HP ZR24w

Hi,

thanks to the early reviewers sharing their impressions with us. Its a big help.

I have one question about the minimal brightness, which is important to me. I like working late in the night without any light.

Is it possible for someone with an calibration device to measure the minimal brightness?

That would be really nice.
 
Slightly off topic but working late at night with the lights off other than the monitor is really bad for your eyes even with a 'dim' monitor. Even a little bias light would help reduce the strain.
 
WildMonkey said:
Maybe you should read more about the NEC one. http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/nec_ea231wmi.htm

It's not a bad monitor by any means.
Click to expand...

I read all about it in last month's issue of "Who Cares" magazine. :cool:

Look, I'm not saying/implying that that particular NEC is a bad monitor in any way. I'm just saying the two are completely different monitors and I don't really see how they can be compared. The 5ms response rate of the HP vs. the 14ms rate of the NEC is a big factor, but the sheer fact that one is 16:10 and the other is 16:9 just ends the debate immediately for me. I'd rather have the EA241WM if I were looking for an NEC to compare with the ZR24w. The extra resolution is the big selling point.
 
moreawesomethanU said:
hey does anyone know where i can get this monitor in canada? There is one on NCIX

http://ncix.com/products/?sku=10331M&vpn=VM633A8#ABA&manufacture=HP - COMPAQ MONITORS

under SMARTBUY ZR24W LCD MONITOR...

Is it the same thing? The part# is the same but wuts smartbuy??
Click to expand...

Buy it from direct canada instead. Free shipping on orders over 300 dollars. Its also located in BC, so no PST when bought from out of province which is a plus to me since I am in ontario.
 
sethk said:
Slightly off topic but working late at night with the lights off other than the monitor is really bad for your eyes even with a 'dim' monitor. Even a little bias light would help reduce the strain.
Click to expand...

really? ive worked in only the glow of the monitor for years and never noticed any problems.

the only light in my room is from teh sun and the monitor, so when the sun goes down, there goes my light.
 
Just pulled the trigger, got it for $475 CDN shipped and taxes in.

Feels good man.
 
Has any one dealt with Bottom Line Telecommunications? They have it at $403.76 with shipping but don't know anything about their dead pixel policies nor reputation.
 
WildMonkey said:
Has any one dealt with Bottom Line Telecommunications? They have it at $403.76 with shipping but don't know anything about their dead pixel policies nor reputation.
Click to expand...

Someone here has bought from them before. I know other people from other forums have bought from there and haven't had problems. I ordered 2 from there and just waiting for shipment.
 
ToastyX said:
Calibrating to a specific luminance is not that important. It's just done for consistency. It's useful if you have several monitors and want them all to be the same brightness.
Click to expand...

And it is exteremely important if you want a calibrated photography workflow and match your monitor brightness to your printer output. Unless you have an unlimited supply of paper and ink! ;)

BJB
 
greens said:
I read all about it in last month's issue of "Who Cares" magazine. :cool:

Look, I'm not saying/implying that that particular NEC is a bad monitor in any way. I'm just saying the two are completely different monitors and I don't really see how they can be compared. The 5ms response rate of the HP vs. the 14ms rate of the NEC is a big factor, but the sheer fact that one is 16:10 and the other is 16:9 just ends the debate immediately for me. I'd rather have the EA241WM if I were looking for an NEC to compare with the ZR24w. The extra resolution is the big selling point.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. But a lot of people would choose a IPS 16:9 monitor over a TN 16:10 monitor. The nec ea241wm is a TN monitor. The ea231wmi is an IPS.

I'm debating between the ea241wmi vs zr24w myself. I'm leaning towards the zr24w because of it's larger size. I haven't really figured out whether 16:10 is better for gaming.
 
Howie said:
Fair enough. But a lot of people would choose a IPS 16:9 monitor over a TN 16:10 monitor. The nec ea241wm is a TN monitor. The ea231wmi is an IPS.

I'm debating between the ea241wmi vs zr24w myself. I'm leaning towards the zr24w because of it's larger size. I haven't really figured out whether 16:10 is better for gaming.
Click to expand...

16:10 is better for everything (especially for desktop space) except watching movies. But I have a TV hooked up for that.
 
Even with 16:10, I find myself wanting more vertical FOV. 16:9 would be a step in the wrong direction for me.
 
+1 for both the posts above. 16:10 all the way. Vertical real estate is a limited resource.
 
Decivox said:
Just pulled the trigger, got it for $475 CDN shipped and taxes in.

Feels good man.
Click to expand...

Mind sharing where did u got it for so cheap? Directcanada (listed by the poster above) have it for 446, which i believe is around 500 after tax.

and also, for those people who already got the monitor, did anyone notice this mentioned in the annetech forum review?

the monitor does not display a static image very well, if you have a static image you will notice variance in the color - especially noticeable on webpages or casual web games. This seems to be due to the screen used it has a slight texture to it and I believe it to be the culprit making small areas slightly brighter or darker.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Decivox said:
Buy it from direct canada instead. Free shipping on orders over 300 dollars. Its also located in BC, so no PST when bought from out of province which is a plus to me since I am in ontario.
Click to expand...

Direct Canada IS NCIX!

It's the same company in the same warehouse! It's just their cover for a "discount" outlet. I've bought DC stuff before and it came in NCIX boxes. Best thing to do is actually price match Direct Canada with your NCIX account. They will never turn it down since it's actually themselves.
 
Blackbird said:
Hm..
Here is a pic of the Pro software: http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/content_images/spyder3pro/cal_check.jpg
And here is a pic of the Elite software: http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/content_images/spyder3elite/recal-option.gif
Seems to me that you can't set white and black luminance with Pro?

And in this review: http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/spyder3pro.html
They say this: "Note that with the Spyder3Pro, you do not get the option to set an absolute level. This is perfectly good enough for many users, but if you need absolute settings then consider the Spyder3Elite."

So maybe i should cancel my Spyder 3 Pro order and order a Elite instead?
Btw i'm mainly just a gamer.

I don't know if i dare to adjust the RGB sliders.. ;P
Because i'm a newbie on this stuff, maybe i should just do the software do it..

Which of these checkboxes do i have to check when i'm calibrating the ZR24w?: http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/content_images/spyder3pro/controls.jpg
Brightness and Contrast, right..?
Click to expand...

I hope you know that games don't care for your software calibration, neither do 99,99% of applications. So the colorimeter will only help you calibrate with the monitor OSD, maybe not worth the expense.

greens said:
I read all about it in last month's issue of "Who Cares" magazine. :cool:

Look, I'm not saying/implying that that particular NEC is a bad monitor in any way. I'm just saying the two are completely different monitors and I don't really see how they can be compared. The 5ms response rate of the HP vs. the 14ms rate of the NEC is a big factor, but the sheer fact that one is 16:10 and the other is 16:9 just ends the debate immediately for me. I'd rather have the EA241WM if I were looking for an NEC to compare with the ZR24w. The extra resolution is the big selling point.
Click to expand...

I agree that 16:10 is much better than 16:9, in fact I would love that there still were 4:3 monitors, with a crazy height of course. Internet is mostly vertical but we get horizontal screens, it doesn't make any sense.

However, the 14ms of the NEC is misleading, it's as quick as other IPS panels, they just didn't try to sugarcoat the truth like every manufacturer does.

I almost bought one, but the fact that the HP was soon out stopped me, because I really want 1200 pixels height.
 
Well let's see how it turns out, I pulled the trigger on Cost Central. Hopefully I'll post some first impressions by week's end.
 
Mine should be here later today. Has anyone figured out decent calibration settings yet (RGB, bright, contrast, etc)?
 
moreawesomethanU said:
Mind sharing where did u got it for so cheap? Directcanada (listed by the poster above) have it for 446, which i believe is around 500 after tax.

and also, for those people who already got the monitor, did anyone notice this mentioned in the annetech forum review?
Click to expand...

I got it from Direct Canada. I only needed to pay 5% GST instead of 13% GST and PST since I am out of province (I live in Ontario). Also shipping is free on orders over $300

I hardly ever buy any computer components in province, except for cases maybe.

Spare-Flair said:
Direct Canada IS NCIX!

It's the same company in the same warehouse! It's just their cover for a "discount" outlet. I've bought DC stuff before and it came in NCIX boxes. Best thing to do is actually price match Direct Canada with your NCIX account. They will never turn it down since it's actually themselves.
Click to expand...

Yea I know, I have ordered from Direct Canada before too and recieved my stuff in NCIX boxes.. :)
 
Aesma said:
I agree that 16:10 is much better than 16:9, in fact I would love that there still were 4:3 monitors, with a crazy height of course. Internet is mostly vertical but we get horizontal screens, it doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

At work, at one point, I turned one landscape for web pages and loved it. Outlook and other apps on the normal one, web pages on the long one.
 
How I calcualed lag. I used response to 50% pixel change. Anyways I got 13.4 ms, which is really good.

This is assuming VSYNC was working perfectly and there was no delay on the cloning.

13.4 is fast, will be pretty good for gaming. I would consider this a great gaming monitor if it can do 75, 80Hz or so. My Dell 2209WA is great and 76Hz makes a notable improvement. This coming from a CRT freak/LCD hater. Higher refresh is great in that it also serves to reduce input lag, reduce vsync induced lag, but also reduces the effects of tearing with no vsync. Oh, and it makes things smoother. Don't forget about that one. ;)

I think IPS would be just fine with 120Hz, even if the pixel response isn't 100% up to snuff. Many of the major benefits would still present themselves, but 3D shutter applications may not work so well.

http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=jzq5in0zgng

http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=vz5xnjwwyw3
 
okashira said:
How I calcualed lag. I used response to 50% pixel change. Anyways I got 13.4 ms, which is really good.

This is assuming VSYNC was working perfectly and there was no delay on the cloning.

13.4 is fast, will be pretty good for gaming. I would consider this a great gaming monitor if it can do 75, 80Hz or so. My Dell 2209WA is great and 76Hz makes a notable improvement. This coming from a CRT freak/LCD hater. Higher refresh is great in that it also serves to reduce input lag, reduce vsync induced lag, but also reduces the effects of tearing with no vsync. Oh, and it makes things smoother. Don't forget about that one. ;)

I think IPS would be just fine with 120Hz, even if the pixel response isn't 100% up to snuff. Many of the major benefits would still present themselves, but 3D shutter applications may not work so well.

http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=jzq5in0zgng

http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=vz5xnjwwyw3
Click to expand...

3D shutter applications really aren't that great on any LCD, so that isn't much of an issue imo. 3D LCD TV's fall way behind Plasmas in this area.

120hz would easily solve most motion resolution issues on almost any modern LCD, regardless of input lag or pixel response time.

I don't quite understand why it hasn't become a standard feature yet, or why 120hz LCDs took so long to show up on the market - does anyone know? Is it a hardware issue? Does it really cost more to produce a LCD capable of running at a higher refresh rate? I wonder how different the internals are of the new 120hz LCDs compared to 60hz LCDs, or if it's only something as simple as a firmware change...
 
oh dear, i guess it was too good to be true for me.. 2 dead pixels appeared (dark sub pixel)

they seem to be on the same line horizontally across the monitor about 3 inches up from the lower bezel.

tried powering down, applying pressure and powering up, no dice. massaging, no dice.

let's see if hp's warranty will take care of this...
 
chris_n said:
oh dear, i guess it was too good to be true for me.. 2 dead pixels appeared (dark sub pixel)

they seem to be on the same line horizontally across the monitor about 3 inches up from the lower bezel.

tried powering down, applying pressure and powering up, no dice. massaging, no dice.

let's see if hp's warranty will take care of this...
Click to expand...

Was it that way out of the box or did they show up later?
 
okashira said:
How I calcualed lag. I used response to 50% pixel change. Anyways I got 13.4 ms, which is really good.
Click to expand...
According to your equation, the lag is 7-8 ms.

You included the oldest bar fading out as part of the average, which isn't fair because LCD monitors are sample and hold displays, so the oldest bar on the LCD will always fade out one frame later than a CRT because a CRT begins to fade out as soon as the area is refreshed, while an LCD will keep the frame on the screen until the next refresh.

You only want to look at the newest bar fading in because that's the actual lag.
 
steal said:
Does it really cost more to produce a LCD capable of running at a higher refresh rate? I wonder how different the internals are of the new 120hz LCDs compared to 60hz LCDs, or if it's only something as simple as a firmware change...
Click to expand...

This is an excellent question/point and I would say the answer is definitely YES and NO. They only cost more now due to the premium assosciated with a low quanitiy manufacturing item. Once all monitors, or at least a good quantity / % of them support 120Hz, then the price of the electronics will be essentially equal to the 60Hz models. The sooner the better, and it's up to US to be vocal in that we want this feature to get it implemented. Post about it, bitch about it, write articles about it (or email others, like Kyle Bennet) to write articles supporting it..

Basically I'm adding to steal's point - 120Hz can be essentially added to ALL monitors as a standard feature without a cost increase. It just needs to be made into a standard.
 
okashira said:
This is an excellent question/point and I would say the answer is definitely YES and NO. They only cost more now due to the premium assosciated with a low quanitiy manufacturing item. Once all monitors, or at least a good quantity / % of them support 120Hz, then the price of the electronics will be essentially equal to the 60Hz models. The sooner the better, and it's up to US to be vocal in that we want this feature to get it implemented. Post about it, bitch about it, write articles about it (or email others, like Kyle Bennet) to write articles supporting it..

Basically I'm adding to steal's point - 120Hz can be essentially added to ALL monitors as a standard feature without a cost increase. It just needs to be made into a standard.
Click to expand...

It depends what you are talking about. 120hz on monitors through a dual-link DVI cable may not cost much more to implement outside of having faster processors to handle the extra frames spewed out by the PC.

On TVs it definitely costs something more as there are extra electronics required to create frame interpolation, which also requires extra buffering/memory. You have to buffer frame 1 and 2 and then use algorithms to produce the extra frames, as current HDMI 1.3 does not have sufficient bandwidth to transmit a 1080p signal at 120hz from source to panel.

I have tried the Acer GD235Hz and didn't find the motion blur was eliminated IMHO, but motion was definitely smoother and less "stepped" from frame to frame as long as my video card was able to produce sufficient frames per second, or in regards to mouse cursor on the desktop.

I'm probably going to try out the ZR24W. An sRGB gamut, low lag IPS screen at 24" with 1920x1200 resolution is definitely tempting. This has always been my fave size vs. resolution combination.

I find my 3008WFP ( 30" ) needs fonts to be enlarged and it somewhat mitigates the extra real estate, and the sRGB presets whites are a bit too green for my taste with whites.
 
Last edited:
ToastyX said:
According to your equation, the lag is 7-8 ms.

You included the oldest bar fading out as part of the average, which isn't fair because LCD monitors are sample and hold displays, so the oldest bar on the LCD will always fade out one frame later than a CRT because a CRT begins to fade out as soon as the area is refreshed, while an LCD will keep the frame on the screen until the next refresh.

You only want to look at the newest bar fading in because that's the actual lag.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your comment. I've looked at it again, and I'm not sure I can agree with you.

That area is supposed to be black. I don't think the shutter speed on the camera was nearly fast enough consider the sample and hold issue. At first I was thinking the pics were from a fast shutter camera, but I don't think this is the case. The reason why white/black interfaces on the CRT seem so sharp and pronounced is because the image is extremely overexposed, not because it's a fast shutter.

Another perspective...
In the 2nd pic (1.jpg) The CRT clearly did not draw white when the electron gun traced the center of the screen (bar 4.5 e.g. center of bar 5) approximately 7 milliseconds ago. However, the LCD has not started to draw black until approximately bar 3.6
This puts the lag here at least 15ms. But that was ~6-7 ms ago. Which makes it more like 20ms like the calc.
 
okashira said:
In the 2nd pic (1.jpg) The CRT clearly did not draw white when the electron gun traced the center of the screen (bar 4.5 e.g. center of bar 5) approximately 7 milliseconds ago. However, the LCD has not started to draw black until approximately bar 3.6
This puts the lag here at least 15ms. But that was ~6-7 ms ago. Which makes it more like 20ms like the calc.
Click to expand...
In that picture, when the camera's shutter opened, the refresh was happening at 4.5. It looks like the CRT is drawing a black bar, but a CRT can't draw black. It's actually drawing a white bar. The reason the top half is black is because when it draws white, it fades away in less than a millisecond, so it was already gone by the time the camera's shutter opened in the middle of the frame. A CRT fades almost as soon as it draws, while an LCD holds the frame until the next refresh. That's why there's a one frame difference while fading out. That combined with retinal persistence is why even fast LCD monitors have motion blur.
 
Hmmm, thinking again about the over-exposure of the image. That would mean the start of the black point on the LCD would be masked because the white is clipped until it becomes far darker then what is really 50% in reality. That means the beginning of the black point may be as far as 3.9 or 4.0 in image 2, putting the lag at closer to 8ms. Given the overexposure, one this is for sure, my "to 50% pixel response" analysis is not accurate here!

I'll revise my estimate to ... 3/17 ms (upper/lower bound) with a contingency for 3/33.67 ms given the lack of info on vsync and clone lag in this setup. I'm pretty confident with 3/17 ms, though. I'll leave it at that since I don't own this monitor or anything.

I'm happy with my 2209WA for gaming until something much better comes along like OLED with <5ms and 120Hz, 120Hz IPS with 1000+ contrast ratio and <8ms lag, 120Hz MVA/S-PVA for ~2000+ contrast ratio with <8ms lag (surely this can be done even with the buffering requirments of overdrive. just run it at 240Hz for processing if necessary; at 240Hz you can buffer 2 frames and still keep 8.33ms lag. Heck ,give me an OLED 240Hz with 13440 x 8400 resolution so we can get that perfect scaling for all resolutions. :D

This one looks good though. It definitely qualifies as a 'high performance" 60 Hz, IPS display as HP intended.

Has anyone tried to force higher refresh rates and test for frame dropping yet?
 
okashira said:
Hmmm, thinking again about the over-exposure of the image. That would mean the start of the black point on the LCD would be masked because the white is clipped until it becomes far darker then what is really 50% in reality. That means the beginning of the black point may be as far as 3.9 or 4.0 in image 2, putting the lag at closer to 8ms. Given the overexposure, one this is for sure, my "to 50% pixel response" analysis is not accurate here!

I'll revise my estimate to ... 3/17 ms (upper/lower bound) with a contingency for 3/33.67 ms given the lack of info on vsync and clone lag in this setup. I'm pretty confident with 3/17 ms, though. I'll leave it at that since I don't own this monitor or anything.

I'm happy with my 2209WA for gaming until something much better comes along like OLED with <5ms and 120Hz, 120Hz IPS with 1000+ contrast ratio and <8ms lag, 120Hz MVA/S-PVA for ~2000+ contrast ratio with <8ms lag (surely this can be done even with the buffering requirments of overdrive. just run it at 240Hz for processing if necessary; at 240Hz you can buffer 2 frames and still keep 8.33ms lag. Heck ,give me an OLED 240Hz with 13440 x 8400 resolution so we can get that perfect scaling for all resolutions. :D

This one looks good though. It definitely qualifies as a 'high performance" 60 Hz, IPS display as HP intended.

Has anyone tried to force higher refresh rates and test for frame dropping yet?
Click to expand...
Wow. You don't hold back, do you? A man can dream :)
 
cool, looks like ive got a tech coming out to my place tomorrow to replace the monitor.

 
Last edited:
chris_n said:
oh dear, i guess it was too good to be true for me.. 2 dead pixels appeared (dark sub pixel)

they seem to be on the same line horizontally across the monitor about 3 inches up from the lower bezel.

tried powering down, applying pressure and powering up, no dice. massaging, no dice.

let's see if hp's warranty will take care of this...
Click to expand...
Chris, how long had the unit been in operation before the dead sub-pixels were noticed? Any chance that it was that way out of the box?
 
chris_n said:
oh dear, i guess it was too good to be true for me.. 2 dead pixels appeared (dark sub pixel)

they seem to be on the same line horizontally across the monitor about 3 inches up from the lower bezel.

tried powering down, applying pressure and powering up, no dice. massaging, no dice.

let's see if hp's warranty will take care of this...
Click to expand...

Ohh nooooo, sorry to hear :(

I just got both of mine today FINALLY, and luckily no dead pixels on either of them. I just hope they don't appear out of no where like yours did.
 
just thought id give a quick update on how customer support has gone so far.

i submitted a ticket this afternoon around 3
4:40 i received an email back tell me that i have 3 years of on site warranty, and that i need a tech to come replace it.
5:50 i confirm i want a tech to come and replace it
7:30 i get a phone call from HP confirming my information, and telling me a local agent will be calling me tomorrow (was after business hours today) to schedule a time.

so far this is some of the best customer service ive ever had.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top