# LED monitor



## GSquadron (Jun 20, 2012)

Hi all!
I could buy one of these monitors but i don't know which one is better and tell me if its a scam.
These are the lowest prices i have found for led monitors at that size.
One is the best 21.5" i can afford and the other is 23" which is 15$ higher in price.

21.5"
http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsuppor...ortFAQ&prodSeriesId=3739209&prodTypeId=382087

23"
http://www.p4c.philips.com/cgi-bin/dcbint/cpindex.pl?slg=en&scy=gb&ctn=236V3LSB/00

Tell me which one is worth to buy!


----------



## Peter1986C (Jun 20, 2012)

LCD, not LED. LEDs are only used for the background lighting (unlike CFLs as with "traditional" LCD screens). LEDs are way too big for serving as pixels (except for displays used by concerts, for obvious reasons (used for huge viewing distances and without the possibillity to do projection)).

The Philips seems like a glare display to me, which I advise you against.


----------



## GSquadron (Jun 20, 2012)

Than why are they called LEDs?
Also, what is wrong with the glare displays?
Can you suggest any brands or monitors?


----------



## INSTG8R (Jun 21, 2012)

The first one is an LCD monitor the 2nd is an LED monitor. LCD and LED are what are used to backlight the screen itself. LED being the newer tech. Of the two I think the Phillips is the better monitor.


----------



## Aquinus (Jun 21, 2012)

They're both LCD, the only difference is conventional LCDs have CCFL (cold cathode florescent lamp) for back-lighting and newer displays use LEDs for back-lighting. LEDs result in lower power consumption, better contrast ratios, and less heat however CCFL has been around for a long time and has become very cheap to produce at the expense of contrast and a little more heat and power. How smooth the picture actual is shouldn't make a difference between the same display with both methods of backlighting.

All in all, LED will give you better image quality with better color reproduction and potentially a smaller form factor where CCFL will be cheaper.


----------



## GSquadron (Jun 21, 2012)

So, which one is better??? 
I want the same quality as my 21" CRT monitor i have now.


----------



## INSTG8R (Jun 21, 2012)

The Phillips has better specs, it has an LED backlight(thinner monitor) and would more energy efficient.


----------



## qubit (Jun 21, 2012)

Aleksander Dishnica said:


> So, which one is better???
> I want the same quality as my 21" CRT monitor i have now.



You can't get the "same quality" as a CRT monitor, because they have different inherent strengths and weaknesses, due to the different technologies inside them.


----------



## GSquadron (Jun 21, 2012)

I just found someone with the Philips one on youtube who got problems
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW1zHyTpKpk


----------



## INSTG8R (Jun 21, 2012)

qubit said:


> You can't get the "same quality" as a CRT monitor, because they have different inherent strengths and weaknesses, due to the different technologies inside them.



Yes I remember when I got my first LCD and it was like "MAN THAT'S SO BRIGHT!!" Of course you get used to it quickly but it was still a shock.


----------



## Aquinus (Jun 21, 2012)

Aleksander Dishnica said:


> I just found someone with the Philips one on youtube who got problems



Every display has problems. It is very rare that I will see any component with at least 1 unhappy consumer. LG tends makes really good thin and power efficient LCD-LED displays.


----------



## repman244 (Jun 21, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> All in all, LED will give you better image quality with better color reproduction and potentially a smaller form factor where CCFL will be cheaper.



Not entirely true about the colour reproduction, many high end monitors still use CCFL since it has wider gamut and better colour reproduction. For LED to come close/surpass is to use RGB LED Backlight which has it's own drawbacks. Also a thing to watch out is that LED's tend to "flash", some notice it some don't.

But in this case (not a high end monitor) it's better to go for LED.



INSTG8R said:


> Yes I remember when I got my first LCD and it was like "MAN THAT'S SO BRIGHT!!" Of course you get used to it quickly but it was still a shock.



I hope you aren't running it at such brightness all the time


----------



## INSTG8R (Jun 21, 2012)

Well no of course not repman but making the switch it was the first thing that struck me and then the sharpness


----------



## Peter1986C (Jun 21, 2012)

INSTG8R said:


> The first one is an LCD monitor the 2nd is an LED monitor. LCD and LED are what are used to backlight the screen itself.



Didn't you read my post? Non-LED LCDs use CCFLs for the baclighting (as Aquinus confirmed).



Aleksander Dishnica said:


> Than why are they called LEDs?



Marketing. 'Nuff said.



Aleksander Dishnica said:


> Also, what is wrong with the glare displays?



Reflections. Annoying.



Aleksander Dishnica said:


> Can you suggest any brands or monitors?



It has been a long time since I read monitor reviews for the latest time, so it is hard to give any recommendations except, mind your viewing distance (the shorter your distance, the higher the DPI rate better be); a non-reflective screen is usually better; a bad LED-LCD is worse than a good CCFL-LCD; look out for screens with bad viewing angles and last but not least make sure you lower the brightness a bit using a calibration aid picture (best search the web for one), because monitor manufacturers like to max out the brightness to draw attention in showrooms but it may lead to crappy picture especially when looking at stuff with (much) dark/medium colors.


----------



## AlienIsGOD (Jun 21, 2012)

@ OP try to look for an LG IPS LED monitor.  they area ffordable and have decent IPS screens for the price.  I have a 4 series and they are discontinued now, i think the 6 series is newest to market.


----------

