Current 24"+ LCD Specification Comparison Chart

Ok, I've updated with the requests!

Mastakill: If you can get me the European prices I'll post them.

Thanks!
 
Thanks for the links RB30, this is an interesting discussion :)

1. V0 panel in the original W was A-MVA, not P-MVA as listed in other websites. This makes sense because the V0 and V2 are belong to same model number so they should be the same type of panel.

This would make sense, and ultimately make things a bit easier. I remember though that the V0 panel was listed as being P-MVA on AUO's website....

Will have a read through those links too :) cheers


When they initially compared W and WZ side by side, they found W has better brightness and other stuff. So they first assumed WZ was not using A-MVA panel. Then they took apart of WZ and found that it had V2 panel and was not listed on the AUO website at the time. So they confirmed with BenQ directly saying that V2 is indeed a A-MVA panel and because V0 cannot do BFI (AMA Z), WZ has V2 instead. I still don't know why V2 specs on AUO website now has a slight different then the initial WZ specs.

that was the main thing which made this confusing...if panel specs matched, it would be a much more clear cut case.

Mind you though, all these testings and dissections were done on the early production models of W and WZ. Since BenQ uses whatever AUO panels AUO supplied to BenQ, and they updated continuously, so we really don't know which version of panel ended up in the Sept 2007 build W (possibly V4) until someone actually opens one up.

could be a mixture of V0, V2 and V4 panels I guess. Best thing to say if asked would be that it uses an AUO M240UW01 MVA panel I guess! haha, would solve a lot of problems!

Badd:

I notice something about the V2 specs on AUO, it said 12 CCFL. I think it is wrong, because when they opened up the FP241WZ, only found 6 tubes for backlighting on V2, so V2's specs should be closer to V4's specs. The V2 specs on AUO website is different from FP241 series's specs: brightness 300, response time 10 msec, backlight 12 CCFL.

shows 6 tubes for backlighting:
http://www.pconline.com.cn/diy/displ.../922615_3.html

AUO website V2 specs:
http://auo.com/auoDEV/products.php?s...d=6&items_id=1

yeah this was the thing. specs are out. Regarding the backlighting though, Behardware saw 12 CCFL's in this review, so perhaps the V2 is correct after all. V4 only has 6 CCFL's listed on AUO's site....wow, this is confusing!
 
yeah this was the thing. specs are out. Regarding the backlighting though, Behardware saw 12 CCFL's in this review, so perhaps the V2 is correct after all. V4 only has 6 CCFL's listed on AUO's site....wow, this is confusing!

Where in the Behardware review said WZ uses 12 CCFL?

Also this review is an early review (advanced preview model because WZ hasn't gone into production at that time) which also claimed that WZ uses non-AUO PVA (which has been disproved by Chinese website disassembly of a WZ):

http://www.behardware.com/articles/646-4/benq-fp241wz-1rst-lcd-with-screening.html

This is probably the review that started whole confusion spreading around WWW about WZ uses non-AUO PVA.

more early discussion more confusion: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8622211&postcount=631
 
Where in the Behardware review said WZ uses 12 CCFL?

Also this review is an early review (advanced preview model because WZ hasn't gone into production at that time) which also claimed that WZ uses non-AUO PVA (which has been disproved by Chinese website disassembly of a WZ):

http://www.behardware.com/articles/646-4/benq-fp241wz-1rst-lcd-with-screening.html

This is probably the review that started whole confusion spreading around WWW about WZ uses non-AUO PVA.

more early discussion more confusion: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8622211&postcount=631

yeah, BeHardware's discussion of Samsung S-PVA didn't help matters...and sorry, i meant to say BH review says 16 CCFL's:

1 - 2 - 3... 16 steps = there are 16 neons in the back of the panel. This corresponds also to what Samsung explained to us about their 24”. We noted that the two neons located at the two most extreme positions are shut down simultaneously. Upon further analysis, we took into consideration that the tubes are shut down successively.
(bottom of first page)
 
yeah it is a little bit of a mess. We know BH had a very early pre-production model though, so things could have changed. Xbitlabs also mention 16 CCFL's for the FP241WZ in this article, but then again, it is linked back to BH from there. Hmmn,

16 backlight lamps (as opposed to 12 CCFLs in the V2)?
 
that's the suggestion i guess....meaning the v2 specs are again out!

BH was referring to their reviewed WZ unit has Samsung panel, so it could just simply mean that Samsung's panel indeed has 16 backlighting neons so it has nothing to do with V2 specs.

One thing is still bugging me is the fact that the WZ units BH reviewed and that Chinese website dissected were all done around December 2006, and there were 2 different panels inside??? Or could it just mean that BH had never actually opened one up and was speculating.
 
BH was referring to their reviewed WZ unit has Samsung panel, so it could just simply mean that Samsung's panel indeed has 16 backlighting neons so it has nothing to do with V2 specs.

One thing is still bugging me is the fact that the WZ units BH reviewed and that Chinese website dissected were all done around December 2006, and there were 2 different panels inside??? Or could it just mean that BH had never actually opened one up and was speculating.

BenQ have said the BH version was a pre-production model, there's no mention in their review that they opened it up, and i doubt they would have tbh. I guess the Samsung vs AUO thing was just an assumption they made? It's an odd situation for sure, I'm seeing if i can get any clarification from BenQ as well :)
 
Back
Top