LG IPS 27inch 3d/120hz 2560x1440 monitor!!!!

"Hopefully 2560x1440" but since it's e-IPS most likely it will. If it was a TN panel, it would definitely be 1080p.

Seeing that LG is somewhat cheaper than Dell, if $500-600, sign me up for one.
For 120Hz @ 2560x1440, I can compromise on the e-IPS panel.

Can someone here describe what "passive" 3D is?
 
Passive 3D=garbage since it runs @1920x540p. Basically it is a cheaper solution for people who sit really far from their monitors/TV's (4ft+ for monitors and 10ft+ for TV's) and won't see any flaws.
 
NCX said:
Passive 3D=garbage since it runs @1920x540p. Basically it is a cheaper solution for people who sit really far from their monitors/TV's (4ft+ for monitors and 10ft+ for TV's) and won't see any flaws.
Click to expand...

So I guess my question is, is this passive 3d, the same crap they put on those tv's?

Will this mean it would not support 120hz?
 
All of the passive 3D displays are 60hz. Passive 3D glasses are lighter and cheaper I guess those are bonuses. Basically LG has targeted the "joesumer," who will buy the biggest and cheapest TV with Passive 3D and now there are a few cheapo monitors.
 
NCX said:
All of the passive 3D displays are 60hz. Passive 3D glasses are lighter and cheaper I guess those are bonuses. Basically LG has targeted the "joesumer," who will buy the biggest and cheapest TV with Passive 3D and now there are a few cheapo monitors.
Click to expand...

Ouch.....was hoping this was a true IPS 120hz monitor.

my happiness is now gone :( (lol)
 
I have bought one of the new LG IPS screens for my work PC and they are a good buy for the money over a TN panel.

Calibrated mine with my Spyder Pro3 and the difference colour wise between factory settings and calibrated was minimal.

Good to go out of the box.
 
Watch out before you get an LG Passive 3D monitor.

LG's HDTVs can use RealD glasses, while their monitors cannot. This is because their polarization is not the same. They are both circular polarized, but 45 degrees rotated from each other. If you use the wrong glasses on either, they will fail to completely block each eye from what the other sees and give a crappy 3D effect.

I recently purchased an LG DM2350D 23" 3D Cinema monitor from Best Buy. I came home and plugged it up, expecting to have my mind blown away. Instead, what I got was purple shadows, blurriness, and a generally bad experience. In games especially, it was everpresent. I found though that tilting my head 45 degrees would cause the picture to clear up completely. With the glasses held in front of me and tilting them, I could see how each lens could not block enough light from the other lense while horizontal to prevent crosstalk.

It turns out, LG started shipping their monitors with the same glasses as their HDTVs, making them defective out of the box. It also seems that LG is oblivious to what they've done. I've spent around three hours so far on the phone with LG support, mostly trying to even explain that there's different kinds of polarization. I'm still not sure if they comprehend the issue fully, as they couldn't even find the model number for the correct pair (FPG-2000 is what the bundle is called) like it never existed.

Anyhow, they shipped out a "different model than what you received with your monitor," so we'll see if they work.. I'm most likely going to return it anyway, as I'm not too keen about needing proprietary glasses that the manufacturer may not know exist. Until LG switches their monitor panels to be compatible with passive glasses that everybody else in the industry is using, I can't recommend buying them.
 
Last edited:
reading that its passive just lost it for me. if it were to have nvidia 3D support i would be all over it.
 
well 2560x1440 @ 120hz requires dp 1.2 i believe, and how many video cards even support that? only the current/newest generation i believe? i think it's gonna be awhile before we see displays like this...

edit; i wouldn't be surprised to see 120hz 1080p or 1920x1200 ips panels next year though.
 
I'm pretty sure it will not accept a 120hz input, so HDMI will be sufficient. This isn't anything really new; they're just applying their passive tech to IPS screens. Hopefully it will come with the same polarization as their HDTVs and not their other monitors.
 
e-IPS pixel response times are too slow for 120hz. Need 8ms ISO or less.
 
Polarization avoids requiring 120Hz by limiting alternating horizontal lines to each eye instead of alternating frames. You still get 60Hz per eye, but only at a resolution of 1920x540. While this may be an acceptable compromise on its own, there's other related issues that may sway you the other way.

What really annoys me is that, at the moment, you're limited to 24Hz/30Hz at 1080P and 60Hz at 720p for frame-packed 3D over HDMI. For gaming, this means I need to upscale 720P to 1080P and cut the horizontal resolution in half on top of that blurry image. This is where I start noticing image quality issues. You can use third-party 3D drivers to get 1080P at 60Hz with side-by-side mode, but then you're cutting your vertical resolution in half on top of horizontal resolution. You avoid any blurriness from upscaling, though.
 
techically because this screen is 2560x1440...it would be 2560x720 for resoulation...so it's kinda like 720p...

But with a screen this small you might need to see how far away you sit because you might not be able to precieve a difference depending on distance. which for a 27" TV is about 3 feet to distinguish the difference between 1080p vs 720p.
 
A monitor like the described would be awesome, but it doesn't look like it's happening before OLED. This sounds like a 1080p 60hz passive 3D monitor, and there have been monitors like that already, just not 27". The news piece doesn't say it's 2560x1440, it says "hopefully". A fools hope. :D
 
16:9, IPS and 27"

You gotta love it!

Thin bezel and 3D is a nice bonus.
 
shinzwei said:
You want a 27inch 1920x1200 :confused: ?
Click to expand...

This thing will be 1920x1080, not 1920x1200 nor 2560x1440.

27" monitors at this resolution are expensive enough as it is, a 27" monitor with passive 3D AND 2560x1440 will be more $$$, and will encroach on TVs that are bigger and cheaper with active 3D.
 
10e said:
This thing will be 1920x1080, not 1920x1200 nor 2560x1440.

27" monitors at this resolution are expensive enough as it is, a 27" monitor with passive 3D AND 2560x1440 will be more $$$, and will encroach on TVs that are bigger and cheaper with active 3D.
Click to expand...

It says in the link that it's going to be 2560x1440 :p

edit; oh, "hopefully"

well... LG doesn't make any 27" 1080p IPS panels, do they?
 
Haven't found any news on this display. Shouldn't it be announced during this ces 2012?
 
from what I understand 1080p is the highest resolution that DL-DVI can handle at 120hz... unsure about display port
 
taken from a thread here on hardforum.. I forgot who posted it.. toastx or some similar nickname contributed the blanking figures,

http://www.web-cyb.org/hardware-info/video-cable-bandwidth.htm

Resolution-and-Cable-BANDWIDTHS_Gb-sec

1680x1050 = 1,764,000 pixels
1,764,000 x 60Hz = 105,840,000 pixels per second
105,840,000 x 24 color bits per pixel = 2,540,160,000 bits per second, or 2.54 Gbits/sec
To get values for 120Hz, merely double the 60Hz values. So:

1680x1050@60Hz = 2.54 Gbits/sec
1920x1080@60Hz = 2.99 Gbits/sec
1920x1200@60Hz = 3.32 Gbits/sec
Single-link DVI effective data rate: 3.96 Gbits/sec
1680x1050@120Hz = 5.08 Gbits/sec
2560x1440@60Hz = 5.31 Gbits/sec
2560x1600@60Hz = 5.90 Gbits/sec
1920x1080@120Hz = 5.97 Gbits/sec
1920x1200@120Hz = 6.64 Gbits/sec
Dual-link DVI effective data rate = 7.92 Gbits/sec
HDMI 1.3/1.4 effective data rate = 8.16 Gbits/sec
DisplayPort 1.0/1.1 effective data rate = 8.64 Gbits/sec
2560x1440@120Hz = 10.62 Gbits/sec
2560x1600@120Hz = 11.80 Gbits/sec
Displayport 1.2 effective data rate = 17.28 Gbits/sec
HDMI Type B effective data rate = 20.40 Gbits/sec

If I have made any errors, let me know. I am not 100% certain about some of the maximum speeds for the cables - I have read that effective data rates are 80% of symbol rates, and I only want to list effective data rates.

I have read that AMD video cards started using Displayport 1.2 with the 6000 series, and that Nvidia cards generally don't use Displayport and those few that do are still at 1.1. HDMI B has not been seen on consumer devices.

Going by my list, 1920x1080 and 1920x1200 should be possible on Dual-Link DVI, HDMI 1.3 and Displayport 1.0 and up.

Edit:

Those values don't include blanking.

1920x1080 @ 60 Hz is typically 2200x1125 @ 60 Hz = 3.564 Gbps or 148.5 MHz pixel clock
1920x1200 @ 60 Hz CVT-RB would be 2080x1235 @ 59.95 Hz = 3.696 Gbps or 154 MHz pixel clock
1920x1200 @ 120 Hz would need to be 2080x1271 @ 120 Hz = 7.614 Gbps or 317.25 MHz pixel clock

That should still fit within dual-link DVI, which is 2 x 165 MHz links = 330 MHz.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top