• 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.

8ms BenQ FP71E+ this month !!!

No word on the color depth, but most likely a 6bit panel. here's hoping 12ms panels with full 8bit per color arrive soon; thank God that I didn't jump on the 710T; what a foul up Samsung.
 
6bit ? is that some kinda "fake" color resolution ?

But yeah, the article says nothing about it :/
 
Well I think he meant 6bit per color, or 18bit all together.

Same with 8bit per color like he said, or 24bit all together.
 
they should really up the resolution... i don't care if they have a 0ms response time, i'm not using 1280x1024 :p
 
Woodchuck said:
they should really up the resolution... i don't care if they have a 0ms response time, i'm not using 1280x1024 :p
Click to expand...

Then it's not marketed to you, is it...from your specs you have a hell of a graphics workstation, so I don't even know why you would need a faster panel. But response time is the only thing keeping the hardcore gamers from all buying lcd's.

Once they come out with a 12ms 20" or larger, I'll trade in mine, but not until then.
 
Yeah, I was talking about per channel; as in it's probably a 18bit 252k color display for 'dithering' up to '16.2mil colors,' which I think is a joke, but functional for those that either have no idea or do not care. As far as 1280x1024; well, I have an X800 Pro, and bigger would be stupid with this thing's limitations. Granted, I probably will wait until next year to get anything like this, and go for a next gen card and a pair of 20" 1600x1200 12ms FULL COLOR displays.
 
Woodchuck said:
they should really up the resolution... i don't care if they have a 0ms response time, i'm not using 1280x1024 :p
Click to expand...

1600x1200 is too damn small for a 17" monitor. i use 1280x1024 on my 17" LCD, and i love it to death.
 
Wow, this looks sweet. Anyone know if they will also have a 19" version and how many months until it's $500 lol?
 
IdiotInCharge said:
No word on the color depth, but most likely a 6bit panel. here's hoping 12ms panels with full 8bit per color arrive soon; thank God that I didn't jump on the 710T; what a foul up Samsung.
Click to expand...
Of course it's a 6-bit panel. And of course they had to sacrifice color reproduction and already poor vewing angles to make them so fast. It really is the fastest panel yet but if you take a look at this graph: http://graphics.tomshardware.com/display/20041015/images/latency.jpg the difference between the 8ms and the Hydis 20ms panel is not that big. Just like I was expecting, the 8ms value is only true for black to white transitions while gray to gray transitions are only a bit faster than current 12ms and 16ms panels. I don't think we'll see 12ms 8-bit panels any time soon. The whole LCD technology is going in totally wrong direction IMO. Instead of focusing on image quality (colors, contrast and viewing angles) manufacturers are just trying to make their monitors as fast as possible. Although I own a 6-bit monitor and think the colors look good, the whole idea of having a 262k screen that uses dithering to make it look like it can display 16.2m colors is a joke indeed.

As for the resolution, 1280x1024 on a 17" LCD is just fine. Anything higher than that would be too high for a small screen like that.
 
You also have to take into consideration that they rate the Hydis 20ms as the fastest lcd they've tested...so to beat the Hydis means its definatley faster than any other lcd out there right now.
 
johnked24 said:
You also have to take into consideration that they rate the Hydis 20ms as the fastest lcd they've tested...so to beat the Hydis means its definatley faster than any other lcd out there right now.
Click to expand...
True, but there is something wrong when a 8ms rated LCD performs just a bit better than a 20ms rated one. And although the 20ms Hydis panel was the fastest LCD they tested it was still only slighly faster than 12ms and 16ms ones from Samsung and AU. Many people will believe that a 8ms panel is twice as fast as a 16ms one and that certainly is not the case. Like I said, I'm not doubting it's the fastest LCD out there right now. I just hate that that "progress" in technology is made at cost of image quality.
 
This is such a disservice to consumers...wildy varying performance and response time from different manufacturers is misleading....a 20 ms panel beating out a 12ms panel.

This reminds me of the MTBF times that used to be centerpieces of hard drive advertising around 10-15 years ago....250,000 hrs, while another manufacturer had 500,000, another 650,000...with laughable standards for testing that barely approximated any useful value.

The amount of pixel transistions that actually take exactly 12ms in a 12ms rated panel is probably a fraction of the total transistions in a given time period. People who do not know any better take the rating literally. It would be in the consumer's best interests for the companies to stop giving these broad, inaccurate single numbers that in many cases you cannot use for comparison, and to instead begin specifying ranges that encompass a given LCD's entire performance spectrum from fastest to slowest. For instance, we'd have 16-50ms panels listed.

Why don't we see this? If more people knew they were buying, for instance, a 12ms screen that took as long as 30ms or more for some colors and that would hit 12ms only under optimum conditions, they may reconsider. So we continue to see these liberal, estimated numbers being tossed about. Marketing advantage prevails here (as it usually does).
 
I want 19 inch with 12ms or less with 1600x1200. That would be perfect for me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top