 169
Aspect Ratio: 16:9
Ultra HD or 4K Resolution Required?: no
Panel technology preference: IPS / PLS / AHVA type
Colour Space preference: Standard sRGB only
Primary use will be: Gaming
Secondary use will be: Photo work and Editing
Functions specifically needed: Not bothered

Plug them in here: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/selector.htm
Given 1080p's days are numbered indeed, I'd not throw 300 pounds at it, or even $300 USD. It's not quite simple to find huge databases of 1080p results, kind of like trying to find databases of business box CPU reviews - they don't excite any interest.

A thought on 4K: It presents no major problems for 1080p video or sources alone - pixel doubling works fine, as was intended. Going to 4K on such a monitor is as simple as selecting a different resolution or source input! There's a list of those panels here, and many already were down to $500 USD as of February: http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/best-4k-monitors (there may be a better site to look at, again; this is just a quick first look). That said, it might be cost-effective to selling on the 1080p monitor when the time comes.

[neorichieb1971]

Thanks for that. I will read through it when I have slept since just done a 12 hour shift.

[Xyga]

Or you can read the recommendation of NCX here;
http://wecravegamestoo.com/forums/monit ... ssage.html
Check the 'best 1080p IPS' and 'best 1080p AMVA' categories.

Since you're going to edit videos I've though maybe you'd apreciate a glossy monitor,
(much clearer image, but lots of screen reflections on the surface, with it you must work in a rather dark room)
The Dell S2715H or S2415H might be a good bet, it's as good as 1080 IPS monitors go today and practically the only glossy widely available, but it's still an IPS so the contrast remains bad (plus Dell's manufacturing quality control sucks more than average).

As Ed said it's impossible to tell you "this is exactly what you need" as there are simply too many things to take into account, with IPS vs. VA being the absolute first choice you must make.

(if you favor responsiveness and more natural colors -> IPS/PLS
if you prefer higher contrast and black levels -> AMVA)

[Ed Oscuro]

At least some of the 1200p monitors at that link should be fine too, just keeping in mind what I wrote earlier about 1080p support. Why pay the same for less? 27" might be in the budget too.

[Xyga]

My personal opinion is that the 'perfect' 2x scaling 4K monitors offer is not a given, plus good 4K models currently go in the $800~1000.

For someone looking at two essentially 1080p jobs, this doesn't make sense IMHO, and I see that video mode live another 5 years at least before actual higher resolution contents become a thing on the market.

The main interest of higher-than-1080p at the moment is definitely not in mainstream gaming nor video, it's in photo and professional work.

[ZellSF]

1080p because my camera is 1080p/50 and I would like to view my video unscaled and 1:1 pixel mapped.

If it's live action video, then watching it 1:1 pixel mapped is severely overrated, I doubt you could even tell the difference.

That said you mentioned an important point that Ed had to fit in his recommendations: you mostly work with 50 FPS content. A monitor that supports 50hz is pretty essential to you.

For someone looking at two essentially 1080p jobs

Video editing is not a 1080p job, the extra desktop space from a 1440p or 4K becomes very useful. Sadly probably outside his budget.

[neorichieb1971]

VA and IPS seem to be different technologies so I'm assuming you can't have both at the same time.

This VA is quite cheap and seems to cover all my requirements!!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/BenQ-EW2440L-24 ... ords=ben+q

I'm more worried about using old consoles on it than the video editing. I have a TV to watch the final product of my edits, the editing part will be done on the monitor though.

[Ed Oscuro]

Yes, VA and IPS refer to how the liquid crystals align within the panel itself. You have to choose one or the other.

VA comes with better contrast than IPS, but slightly lower response time (speed). IPS also has colors at least as good as VA, if not better.

One feature of IPS panels is that they often have some kind of residual glow, but as I sit here typing this, the black starfield in the Shmups Forum background looks black. I would still get IPS over VA for that slight advantages in speed and color. On top of that, many newer IPS panels have much less glow, I think.

[neorichieb1971]

What about this one?

Its IPS and has adjustment this that and the other.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/ASUS-PB238Q-192 ... s=asus+ips

[Xyga]

What about this one?

Its IPS and has adjustment this that and the other.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/ASUS-PB238Q-192 ... s=asus+ips

It's a 2012 model, probably with bad overdrive and not guaranteed to be flicker-free.
The LG 24MB35PY in the same style is most certainly better, but it lacks an HDMI input (you can safely use a simple cheap HDMI>DVI converter though). Funnily it features DP in place.

PS: gotta check in the online manual or specs sheet if it can handle 50Hz though.

If you're looking for something more 'high grade' in 24" size there the Eizo EV2450. http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/eizo_ev2450.htm
Again check for 50Hz.

[neorichieb1971]

http://www.amazon.co.uk/PB238Q-23-inch- ... rds=PB238Q

This one is current on the ASUS website.

I like the rotate mechanism it offers.

I am assuming no matter what monitor I list here something will be wrong with it?

I prefer a rectangular stand than the other Asus circle stands. Build quality and weightyness are a concern.. I want a tankish thing rather than a flimsy monitor.

The 50hz thing, I am not sure its a concern all the PC's i've ever worked on seem to handle my material without any concerns. I am pretty sure if using a VGA HD15 connector the signal is higher than 50hz even if the video shown on it is 50hz.