Best 30" monitor - 2010 edition!

[kasakka]

It uses newer IPS technology (H-IPS) that is better than the older IPS technology. And why is 16:9 bad? It's better for gaming (wider FOV) and videos (most videos are 16:9 or wider). The only benefit of a 30" is 160 extra vertical pixels, but with 1440 vertical pixels, having 160 fewer pixels won't make much of a difference.

Not this again. 16:10 2560x1600 can do everything the 16:9 does when using 16:9 resolutions, just with tiny black bars. Most of the time people use desktop apps and extra vertical resolution is good to have there. Not to mention the physically larger size of the 30" vs 27".

IMO the whole input lag thing is pretty overrated. I can't notice any perceivable difference between my 3008WFP A02 revision and my 40" Sony HDTV that is supposed to have only 0-10 ms lag according to hdtvtest.co.uk. I'm sure there is one if you use test programs and cameras but if I can't spot it when actually using it, it is irrelevant to me.

The biggest drawbacks of the 3008WFP (and the U2711) are the really slow resolution/input switching. It takes roughly 5 seconds to change resolutions or inputs for some reason. Very annoying if you are flipping thru the inputs. Not being able to disable inputs is another problem, having to cycle thru all those analog inputs is a chore. The menus are also very poorly designed on the 3008WFP (apparently better on the U2711). Having USB connected can make your computer come out of sleep if you switch the monitor completely off, probably due to the card reader becoming "disconnected". Most of the color presets are also just plain awful.

The upcoming U3011 seems to have a better set of inputs (less mostly useless ones) but I really hope that they've worked on the afore-mentioned issues too.

As far as 30" panels go, there haven't been any real improvements. You'll notice a bigger difference in the various antiglare coatings than between panels.

The lack of a OSD in most displays will make for more difficult color calibration and possibly fucked up colors in games (since they don't support color profiles). I used to have a 20" Viewsonic that would be very blueish if you didn't use software calibration in combination with the hardware RGB settings (the hardware settings weren't enough for good colors, especially grays) and it was just awful when gaming because the software calibration part got turned off. So at least for me a proper OSD with color control settings is a must.

For Windows users the scaler shouldn't be that important since the graphics card can scale the lower resolutions.

 

[damnboy]

Kasakka is right on target regarding to slowness of switching input source of 3008wfp.
Beside that draw backup, it also get pretty hot and raise my room temperature high.
It still a great monitor though that's why I bought another one!

 

[Vega]

It uses newer IPS technology (H-IPS) that is better than the older IPS technology. And why is 16:9 bad? It's better for gaming (wider FOV) and videos (most videos are 16:9 or wider). The only benefit of a 30" is 160 extra vertical pixels, but with 1440 vertical pixels, having 160 fewer pixels won't make much of a difference.

H-IPS isn't the newest IPS technology. H-IPS is from 2005. There's E-IPS (2009) and like the HP ZR30W, P-IPS (2010).

16:9 has only become mainstream because it's cheaper for manufacturers. It's also not a movie aspect ratio, but a TV ratio. As a single monitor, 16:9 will produce a wider field of vision in only Hor+ games. If you are doing Eyefinity/nVsurround, 3x 16:10 LCD's would work far better than 3x 16:9. 16:9 in that case being far too short and wide.

 

[heelix]

You might not think there is a difference, but I've got a 3007 and a 2707 on my desk. Needed (and I use that word loosely) an external monitor for my laptops, which all had a single link DVI at the time.

The 30" is 2560x1600, while the 27" is 1920x1200. It does not sound like much of a difference, but there is a sizable chunk of usable screen that is nice to have. Both game just fine, though the 30" does require a bit more GPU than the 27". Any subtleties are lost upon me, apparently, if the 3007 is is sucky gaming monitor.

I'd kill for a laptop that came with a 4:3 ratio today. Where did the 1600x1200 laptops go? I agree - most manufactures went 'cheap'. Don't like the 16:9 monitors at all, which is kept my old Thinkpad T60p in use far longer than it should be.

 

[tk-don]

H-IPS isn't the newest IPS technology. H-IPS is from 2005. There's E-IPS (2009) and like the HP ZR30W, P-IPS (2010).

I think he just meant to say that H-IPS is newer than S-IPS. The OP was considering S-IPS panels in his post. But if you're just considering the raw panel (TFT+LCD layer which would define the screen technology) then actually H-IPS, e-IPS and p-IPS are identical.

 

[Ramirin]

I decided to go with the U2711 instead of a 30" and I'm glad I did. It is just the perfect size for my desk and the pixel density make games look amazing even without AA.

 

[jcvjcvjcvjcv]

You might not think there is a difference, but I've got a 3007 and a 2707 on my desk. Needed (and I use that word loosely) an external monitor for my laptops, which all had a single link DVI at the time.

The 30" is 2560x1600, while the 27" is 1920x1200. It does not sound like much of a difference, but there is a sizable chunk of usable screen that is nice to have. Both game just fine, though the 30" does require a bit more GPU than the 27". Any subtleties are lost upon me, apparently, if the 3007 is is sucky gaming monitor.

I'd kill for a laptop that came with a 4:3 ratio today. Where did the 1600x1200 laptops go? I agree - most manufactures went 'cheap'. Don't like the 16:9 monitors at all, which is kept my old Thinkpad T60p in use far longer than it should be.

I believe Lenovo didn't want to be dependent on one producer for the 4:3 screens, so in order to adequately meet consumer demand they dropped it. The morons

There have been threads with Lenovo / IBM personnel stating that if someone could come up with a binding order for 10,000 units they would make a 4:3 batch. Of course that's nonsense. If they would produce 10,000 and put as many add money behind the "Now with high screen" 4:3 line they would sell in no-time. The premium for the last 4:3 T61's was $300+ over 16:10 and the waiting lists was MONTHS. And the whole cost argument in the ThinkPad class is a bunch of bull. Talking TN, the difference is $10.

 

[heelix]

Hell, at this point even 16:10 is starting to look good.