Before I detail the specifications and features offered by each of the monitors we'll be looking at today, let's take a moment to compare some of their more important characteristics.
|Eizo FlexScan L795||HP L1730||HP L2035||Philips 190B4CS||Samsung 173MW||Samsung 173T||Sony HX93|
|Viewing angle (â—¦)||170||160 horizontal|
|Pixel response time (ms)||25||25||16||25||25||25||25|
|Interfaces||VGA, DVI-I||VGA, DVI-I||VGA, DVI-I, composite and S-Video||VGA, DVI-D||VGA, DVI-D, coaxial, composite, CVBS and S-Video||VGA, DVI-D||DVI-D, VGA (2)|
|Left/Right border thickness (mm)||19||22||21||22||25||13||32|
|Warranty||5 years||3 years||3 years||3 years||3 years||3 years||3 years|
|Pixel defect policy||5 defects||7 defects||10 defects||5 defects||7 defects||7 defects||7 defects|
|Power consumption (W)||53 (typical)||â‰¤ 20||â‰¤ 75||45 (typical)||â‰¤ 49||â‰¤ 40||â‰¤ 60|
The screens in our comparo run the gamut from 17 to 20 inches, with resolutions between 1280x768 and 1600x1200. With the exception of the HP L2035 and Samsung 173MW, all the screens use a 5:4 aspect ratio that's sure to irk 4:3 purists. Personally, I'd rather have a 5:4 display at 1280x1024 than a 4:3 display at 1280x960 that offers 81,920 fewer pixels, but that's just me.
The contrast ratios range between 400:1 and 800:1, and brightness levels between 250 and 450 cd/m2. On paper, Sony's HX93 offers the best contrast ratio and brightness rating of any monitor in this comparisonthe screen certainly has a lot to live up to in our performance tests.
HP's L2035 boasts a speedy 16 millisecond pixel response time while the rest of the pack comes in at 25 milliseconds. Of course, claimed pixel response times don't guarantee less ghosting and streaking in the real world, but keep an eye on the HP in our pixel persistence tests.
Because analog-only LCDs are just wrong, I limited this comparison to screens that had at least one DVI input. HP and Samsung spice up the interface front by offering a bevy of video inputs in addition to traditional monitor interfaces.
Unless you're thinking about running a multimonitor configuration, you can skip over the section on left/right border thickness. However, anyone looking to arrange several screens side-by-side will want to pay special attention to Samsung's 173T, which offers the thinnest screen borders in this comparison. Monitors like Sony's HX93, whose left/right borders are over an inch and a quarter wide, are clearly not designed for multimonitor applications.
Most of these screens are covered by three-year warranties, but dead pixel policies vary quite a bit from manufacturer to manufacturer and screen to screen. I'll be discussing each when we take a closer look at the individual screens.
Our earlier discussion highlighted the fact that LCD monitors typically consume less power than CRT displays, but there's still plenty of power consumption differentiation within the LCD world. Larger screens like HP's 20" L2035 and Sony's 19" HX93 tend to consume more power than smaller 17" displays, but HP's L1730 deserves special attention for having far lower peak power consumption than the rest of the pack.
A quick look at current street prices rounds up our fancy little comparison chart, and as you can see, we have screens to fit just about every budget. While none of the screens are cheap, some are definitely more affordable than others. It will be interesting to see whether the pricier screens have superior performance and features to soften the sticker shock.
|Samsung's Galaxy Note 4 with the Exynos 5433 processor||30|
|You can now unlock your Chromebook with your phone||10|
|Deal of the week: A Radeon R9 290X for $233||111|
|AMD's new Fixer video is even crazier than the last||83|
|Leak pegs desktop Broadwell, Skylake for mid-year||52|
|Battlefield Hardline open beta scheduled for February 3||19|
|WSJ: Microsoft to back Cyanogen with $70M investment||55|
|You've goat to check out Silicon Power's new thumb drive||54|
|nvidia already released an official response: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spZJrsssPA0||+85|