• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

NEC EX231Wp thread

This is intriguing. I assume it uses the Samsung cPVA panel, known for extremely high static contrast ratios, problems with black crush, and a mediocre response time. As far as I know, no one other than Samsung itself has used the panel yet; it should be interesting to see if NEC's electronics can mitigate some of the issues.

I use multiple Samsung f2380 monitors one a daily basis. It's great for office work as is.

I'm skeptical of the touch sensitive controls; I think NEC's approach with the ea231 and ea232, along with its PA series, was great. Again, interested to see if the implementation is any good.

It's supposed to hit the market next month.
 
Yes, but the PQ is amazing and most of the C-PVA panels support 72-76hz which is a great happy medium for PC gaming vs getting a 120hz TN.

Only the original F2380 had black crush due to bad settings. The F2380M/MX/F2370 and Eizo EV2333 all use the same panel with no black crush. Modern F2380's now (1 reviewd recently by TFT central did not have the black crush) should be fine.

Similarily the Eizo Foris FS2331 and Samusng 2333t also use an inferior C-PVA panel (2000-2500:1 contrast vs 3,000:1 and slightly narrower viewing angles). Not sure which C-PVA panel (it is the first to use LED backlighting) this will use but being an NEC it will surely have good color presets.
 
Ya that response time is worrying if they are quoting it as "typical" given that is usually marketing speak for "about as good as it gets." Have to see, could be an error or the like but if it really is like most response figures, then it means a pretty slow panel.
 
NCX said:
Only the original F2380 had black crush due to bad settings.
Click to expand...

Classic unsubstantiated claim.


NCX said:
The F2380M/MX/F2370 and Eizo EV2333 all use the same panel with no black crush.
Click to expand...

Classic unsubstantiated claim.

NCX said:
Modern F2380's now (1 reviewd recently by TFT central did not have the black crush) should be fine.
Click to expand...

Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous supposition, replete with poor grammar.

NCX said:
Similarily the Eizo Foris FS2331 and Samusng 2333t also use an inferior C-PVA panel (2000-2500:1 contrast vs 3,000:1 and slightly narrower viewing angles).
Click to expand...

What does reduced measured contrast ratio have to do with your claim that the FS2331 uses a weaker PVA part, NCX?
 
The Eizo Foris FS2331 and Samsung 2333t, of course, do not use an inferior panel. The only 23" cPVA panel that I'm aware of -- LTM230HP01 -- is used in these monitors, according to the TFT Central database:

2011-06-14_0351.png


http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/panelsearch.htm

The only other cPVA panel listed in their database is for the short-lived f2080, though there may be another one for the MD230 "slim bezel" gaming monitor.

The 25ms response time is quoted above; any variation for the NEC will depend on the quality of their overdrive. You should look for reviews of the Eizo monitors to approximate the experience.

http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma1=36&mo1=817&p1=9958&ma2=88&mo2=752&p2=8953&ph=1
 
Troll Overdrive Activated!

The newer F2380M variant has been reviewed by foriegn sights, no black crush.

TFT centrals F2380 didn't have the same problem as the 2009 units leaidng one to conclude that Samsung fixed the problem after the backlash.

FS2331/2333t have lower contrast and worse viewing angles according to reviewers and the 2333t info is from ToastyX. I just assumed these use a different panel (possibly cheaper), why else the reduced viewing angles and lower CR? TFT's data base doesn't include every panel, and now we have a LED backlit version. I'm still not wrong in saying the 2331/2333t are inferior.
 
Last edited:
TFT Central's review of the f2380 doesn't address black crush. Silence doesn't suggest that the problem disappeared.

I bought an f2380 in Sept '09, and then three more in March '11. I like the monitor, and the panel. It certainly has issues with black crush. I don't game.

Your error on the "quality" of the panels reflects your reliance on anecdotes to form irrationally firm opinions.
 
NCX said:
Troll Overdrive Activated!
Click to expand...

Classic invective, as expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.

NCX said:
The newer F2380M variants have been reviewed by foriegn sights, black crush.
Click to expand...

Ambiguous.

NCX said:
TFT centrals F2380 didn't have the same problem as the 2009 units leaidng one to conclude that Samsung fixed the problem after the backlash.
Click to expand...

Where does it say in the TFTCentral article that the monitor does not have black crush, NCX?

NCX said:
FS2331/2333t have lower contrast and worse viewing angles according to reviewers and the 2333t info is from ToastyX.
Click to expand...

Where do reviewers say this, NCX?
NCX said:
I just assumed it was a different panel, why else the reduced viewing angles and lower CR?
Click to expand...

Classic inconsistency. You claimed that the FS2331 uses an inferior panel.
NCX said:
Only the original F2380 had black crush due to bad settings.
Click to expand...

Whoisthisreally said:
Classic unsubstantiated claim.
Click to expand...
.
Click to expand...

Note: No response.
 
The F2380MX does not have black crush. For me TFT centrals silence suggests that it wasn't an issue. The 2333t/FS2331/EV2333 don't have black crush either according to reviews/

I said new F2380's should be fine. Assuming you don't buy one made in 2009...should be obvious that I am just guessing. If one wants to be a dick about it go ahead.
 
The f2380s I purchased in March of 2011 were manufactured in August of 2010, according to the sticker on the back.
 
Did you change the gamma to mode 2? Should be close to 2.2 according to TFT central.

Maybe they are still messed up, if the unit reviewed by TFT central was like the original one would think he would have said so.

Other than the Digital Versus review the only reviews for the variants are foriegn, but are very good. Just because the reviews are in a different language doesn't make them bad.

This thread isn't about the F2380's. The newer variants and Eizo panels have been fine, no reason for the NEC not to be as well.
 
I had both the original F2380 and the 2333T.

The 2333T doesn't have the severe black crush that the F2380 had.

The 2333T has a completely different pixel structure than the F2380, so obviously they can't be the same panel.

The F2380 is LTM230HP01 according to this site: http://publish.it168.com/2009/0505/20090505059404.shtml

The 2333T might be LTM230HP04 according to this site: http://monitor.net.ru/forum/topic356172-800.html

The NEC is LED-backlit instead of CCFL, so that means yet another panel model, possibly LTM230HP06.
 
Where did you post pictures of the different pixel structures? I find it somewhat hard to believe that they would have had such a significant change in the cPVA tech so soon after introduction, without announcement or fanfare.

I like cPVA monitors, and PVA in general -- lost dark details don't affect me at all, given my uses. . I also happen to have had some good experiences with NEC. As I mentioned, I'm mostly worried about the touch sensitive controls.
 
The original F2380 uses a typical multiple domain pixel with a pattern of diagonal electrode digits. The 2333T panel seems to be simplified into a column divided into four regions from memory.
 
the TFT Central review did talk about black crush and off-centre contrast/gamma shift in the viewing angle section as well, unless you are referring to other things NCX?

There was a pretty obvious off-centre contrast shift which is inherant to VA panel types. Using a test image which shows a dark grey font on a black background you can easily test this 'feature'. From head on, the text was invisible and lost within the black background. This is down to the pixel alignment in a PVA matrix. The text only became visible from a wide angle in this test, of about 45° and this was a bit wider than some older S-PVA panels. This is an extreme case of course as this is a very dark grey tone we are testing with. Lighter greys and other colours will appear a little darker from head on than they will from a side angle, but you may well find you lose some detail as a result. This can be particularly problematic in dark images and where grey tone is important. It is this issue that has led to many graphics professionals and colour enthusiasts choosing IPS panels instead, and the manufacturers have been quick to incorporate this alternative panel technology in their screens. I would like to make a point that for many people this won't be an issue at all, and many may not even notice it. Remember, many people are perfectly happy with their TN Film panels and other VA based screens. Just something to be wary of if you are affected by this issue or are doing colour critical work.
Click to expand...

if the NEC is W-LED based then it must be a new panel from Samsung as well, combining cPVA with W-LED. Being PVA based, i expect there are still issues with VA type off centre gamma / contrast changes
 
cvgd said:
I like cPVA monitors, and PVA in general -- lost dark details don't affect me at all, given my uses.
Click to expand...
I agree

LCD:s are far from perfect. It doesnt matter if we are talking PVA, IPS or TN.

I think cPVA is very underrated. Maybe because the discussion is so centered around gaming but for ordinary use cPVA is better than TN and IPS imo.
 
The VA discussion always becomes centered around that certain some one in love with their NEC 2490 trolling anything VA related.

In reality VA gamma shift hardly affects image quality except when exploited in those "test," images. The deep black level and light AG results in amazing image quality never before seen on LCD monitors.

Still it would be nice if Samsung/Eizo/NEC would give us a properly over driven C-PVA panel. The Eizo Foris was a step in the right direction but it also suffered from lower contrast and slightly narrower viewing angles. There is also a Glossy Eizo touch screen, but it is 1000$. I saw something about "Rapid Response," on the NEC product page, maybe this will have over drive.
 
cvgd said:
I'm sure that I can find it somewhere, but do you have camera settings handy for taking a picture of the pixel substructure?
Click to expand...
You need to use macro mode or use manual focus to get as close as possible. The perfect distance will take some trial and error, so take several pictures from slightly different distances. The camera must also be perfectly steady to get a good shot, so set it down in front of the screen and use a timer. Use a low ISO to reduce noise and use a faster shutter speed so the brightness doesn't blow out the details. To get a perfectly clear shot, you need to put a piece of packing tape on the screen to nullify the effects of the anti-glare. Fold one end of the tape so you can easily remove it when you're done.
 
ToastyX said:
You need to use macro mode or use manual focus to get as close as possible. The perfect distance will take some trial and error, so take several pictures from slightly different distances. The camera must also be perfectly steady to get a good shot, so set it down in front of the screen and use a timer. Use a low ISO to reduce noise and use a faster shutter speed so the brightness doesn't blow out the details. To get a perfectly clear shot, you need to put a piece of packing tape on the screen to nullify the effects of the anti-glare. Fold one end of the tape so you can easily remove it when you're done.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'll try to dig out the camera and take some pics of different f2380s, to see if there is some difference.
 
That would be interesting+lame if the F2380's have different panels.

Toasty will you be getting one of these NEC's?

Only 255$ in Canada, nothing but Ebay links show up for Nextag US.
 
No more monitors for me unless something interesting comes out like a true 120 Hz IPS monitor or a 3840x2160 "retina" display.

I also can't use 6-bit displays with Mac OS X because the dithering clashes with the video card dithering, causing significant artifacts in some cases. The Samsung F2380 and 2333T have strong dithering artifacts on ATI-based Macs, and the Dell U2311H has pinstriping artifacts on NVIDIA-based Macs. I'm also annoyed by the fact that there's no way to tell which monitors have dithering because this important detail is not revealed in the specs.

I have no reason to get anything else right now because technology has not improved.
 
Hi all from a forum newbie. A bit dusty, this thread, yet seems adequate.

I was on the brink of buying an Eizo EV2333 when I stumbled over the EX231Wp which appears to have the same panel(?). The latter is appealing mainly for its lower price, thinner case and external PSU. Sadly there is not too much to find in the Web.

I wonder if anyone has had the opportunity to evaluate these two side by side or at least in short succession? I'm especially interested in CCFL vs. W-LED (clouding, bleeding, whatever), possible color/gray banding issues due to electronics (the Eizo seems to excel here), and reactivity (does the NEC have overdrive at all? If so, how does it compare?).

Thx a lot for all your input!

PS: Completely different display, I know - yet the Dell U2412M draws my interest, too. Tangible comparisons welcome! (I do know basic aspects such as e-IPS vs. cPVA, have read several tests, and follow the according thread in this forum.)
 
I can refer to my previous comment on the EV2333 relative to the Dells here.

The EX231 panel is open to some differences as it evidently does not contain the same panel as the original CCFL one. Also important is the electronics which is to my knowledge unreviewed.

F2380 pixel macro from it168
cpva.jpg


2333T panel by ToastyX reveals concern that a simplified C-PVA exists:
2333t-pixels.jpg
 
Thx for your quick response Whoareyoureally.

Whoisthisreally said:
I can refer to my previous comment on the EV2333 relative to the Dells here.
Click to expand...
I noticed your post before, thought it a bit unspecific then (sry). Do you intend to say that the Eizo is superior to the Dell in all 3 aspects uniformity, linearity, and gradation? Linearity with respect to what?

As you own two of them, could you plz comment on portrait mode text readability and overall quality of the Eizo? I read somewhere that due to subpixel structure PVA may have issues here as compared with IPS. (I was extremely happy with my NEC 1980FXi in this regard too. Pity it's gone.)

Whoisthisreally said:
The EX231 panel is open to some differences as it evidently does not contain the same panel as the original CCFL one. Also important is the electronics which is to my knowledge unreviewed.
Click to expand...
Where does this evidence come from? Maybe a later revision in the NEC? Electronics may be the reason but empirical assessment would suffice for me.

Whoisthisreally said:
F2380 pixel macro from it168
2333T panel by ToastyX reveals concern that a simplified C-PVA exists:
Click to expand...
Any of these panels identical to the ones(s) in question?
 
zaphod.b said:
I noticed your post before, thought it a bit unspecific then (sry). Do you intend to say that the Eizo is superior to the Dell in all 3 aspects uniformity, linearity, and gradation? Linearity with respect to what?
Click to expand...
I am referring to linearity being that the grayscale ramp closely matches the white point across all values.

zaphod.b said:
As you own two of them, could you plz comment on portrait mode text readability and overall quality of the Eizo? I read somewhere that due to subpixel structure PVA may have issues here as compared with IPS. (I was extremely happy with my NEC 1980FXi in this regard too. Pity it's gone.)
Click to expand...

It should perform just as well as any IPS model. You have to make sure you get the Flexstand version though. My unit is defect free and the build quality is high.

zaphod.b said:
Where does this evidence come from? Maybe a later revision in the NEC? Electronics may be the reason but empirical assessment would suffice for me.


Any of these panels identical to the ones(s) in question?
Click to expand...

The LTM230HP01 has a Cold Cathode Fluorescent backlight. The EX231WP has adopted the trend away from CCFL to W-LED and this means it cannot be equipped with the LTM230HP01 panel, which we have a good understanding of here. The electronics NEC has supplied to this model determine whether it can stand out in terms of image quality. NEC is a very skilled manufacturer in this regard but only within the pricy models, so we can't be sure.
 
Whoisthisreally said:
The LTM230HP01 has a Cold Cathode Fluorescent backlight. The EX231WP has adopted the trend away from CCFL to W-LED and this means it cannot be equipped with the LTM230HP01 panel, which we have a good understanding of here.
Click to expand...
Erm - aren't panel and backlight separate entities? Do you intend to say that a panel's lifecyle ends when the [type of] backlight changes?

Still I suppose panel substrate and electronics could be left pretty much unaltered even when assembled with a different backlight (->revision), which would imply similar behaviour (sharpness, gradation,...) except for properties that originate specifically from the backlight (uniformity etc)?
 
zaphod.b said:
Erm - aren't panel and backlight separate entities? Do you intend to say that a panel's lifecyle ends when the [type of] backlight changes?
Click to expand...

Panel manufacturers integrate the light source and it forms a part of the panel's specification. You can read the datasheet in question here. A new model number is used when there is a change in specification such as backlight. Very recently all manufacturers have replaced many of their products with W-LED.

zaphod.b said:
Still I suppose panel substrate and electronics could be left pretty much unaltered even when assembled with a different backlight (->revision), which would imply similar behaviour (sharpness, gradation,...) except for properties that originate specifically from the backlight (uniformity etc)?
Click to expand...

PSU and the circuit board are designed by the manufacturer of the monitor. You can see the Eizo logo on the PSU here.
 
Until now I attributed backlight assembly to the monitor manufacturers. Thank you for the enlightenment.

Excuse me I insist: I still do not see the necessity a mere backlight change would require the imaging parts of a panel change too. Wouldn't panel manufacturers want to reuse as many parts for as long a time as possible?

I may well be clutching at straws here trying to extrapolate from EV2333 to EX231Wp. Maybe not worth the fuzz...
 
zaphod.b said:
None that I know of. One user experience on Amazon.de (german; guy active on prad.de as well).
Click to expand...

Thanks for this, zaphod, I hope one or two reviews are soon released for this monitor. It's one of the few higher-end 23-inch monitors available in South Africa right now.

I'll keep watching.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
i noticed that TFTCentral have it listed as a "coming soon" too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top