Looking for a 32" VA/MVA or AMVA panel monitor

alpharalpha

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
90
Having a hard time finding 32" VA panel monitors, it'll mostly be used for watching dvd movies so 1080p. That's what's so difficult, I am running into a lot of 1440p, can anybody help me?
 
Last edited:

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,287
Edit: you changed the OP to say you're looking specifically for 1080p. These are 1440p monitors.


FreeSync: HP Omen 32
G-Sync: LG 32GK850G

Others:

Philips BDM3270
ASUS PB328Q
 
Last edited:

alpharalpha

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
90
I have found one 32" 1080p AMVA monitor; it's technically a large format commercial display, the Philips Q-Line I have used a 32" Viewsonic commercial monitor before and found the 1080p not to be an issue, it's still being used going on over 8 years now. Do you think this Philips Q-Line would be good for watching movies? It's an AMVA panel but the contrast is only 1400:1 The price right now is under $250 with a 3 year warranty. What do you think? How would this compare to my Benq GW2750HM that has 5000:1 contrast and a great picture with superb blacks which is why I like AMVA panels.
 

igluk

Gawd
Joined
Nov 1, 2014
Messages
718
Why would you want a digital signage display, they are way more expensive than consumer monitors and come without stand.
Commercial displays usually have a longer LED lifetime (min. 50k hours) and in some cases very high brightness for sunlight readability but other than that there are no advantages.
You must be looking at the wrong places, for consumers there are over a dozen different 32'' 1080p VA displays available in flat, curved, 60hz and 144hz versions. Only a couple of them were reviewed, most of them sit around 3500:1 contrast wise.
What comes recommended and also happens to be one of the cheapest is the Samsung S32F351 but I'm not sure whether it supports refresh rates divisible by 24/25fps. Its being reviewed by NCX and appears to be better than some of the alternatives. At 144Hz there are more expensive models like the BenQ EX3200R for example.
 

alpharalpha

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
90
I am a wall mount guy and unfortunately that wonderful Benq doesn't have vesa or I would've got it. The Samsung has a white bezel which I don't like. Can you link me to the over dozen monitors you mentioned? Also, yes the digital signage are usually more expensive, our Viewsonic was, but this Philips is marked down and under $250, I think the digital signage stuff inside was screwy, but I would just be getting it for the monitor. I'd still like to get that link to look for something better fitting my needs. I'm watching a movie right now on my GW2750HM and those dark blacks with the contrast, I love it.
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,287
If the money isn't a problem for you, I'd go with 1440p, even if you're primarily going to be watching 1080p movies on it. There's loads of 1440p and higher YouTube content, and I think that 1080p on a 32" monitor is going to look pretty bad. There are (some few) people who say that 32" is too big for 1440p - though they would be sitting with their face really close to the monitor.
 
Last edited:

igluk

Gawd
Joined
Nov 1, 2014
Messages
718
Overlooked that you can get the Philips for $250, yeah that is definitely improvement over the >$450 MSRP. Not 100% sure it is VA though, with only 1400:1 contrast it could be a mislabeled IPS as well.
Maybe it using the DV320FHM-NN0 panel which fits the specs of the Philips almost perfectly, only the typical contrast is slightly lower at 1200:1.

Here are some of the other models:
Asus VA326H
Asus VA327H
MSI AG32C
Acer Z321
iiyama G3266HS-B1
Philips 328E8QJAB5
ViewSonic XG3202-C
Acer ED322Q
Samsung V32F390

But Delicieuxz is right, I wouldn't discount 1440p just because it is not the native resolution of the movies. If you pass the playback through madVR and use shaders and upscaling techniques a 1080p movie will look very good on a 1440p screen.
Perceived blacks look darker when the panel coating is glossy. Most of the 1440p displays are matte though. I think the AOC Q3279VWF isn't but it has very slow response time and lacks VESA mounts
 

alpharalpha

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
90
Overlooked that you can get the Philips for $250, yeah that is definitely improvement over the >$450 MSRP. Not 100% sure it is VA though, with only 1400:1 contrast it could be a mislabeled IPS as well.
Maybe it using the DV320FHM-NN0 panel which fits the specs of the Philips almost perfectly, only the typical contrast is slightly lower at 1200:1.

Here are some of the other models:
Asus VA326H
Asus VA327H
MSI AG32C
Acer Z321
iiyama G3266HS-B1
Philips 328E8QJAB5
ViewSonic XG3202-C
Acer ED322Q
Samsung V32F390

But Delicieuxz is right, I wouldn't discount 1440p just because it is not the native resolution of the movies. If you pass the playback through madVR and use shaders and upscaling techniques a 1080p movie will look very good on a 1440p screen.
Perceived blacks look darker when the panel coating is glossy. Most of the 1440p displays are matte though. I think the AOC Q3279VWF isn't but it has very slow response time and lacks VESA mounts


Yes, that Philips is the newer model that is IPS, the previous model was AMVA 3000:1 Thanks for catching that.
Of the list you posted only the 2 Asus monitors have vesa mounts and are available in the usa. I wonder, some reviews on those asus stated they had to load special drivers to get them to look right, now most of those reviewers were for the ips model (they have all the models under one review set) so do you think just plugging in the VA model to my surround dvd system and calibrating it will work ok?
With the 1440p all that madVR, shaders and upsacaling, wouldn't that all have to go thru the PC, not just running straight from the dvd surround system? I'm not totally against switching over to using my pc as a htpc if 1440p is becoming the new standard.
Also, I did find that previous model Philips with the AMVA panel but it's $400. Though you're paying for a lot of features designed for medical work, presentations, loading programming remotely etc.
Do you think for watching movies and light internet that paying the extra $50 for the 144hz model of the ASUS is worth it?
Thanks for your helpful reply.
 

igluk

Gawd
Joined
Nov 1, 2014
Messages
718
Most monitors aren't very well calibrated out of the box. If you have no PC in between where you can do all kinds of picture adjustments via drivers or software then it is important that the monitor has extensive OSD options for picture adjustment.
If you have a hardware calibration device then it should not be a problem in any case (that is if it works via the dvd system - I don't know enough about how this works exactly)
madVR etc. has to go through the PC, yes. It has reached a level where when you configure it right the various methods you have at your disposal are easily on the level of what many high end TV sets can do with improving image quality of the source material. Can be quite a performance hog though on the higher settings.
144Hz mainly benefits games but during normal use navigating the internet will feel snappier - clearer text while scrolling, smoother mouse movement.
With 100Hz/120Hz/144Hz you also don't have to worry about the 60Hz judder during movie playback. Since 100Hz for 25fps -> 4:4 pulldown, 144Hz for 24fps -> 6:6 pulldown.
If it's only $50 more I would seriously consider it. A 60Hz monitor would need to support 24Hz playback or 48Hz/50Hz or 72Hz/75Hz to help with judder but it is not always clear whether this is supported on the display.
 
Last edited:

alpharalpha

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
90
The dvd movies I watch now thru my surround system show at 480p when I check that osd setting on the monitor. So, if 480p looks fine on my 1080p 27" monitor what is the difference going to be in quality if I had a 1440p monitor, significant, about the same? It's much easier finding a larger sized amva monitor that's 1440p. Thanks.
 

alpharalpha

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
90
Why would you want a digital signage display, they are way more expensive than consumer monitors and come without stand.
Commercial displays usually have a longer LED lifetime (min. 50k hours) and in some cases very high brightness for sunlight readability but other than that there are no advantages.
You must be looking at the wrong places, for consumers there are over a dozen different 32'' 1080p VA displays available in flat, curved, 60hz and 144hz versions. Only a couple of them were reviewed, most of them sit around 3500:1 contrast wise.
What comes recommended and also happens to be one of the cheapest is the Samsung S32F351 but I'm not sure whether it supports refresh rates divisible by 24/25fps. Its being reviewed by NCX and appears to be better than some of the alternatives. At 144Hz there are more expensive models like the BenQ EX3200R for example.

Traditionally LFDs use beefier components and better quality panels as they're meant for 24/7 & public viewing. I am VERY pleased to say that I finally found a NEC C431 43" 1080p AMVA3 Panel Monitor, after my long search and using a 27" for going on 8 years it's SO nice; the picture quality is just what I wanted, if anything I think it's better than the Benq GW2750, maybe the PSA added to the AMVA makes the difference or the components working with the panel; and just going from a 27" to a 43" is a big deal alone. My living room computer pulls double duty as living room pc as well as htpc for streaming, and also my surround system connects to the monitor. I sit about 10' from the monitor so yeah I can actually see what I'm watching. And right now I'm sitting 3' from it and text etc is fine, I've actually heard a larger monitor is better as you have to move your head more, but it feels very natural to be this size, that was a big concern, I was thinking I'd have this uncomfortably oversized monitor to have decent viewing. AU Optronics are one of the companies still pursuing this amva technology; took a LONG time but I finally got it😀 (Oh, and before was thinking 32" would be the biggest I could go and still use it for computer monitor but I've known all along sitting at 10' a 40" is minimum viewing size, anything smaller wouldn't make sense.)
 
Top