I so badly want this monitor...



Contrast ratio 1200:1

That seems a little on the low end. I was expecting to see 100k dynamic contrast at a minimum.
 
Here's another one with the same specs so I imagine it's got the same panel in it. 56" Quad Full HD Monitor

Supposedly sells for around $50k so I don't need it that badly :(

Regarding the contrast ratio, yeah it's a bit low, but considering the Apple 30" cinema is only 700:1, the Apple 24" LCD is only 1000:1, and the Dell WFPs all come in at 1000:1 to 3000:1 I'm sure it would suffice.
 
I've got an old Samsung that's 2000:1 that's pretty nice. The new ones are 8k & 50k:1 dynamic. The thing that really sucks is the 6.5ms response time. Makes it almost worthless for anything with graphics/video, so the lower resolution isn't a problem.
 
I've got a Viewsonic widescreen LCD that's a few years old and supposedly 8ms, but I have no problems with video or FPS gaming. From what I understand, though, the latency measurement varies by manufacturer, and can mean different things.
 
keliix06 said:
I've got an old Samsung that's 2000:1 that's pretty nice. The new ones are 8k & 50k:1 dynamic. The thing that really sucks is the 6.5ms response time. Makes it almost worthless for anything with graphics/video, so the lower resolution isn't a problem.
Click to expand...

6.5 ms is pretty good actually. Almost the entire Dell lineup is 6-8 ms with just a few models in the 5ms range. They all perform just fine for gaming and video.
 
Hey FatBat, this one's for you buddy. Wood paneled monitors. LOL

_images_Dscn0461.jpg
 
Fatbat said:
6.5 ms is pretty good actually. Almost the entire Dell lineup is 6-8 ms with just a few models in the 5ms range. They all perform just fine for gaming and video.
Click to expand...

Guess I'm just spoiled with 2ms on all of my monitors. And of course I meant contrast and not resolution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom