• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Do all monitors render text differently?

A

addictedto60fps

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,329
I'm currently using a Dell monitor at work, as opposed to my Apple at home, and I much prefer how the text looks on my Dell than the Apple. It just looks so much better, even though it has a much higher dot pitch than the Apple. Everything looks crisper. So, because of that, I was wondering if different monitors render text differently on the screen? Anyone know?
 
Last edited:
dell ultrasharp have a aggressive anti glare coating, casue difficoult to text reading, and dirty grainy look specially in white pages = eyestrain.
 
Screen cap each w/png files, then view each png on the other screen ... same opinion?
 
Are you using different operating systems? Macs, Windows, and Linux render text differently. Lots of other factors can change the appearance of text, including cleartype settings, hardware acceleration. the type of cable (digital v. analog), even nvidia v. amd video cards. The antiglare coating will also change the appearance of text, as can portrait v. landscape orientation.

What Dell monitor do you have? If they are both IPS panels (ie, if it's a current Ultrasharp), the monitor probably isn't the cause of the different text rendering. Since cleartype uses rgb subpixels, TN, IPS, and PVA panels can render text differently.
 
Here are the differences:

Apple 27" Cinema Display

Mini Display Port
Radeon 6970
Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit

Dell 1908FPt

VGA
GeForce FX 5200
XP Professional


I have ClearType disabled on both pc's, as I can't stand how text looks with ClearType enabled. It looks fuzzy/blurry and doesn't look crisp. Hmm, hardware acceleration, I never thought of that. Maybe that's it. I'll try when I get home later tonight after work. I know that when I enable hardware acceleration in Firefox with my Radeon/Apple configuration, the text looks slightly fuzzy. Is that because of the antialiasing of the Radeon? I'll try disabling the hardware acceleration in Windows 7 and see if that makes any difference. Hopefully, it does. *crosses fingers*
 
You aren't going to be able to isolate the differences between those systems -- there are just too many variables.

It sounds like you might want to try a different rendering engine on your home system -- gdi++ or gdipp might work. Given that you like the analog connection, and the less "crisp" fonts, I suspect you'll prefer one of those alternatives.
 
senna89 said:
dell ultrasharp have a aggressive anti glare coating, casue difficoult to text reading, and dirty grainy look specially in white pages = eyestrain.
Click to expand...

Have you ever seen what you are talking about in every thread?
 
addictedto60fps said:
I know that when I enable hardware acceleration in Firefox with my Radeon/Apple configuration, the text looks slightly fuzzy. Is that because of the antialiasing of the Radeon?
Click to expand...

Yes and no. When hardware acceleration is enabled in Firefox on Vista/Win7, it uses Direct2D/DirectWrite for rendering text with sub-pixel-AA and natural rendering (favors font style over snapping to your monitor's pixel grid). Both things combined results is blurrier text. How and when natural rendering is used will change in Firefox 7 (release in ~3 months), and should help with sharpness issues.

Win7's default text rendering is also smoother/blurrier than stock GDI rendering from WinXP. The aliased (ClearType disabled) rendering of WinXP has the advantage as far as sharpness goes.

That said, some LCD monitors render text better than others. Resolution matters, panel type matters, anti-glare coating matters. It is all in the eye of the beholder, so if you prefer the old Dell (high dot-pitch = larger more aliased text), there is nothing wrong with that. Some of the older matte dell monitors were like their name stake, 'ultrasharp', to the point of being a fault, since you could see the individual pixels in a grid. Great for text, but very distracting for everything else.
 
Cyberbeing said:
Win7's default text rendering is also smoother/blurrier than stock GDI rendering from WinXP. The aliased (ClearType disabled) rendering of WinXP has the advantage as far as sharpness goes.
Click to expand...

Ah, very interesting. Is there anyway I can get the Windows 7 text to look like the text in Win XP? I loathe the Windows 7 text. I've also taken a look at other monitors running Windows 7 and they all look blurry to me.

xorbe said:
Screen cap each w/png files, then view each png on the other screen ... same opinion?
Click to expand...

Same results. If I view the laptop/work monitor text (text is identical on both screens) .png on the Apple, it's very crisp, vibrant, and clear. If I view the Apple text on the laptop/work monitor, it's slightly fuzzy.

cvgd said:
It sounds like you might want to try a different rendering engine on your home system -- gdi++ or gdipp might work. Given that you like the analog connection, and the less "crisp" fonts, I suspect you'll prefer one of those alternatives.
Click to expand...

What is that and where/how do I get that to work?
 
Last edited:
Ok, I think I got the text to look close to how it looks on my work Dell. This is what I did. Under Personalize, I set the theme to Windows Classic. Under Performance Options, I've disabled "Smooth edges of screen fonts." For me, the text looks so much better now. I'm assuming setting the theme to Windows Classic mimics how text looks under Windows XP in this case. In any case, I much prefer how the text is rendered under Windows Classic than any of the other themes, particularly the Aero themes. The Aero themes make the text look too antialiased and thus, too blurry for me.
 
The theme shouldn't do anything for text rendering. The smooth fonts preference simply turns ClearType on/off.

I can't stand having ClearType off. To me it looks overly sharp and pixelated. Of course the smaller the dot pitch the better ClearType etc will look.

The hardware accelerated rendering in FF4+ and IE9 looks like shit at the moment. It's a Microsoft problem afaik and nowhere near the quality of OSX's text rendering (which even there looks better in Webkit browsers vs the rest of the OS).
 
kasakka said:
The theme shouldn't do anything for text rendering. The smooth fonts preference simply turns ClearType on/off.
Click to expand...

Theme makes a huge difference on my monitor. To highlight, I've attached a couple of pics. In both pics, font is Tacoma, size set to 14 and bolded, with "smooth edges of font screen" unchecked.

Windows 7 theme: http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/1139/cdrive2.png

Windows classic theme: http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/2940/cdrivew.png

In these pics, the text rendered under Windows 7 theme looks blurry to me and gives me a headache. The text rendered under the classic theme is nice and crisp. Can someone try this on their monitor and confirm if you get the same results?
 
Last edited:
senna89 said:
yes.
the text clarity depend by monitor coating.
lighter coating = text sharpness and optimal focus.

VA panel displays is the best office text reading monitors.
Click to expand...

This is entirely subjective and there's plenty of other factors involved besides the panel type and AG coating. I have the Dell U2311H at home, which supposedly has some of the heaviest/most aggressive AG coating on it. However, text appears perfectly clear to me, and I have no issues reading documents/forums for hours on end.

This whole AG coating thing is completely blown out of proportion on this forum. Yes, it bothers some as they may be more "sensitive" to its presence, but I honestly never notice it unless I'm looking for it.
 
Mabu said:
This whole AG coating thing is completely blown out of proportion on this forum. Yes, it bothers some as they may be more "sensitive" to its presence, but I honestly never notice it unless I'm looking for it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. At work and home I have a variety of displays, from VA to IPS to glossy TN running Windows 7 or Mac OSX at various resolutions and screen sizes. Aside from the difference between Win and OSX font rendering, there isn't any real difference in the way text looks beyond the way resolution, display size and above all viewing distance plays into it.

OSX has the best looking font rendering but at small text sizes it can get blurry. Win7 has sharp text but fonts don't look as good because they're forced into a pixel grid.
 
kasakka said:
Win7 has sharp text but fonts don't look as good because they're forced into a pixel grid.
Click to expand...

I disagree about Win7 text, as they look blurry to me. They're far too antialiased, thus giving it a blurry appearance. I think I'm in the minority, though. I prefer my text to not be antialiased, as antialiased text gives me a headache. For me, text that's antialiased is like looking at text without your glasses. Whereas, non-antialised text looks like you're looking at text with your glasses. But that's just me.
 
it's subjective ok but that tha VA panel is better for text reading is a fact.
 
phammd said:
How is something subjective and also a fact at the same time?
Click to expand...

"subjective" means that some users may be less sensitive to the coating, but warn him not, does not mean that there isnt. :rolleyes:
do u want to say me that IPS is an optimal type for reading ?

The pixels Red Green and Blue are more distinguishable in samsung, instead in dell are more blurred.
U can see that the samsung is sharper that Dell, in reality text in dell is not perfectly in focus, and if your eyes do not feel it, good for you.

Dell u2311h
dell2.png


Samsung PVA 2333T
samsung2.png
 
Last edited:
senna89 said:
"subjective" means that some users may be less sensitive to the coating, but warn him not, does not mean that there isnt. :rolleyes:
do u want to say me that IPS is an optimal type for reading ?

Dell u2311h
dell2.png


Samsung PVA 2333T
samsung2.png
Click to expand...

Yup, that Dell is definitely more blurry. Is it because of the AG coating?
 
addictedto60fps said:
Yup, that Dell is definitely more blurry. Is it because of the AG coating?
Click to expand...

absolutely YES.
it is subjective because some users may experience less, but the blurred effect is there. ( + grainy effect specially in whites )


generally the situation is this :

TN = medium coating
VA = light coating
IPS = Harsh coating

there are some exceptions.
 
I get that you have strong feelings about this, but I prefer to read text on a monitor with antiglare. I'm somewhat indifferent between the LG IPS antiglare and Samsungs PVA, but I actually find the text to appear smoother and less pixelated with AG coating. It gives a softer feel that I enjoy. To be more specific, I marginally prefer the IPS with Windows 7, and the PVA with Ubuntu.

For the OP, here's the link to gdipp:

http://code.google.com/p/gdipp/

I used to use gdi++ religiously, but I found that I needed to have a better sense of the more "typical" text experience when doing web development, so started turning it off, and eventually quit using it altogether. It has some difficulties with hardware acceleration in firefox last I heard, and I'm not sure if the same goes for gdipp.
 
senna89 said:
The pixels Red Green and Blue are more distinguishable in samsung, instead in dell are more blurred.
Click to expand...
No, they're not. The pictures you're showing are not even in focus, and the pictures don't show any difference in text rendering.

addictedto60fps said:
Yup, that Dell is definitely more blurry. Is it because of the AG coating?
Click to expand...
No, it's because the photos are not properly focused. The strength of the anti-glare has no significant effect on the text. Only a glossy screen would show a difference, and even then, the difference would be slight from a normal viewing distance.

Most complaints about text rendering are due to ClearType, not the monitor itself.
 
Look around, many users have complained about this defect in the IPS, is the only defect they have.
S-PLS panel by samsung saw this issue and will resolve it using a semi glare coating.

Clear type is same for all monitor, windows use this tecnology since over ten years, i have 2 IPS display, IPS226v and U2311H, and both had the same problem, text perceived hard to read and grainy effect and cause eyestrain specially if u have the glasses, in TN monitor ther'isnt any issues.

Have u just forgott this discussion ?
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1512279&page=2

.
 
Last edited:
addictedto60fps said:
I disagree about Win7 text, as they look blurry to me. They're far too antialiased, thus giving it a blurry appearance. I think I'm in the minority, though. I prefer my text to not be antialiased, as antialiased text gives me a headache. For me, text that's antialiased is like looking at text without your glasses. Whereas, non-antialised text looks like you're looking at text with your glasses. But that's just me.
Click to expand...

You're not the only one.
 
senna89 said:
it's subjective ok but that tha VA panel is better for text reading is a fact.
Click to expand...

Subjective: This apple tastes better than that banana.
Fact: This apple is red. That banana is yellow.

Subjective: This monitor is better for text reading than that monitor.
Fact: This monitor has AG coating. That monitor does not have AG coating.
 
I have an HP LP2465 (PVA) and a LP2475w (IPS), and have felt for a long time that the 2465 does a better job with text. I generally play games on the ips and read/surf on the PVA.
 
Kueller said:
I have an HP LP2465 (PVA) and a LP2475w (IPS), and have felt for a long time that the 2465 does a better job with text. I generally play games on the ips and read/surf on the PVA.
Click to expand...

yes u have right, but i can say that in HP products the IPS model use a lighter AG coating than other brand, the difference IPS / VA is lower here.
instead whit Dell or LG the difference is much evident. :cool:
 
addictedto60fps said:
Glad to know I'm not the only one and I'm not going crazy here. ;) It seems like we're both in the minority here.
Click to expand...

I am not so sure, because I agree also and I have both. I am not saying that PVA is better than IPS all arround, but it is better for reading text. The higher CR is another reason why.
 
senna89 said:
yes u have right, but i can say that in HP products the IPS model use a lighter AG coating than other brand, the difference IPS / VA is lower here.
instead whit Dell or LG the difference is much evident. :cool:
Click to expand...

I love the setup I have for day to day stuff, but it's been giving me headaches trying to decide what I should do if I go for eyefinity. Another LP2475w? They're expensive and not as well suited to gaming as a ZR24w, but if I get a ZR24w I'll then have mixed 3 different monitors and 2 different panel types. I don't really want to sell off the 2465 and replace it with a 3rd IPS either though, because I do a lot of reading on a daily basis and never suffer a hint of eye strain with the PVA panel. Decisions, decisions.

I thought about the U2410 too, but I'm not sure it would line up with my other 2 HP's on a mount.
 
daveswantek said:
I am not so sure, because I agree also and I have both. I am not saying that PVA is better than IPS all arround, but it is better for reading text. The higher CR is another reason why.
Click to expand...

Are you sure you quoted the right post? :p
 
daveswantek said:
I am not so sure, because I agree also and I have both. I am not saying that PVA is better than IPS all arround, but it is better for reading text. The higher CR is another reason why.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure you responded to the right post there. ;) I was referring to Windows 7 text being blurry and how I much prefer text that's aliased, much like how Win XP renders text.
 
If you want better text run through the ClearType wizard. There are several options that will fine tune the text rendering for each monitor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top