23" verses 24"

Which is more comfortable to use?

  • 23" (pixel pitch 0.258)

    Votes: 6 21.4%

  • 24" (pixel pitch 0.27)

    Votes: 22 78.6%
  • Total voters
    28
S

ShadowFusion

n00b
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
21
Hi,

What do people think about 23" monitors verses 24"? (given that they have the same resolution)

Is the size of everything quite noticeably different and if so which is better?

I'm used to a 20.1" which has a pixel pitch of 0.258 which matches the 23". Where as 24" is 0.27 which is more like a 21" monitor.

I know this is a matter of opinion but would 23" be better since it would have less "screen door" issues?

I find it interesting that 20.1" seem quite popular verses 21" where as 24" seems more popular than 23"... given the pixel pitch is different...

I found this guide quite useful

Thanks

EDIT: Also something else to note... which is more true to physical proportions? (e.g. hold up sheet of paper to word and size match?...)
 
Smaller pixel pitch doesn't necessarily mean less screen door effect. The pixel pitch doesn't tell you how much space is between the pixels, only the size of the pixels including the space. The less space between the pixels, the less screen door effect, but the less sharp it will appear.

Neither is more true to physical proportions. It depends on what the software thinks the DPI is. Windows assumes 96 DPI by default, and 23" is 98 while 24" is 94, so they're both off by the same amount, but you can change that. Image editors usually assume 72 DPI by default, but you can change that as well. If you can set the DPI, it doesn't matter.

Honestly, the pixel pitch should be the least of your worries. The panel type, color quality, viewing angles, lag, response time, and contrast are more important issues.
 
Possibly in theory that makes sense.

But In practice: Smaller pitch does result in less SDE and less visibly pixels from what I have seen.

I saw ZERO SDE/pixels structure on my 3007-HC and both clearly visible on my 2405wfp.

I would also prefer 23" to match with a quality 20" 4:3 panel (NEC 2090uxi) there seem to be fewer quality 21" panels to match 24" screens.
 
@ToastyX: Cool thanks for the info, wasn't too sure about the screen door but glad you've cleaned that up for me.

DPI: Yea I'm just a bit concerned everything will look bigger than wat I'm used too...

I really just wanted to settle on a size since I've had a nightmare trying to choose a screen :(

As of now, looking for:
24"
gaming / web design (extensive use so comfortable for looking at for 10+ a day
Looks great but still has low input lag (ala no 2408wfp)
< $850 USD

I really wanted an IPS but that dream is looking quite unrealistic now...

I've got a Dell 2007wfp (IPS) so that's wat I'm used to...

any ideas? :confused:

Thanks

EDIT: Oh and very important is 1:1 or aspect scaling.... for 1080p input (I want my black bars :) )
 
nm going to order a BenQ FP241W :D

But I'd still be interested to see what other people prefer... I think given that a 23/24 is a big screen.... mabye a higher dot pitch is better so you can sit a bit further back...
 
Snowdog said:
I would also prefer 23" to match with a quality 20" 4:3 panel (NEC 2090uxi) there seem to be fewer quality 21" panels to match 24" screens.
Click to expand...

Are there any new 23" panels out there. IIRC they're all fairly old models like the apple.

Personally I'm planning to put a 30" between my 2090's in a year or two.
 
I can't compare 23" and 24" for you because I have never used a 23" display. However, I happen to be a new 24" monitor user. I have been using one for 1 month now, and the previous display I had was a 17", so that was a significant jump as for the size. And I can assure you that I have no "screen door" issue. Besides this, as others noticed, there seem to be very few 23" displays on the market, while 24" are becoming increasingly popular. Shouldn't there be a reason for that? My advice: don't worry for "screen door"/ "pixel pitch" issues, and go for the 24" display of your choice!
 
The 23" panels were updated to 700:1 contrast in 2006. They may be a bit old, but they still perform very well.



Snowdog said:
Possibly in theory that makes sense.

But In practice: Smaller pitch does result in less SDE and less visibly pixels from what I have seen.

I saw ZERO SDE/pixels structure on my 3007-HC and both clearly visible on my 2405wfp.
Click to expand...
I find that strange because my experience is exactly the opposite. I found the 2405FPW had a smoother image because there was less spacing between the pixels, while with S-IPS panels, I felt like I was staring at a grid of dots. TN panels and H-IPS panels are somewhere in the middle.
 
That is strange. Have you looked at a 30" S-IPS? I had to be about 10 inches away to see the pixel structure it was completely invisible at normal viewing distances. On the 2405, I could see it from 2 feet away. I have a 17" LCD that is in the middle as far as pitch and visible pixel structure.

For me it has been a perfect correlation between dot pitch and structure visibility (as you would expect). 19" LCDs look gross and pixelated to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top