27'' ViewSonic LCD Does Full HD, 1ms Response
ViewSonic is claiming "world's first" with this upcoming LCD panel.
ViewSonic is claiming a "world's first" with the announcement of it's new 27-inch LCD monitor with Full HD support and 1ms response time. According to the company, the VX2739wm isn't available for purchase as of this writing, however interested consumers can head to Amazon, Newegg, and PCMall to pre-order for a special introductory price of $349.99 USD.
In addition to 1080p Full HD support, the VX2739wm comes with a "crystal clear" 100,000:1 contrast ratio, built-in speakers with SRS Premium Sound, a 4-port USB hub, and HDMI, DVI and VGA connectivity. The panel is also somewhat green despite its black casing, saving up to 35-percent energy use thanks to its special ECO-mode.
"A multipurpose device, the VX2739wm is perfect as a monitor or game console on the desktop or wall with its VESA compliant design, or as an entertainment display when hooked up to a DVD player or cable/satellite box," the company said.
ViewSonic's VX2739wm is expected to hit the online markets and standard retail shelves on May 21.
- Hurray! Farmville May Break Away from Facebook
- Opera CEO Says We Don't Need Silly Flash
- FCC Allowing Hollywood to Disable Analog Output
- Nintendo Sees Apple as the ''Enemy of the Future''
- Fans Make Awesome Street Fighter Short Films
- Activision Boss Talks About Infinity Ward Firings
- Report: HTC EVO 4G, Cost $200, Launches June 6
- Austrian Phone Booths to Charge Cars
- Apple Wants to Identify Users By Their Heartbeat
- Report: New iPhone will be 4G Verizon Device
- Man Found Guilty for Tweeting Airport Bomb Threat
- James Cameron Aids NASA on 3D Camera for Mars
- LittleBigPlanet 2 Announced, Debut Trailer Inside
- Obama Says iPad, iPod, Xbox, PS3 are Distractions
- Darth Vader Will Tell You Where to Drive
- NEX 3 & NEX 5: Sony Cameras With Lens Mounts
- An Active Bodysuit Only for Women
- HTPC Inside Nintendo NES Case For Sale
- Facebook Board Member Hacked, Friends Phished
If the price is $550 or below (yeah, right), I'll buy it.
If the price is $550 or below (yeah, right), I'll buy it.
Holy, I'll wait for a 22inch ver with 1ms with full hd and for 250>
If the price is $550 or below (yeah, right), I'll buy it.
Read the article:
[citation]consumers can head to Amazon, Newegg, and PCMall to pre-order for a special introductory price of $349.99 USD.[/citation]
If the price is $550 or below (yeah, right), I'll buy it.
Uhhh, something makes me think it is. Opening your eyes helps avoid problems like this.
If the price is $550 or below (yeah, right), I'll buy it.
rofl. No one could take a joke?
Nice!
I was about three days from ordering the Asus 27" 1080P 2ms which my brother just got for $360-ish @ newegg and the dynamic contrast ratio is not even close to this!
1080p on a 27-inch monitor looks like crap. 2560x1600 is more like it. I hate how all of the monitors these days are like "Full 1080p!!!", and the manufacturers have got people to think that 1080p is the limit....I guess it has something to do that 90% of the world runs on cheap Intel graphics that would commit suicide if hit had to pump out 4mp screens.
1080p on a 27-inch monitor looks like crap. 2560x1600 is more like it. I hate how all of the monitors these days are like "Full 1080p!!!", and the manufacturers have got people to think that 1080p is the limit....I guess it has something to do that 90% of the world runs on cheap Intel graphics that would commit suicide if hit had to pump out 4mp screens.
I doubt it looks like "crap". I think the monitor is meant to be viewed from a bit farther away than your typical desk monitor. If it had the higher resolution than yeah I could definitely see it being a desk monitor with a LOT of real estate.
I don't know much about the 2560X1600 resolution, but I do know it's relatively expensive. At least when looking at the Dell monitors you are talking about $1000 and up.
In any case, the specs and price seem pretty good, but I am not crazy about the size. I would like to see some cheaper versions in the 23-24 inch range.
Eh, not that great of a product. 75hz, but it's realistically too large for that kind of resolution. My 19.5" CRT looks great with a 2mp resolution, but for a 27"? Nah, not gonna happen. I'm still waiting on manufacturers to push out QFHD 3840x2160 panels...
1600p is the way to go. First monitor I bought with that res was the Gateway XHD3000 awesome monitor, just plagued by all type of
random problems. I have also had the Samsung 305t both of these had problems with 1/4 the screen on the right side first started ghosting then eventually just had green lines all down that side of screen.
I had the HP LP3065 but it went back the next day because it didnt want to act right with newer video cards, plus it doesnt have a scaler built in so 2560x1600 only if you try to switch it kept going into no signal mode and kept turning off.
The gateway one at the time when it came out was the higest rated 30inch several magazines rated it higher than the dell. But everyone has had problems with the gateway because cost cutting when making the monitor.
I am now using two Doublesight DS- 305W monitors and they are working great. But 1080p compared to 1600p its not even a contest. 1600p if you need screen realestate and have the
graphics cards to run it looks great.
1080p on a 27-inch monitor looks like crap. 2560x1600 is more like it. I hate how all of the monitors these days are like "Full 1080p!!!", and the manufacturers have got people to think that 1080p is the limit....I guess it has something to do that 90% of the world runs on cheap Intel graphics that would commit suicide if hit had to pump out 4mp screens.
I agree. 1080p monitors are nothing special, just tv panels. I'd rather have a 2ms response with 1920x1200 for less than $300. Oh yeah, I already do: An ASUS VW266H.
I would have thought the claim of the world's first 1ms access time would have been the selling point for hardcore gamers. I would defintely like to see Tom's Hardware do a review and benchmark the actual or average access time.
it's likely to be below 1ms viewsonic doesn't really lie about that they generally have some of the best monitors in response time but they also tend to have some of the crappies contrast and color representation.
As someone who wears glasses, I like the idea of a 27" monitor running at 1080p. I have my 24" monitor running at 1680x1050 instead of it's native 1920x1200.
I hate how all of the monitors these days are like "Full 1080p!!!", and the manufacturers have got people to think that 1080p is the limit.
It's become difficult to find monitor specs above 1080p these days and that is going to prevent me from making any new monitor purchases for some time to come. I want HDMI and Display Port with much higher than 1080p as the "recommended" or ideal resolution. I appreciate 1080p support so that I know HD video in that format will be supported but that should be obvious when the monitor can push much higher resolutions.
It's not a high enough refresh rate for 3d glasses. Bahhh.
Old tech already.
oh snap this is perfect for my situation.
Cool.
Someone wake me when 4k resolution is injected into mainstream 30" monitors please, I'm gonna go take a nap. This is just boring.
1080p on a 27-inch monitor looks like crap. 2560x1600 is more like it. I hate how all of the monitors these days are like "Full 1080p!!!", and the manufacturers have got people to think that 1080p is the limit....I guess it has something to do that 90% of the world runs on cheap Intel graphics that would commit suicide if hit had to pump out 4mp screens.
That's not it at all. It's more for Blu-ray. When you have a higher resolution screen than the source material, you have two choices. Either you play it per-pixel in a tiny box in the middle of the screen, or you attempt to stretch it. Per-pixel will look correct, but you sacrifice size. Stretching regains the size, but sacrifices quality... which is counterintuitive if you bought it with the intentions of watching blu-ray.
On the other hand, if you have a nice TV for that sort of thing, have at it. Just don't condemn something before you do your homework.
I'm curious as to when they'll attempt to build a fast, accurate monitor. Right now, it's either a fast crappy monitor, or a painfully slow nice one. Where's the fun in that?
response time and dynamic contrast ratio is more of a marketing to me. i need to read an actual good review before i believe them. and check out the item myself once it's available.
we all know how they measure response time.
i dont mind 1080p, anything higher and i will have to upgrade my pc again
What about input lag?
Bring back CRT technology! Stuck here with my Trinitron G200 because I refuse to deal with the vast deficiencies in LCD technology. I've got a contrast ratio that can't be touched (non-dynamic, thank you), superior black levels, better than 1ms response time, I don't have to worry about "non-native" resolutions, and refresh rates up to 120Hz. So it takes up a lot of room on my desk. What would I do with a bunch of free space behind my monitor anyway?
"That's not it at all. It's more for Blu-ray. When you have a higher resolution screen than the source material, you have two choices. Either you play it per-pixel in a tiny box in the middle of the screen, or you attempt to stretch it. Per-pixel will look correct, but you sacrifice size. Stretching regains the size, but sacrifices quality... which is counterintuitive if you bought it with the intentions of watching blu-ray."
You sir, have no idea how to handle HD videos on your computer, you need to realize the results would be the same aslong as it's at or above the resolution @ 16.9... just having more pixels would NOT make it look worse in any way...
As someone who wears glasses, I like the idea of a 27" monitor running at 1080p. I have my 24" monitor running at 1680x1050 instead of it's native 1920x1200.
.....what? You might have gotten your glasses from doing that sort of thing! Just terrible to do to oneself. Please fix asap, just not for me, but for all of us.
Why would a 27 monitor look crap, when you have 40, 46, 50-inch HC TVs being bought left, right and centre? Maybe you should tell all the purchasers that they're wasting their money. I reckon a 27-inch Full HD would look super sharp.
I doubt it looks like "crap". I think the monitor is meant to be viewed from a bit farther away than your typical desk monitor. If it had the higher resolution than yeah I could definitely see it being a desk monitor with a LOT of real estate.I don't know much about the 2560X1600 resolution, but I do know it's relatively expensive. At least when looking at the Dell monitors you are talking about $1000 and up.In any case, the specs and price seem pretty good, but I am not crazy about the size. I would like to see some cheaper versions in the 23-24 inch range.
This appears to be a 16:9 monitor. If so, 2560 X 1600 wouldn't be right. 2560 X 1440 would be the correct high end resolution.
I have the old ViewSonic 27.5" screen that was 1920x1200, and it is gorgeous! you don't need a higher res at this size! 2560x1600 becomes relevant above 29"...Whats more, the vertical height of my 27" is almost exactly the same as a 4:3 19", so I'm gonna get 2 of those and rock a 3screen set soon. Its a pitty this new ViewSonic isn't 3D ready 120Hz though, that would make it the biggest desktop 3D display
Do you guys know anything about LCD Size to Resolution Ratio?? I'm sorry but even UXGA looks way better on a smaller monitor. Only thing they barely got right was the price of this monitor. I still wouldn't pay the introductory price. Especially when you can get the same exact resolution on a smaller monitor and pay less. I can see if you are using your PC for Media purposes and want the biggger screen. But as a gamer, I want more Pixels per inch.
Doesn't make any mention of the panel type ...