Nobody bothered telling what's its resolution, but I'm guessing it's 1680x1050.

marketing department fail

Is the fact its backlit by white LED's going to make this a must have monitor ? I very much doubt it !

All I want is 120hz and less than 2 ms with almost no input lag.

Is that really asking too much?

Aye... As sweet as LED backlit and DisplayPort are, please add 120Hz, 24" or 26" sizes and 1080p. :rockout:

Shouldn't they be comparing the power consumption of a white LED monitor against that of other (non-white?) LCD monitors? The whole idea of comparing it to a CCFL-backlit standard, then harping on all this "white LED" nonsense makes it sound like it's nothing special, but yet somehow it's better than other LEDs.

That said, res and refresh rate would be nice specs to have. Hell, even price would be handy... No point harping on all this "eco-friendly" business when you can't run the numbers to see if the premium you'll undoubtably pay will actually make up for itself in a reasonable period of time.

the stand needs to be redesigned

i just got a new laptop with LED and the brightness is retina-burning when on full blast.

its just THEIR first LED monitor.


Samsung have been making LED backlit screens for some time now, mines one of em.

45W max power on a 24", vs the 150W my old 19" CRT used to use - its awesome.

MistralAye... As sweet as LED backlit and DisplayPort are, please add 120Hz, 24" or 26" sizes and 1080p. :rockout:

Samsung 55" LED HDTV Series 8.

And to those that are assuming it's a "white LED", the white they are talking about isn't the LEDs. They're the same LEDs as any other LED monitor. They are talking about the case being white. They have the first LED monitor with a white casing is what they are trying to say.

hmm.... I'm confused by the whole %50 percent power reduction over CCFLs, as cold cathodes have about the same lumen per watt rating. As in, they both put out around the same amount of light for the energy they use. I find it impossible to believe they have achieved a 50% power reduction just from switching from CCFLs to LEDs...

Swansenhmm.... I'm confused by the whole %50 percent power reduction over CCFLs, as cold cathodes have about the same lumen per watt rating. As in, they both put out around the same amount of light for the energy they use. I find it impossible to believe they have achieved a 50% power reduction just from switching from CCFLs to LEDs...

well, you really need to go buy an LED torch or something.

Musselswell, you really need to go buy an LED torch or something.

??? i have one, whats your point? Facts are facts, they output about the same light for the amount of power they use. They also physically last the same amount of time, but life really depends on their power source(constant current regulator for LEDs and a ballast for CCFLs). What i am wondering is if they meant fluorescent tubes, as that would make much more sense. No one really knows what a CCFL is yet they see them all the time(neon signs). Everyone knows what an LED is though, so they might be cashing in on that. I will say that with a really wide angle lens on an LED they would probably get better coverage with less LEDs vs what you would get from CCFL tubes. Of which, the power usage gains would still be minimal. However, just thought of this, maybe they gained 50% from like 4 watts to 2 watts draw(just from a back lighting standpoint, not the entire usage of the monitor) and that is how they are able to make such claims.... This is just my opinion, but makes sense to me.

Swansen??? i have one, whats your point? Facts are facts, they output about the same light for the amount of power they use. They also physically last the same amount of time, but life really depends on their power source(constant current regulator for LEDs and a ballast for CCFLs). What i am wondering is if they meant fluorescent tubes, as that would make much more sense. No one really knows what a CCFL is yet they see them all the time(neon signs). Everyone knows what an LED is though, so they might be cashing in on that. I will say that with a really wide angle lens on an LED they would probably get better coverage with less LEDs vs what you would get from CCFL tubes. Of which, the power usage gains would still be minimal. However, just thought of this, maybe they gained 50% from like 4 watts to 2 watts draw(just from a back lighting standpoint, not the entire usage of the monitor) and that is how they are able to make such claims.... This is just my opinion, but makes sense to me.

unfortunately, your facts are wrong.

LED's use a lot less power for the same illumination. CCFL (cold cathode fluorescent light)s use a lot of power.

and lol, yeah you really dont know much about LCD's - pretty much the ENTIRE power consumption comes from the backlight. the rest is minimal.

Musselsunfortunately, your facts are wrong.

LED's use a lot less power for the same illumination. CCFL (cold cathode fluorescent light)s use a lot of power.

and lol, yeah you really dont know much about LCD's - pretty much the ENTIRE power consumption comes from the backlight. the rest is minimal.

Yep.. the whole of the LCDs power consumption comes from its backlight... powering the panel apparently isn't important... At that, i guess panel type doesn't make a difference ether.. I'm sorry, but your wrong and i'm not going to argue, so flame away. Facts are facts man, i don't really know what to tell you, and you do realize there are MANY more facets to a LCD than its back light right?? Also, your point is very poor, since i don't pay close attention to how an LCD draws power i instantly understand nothing about them?? solid point there guy....but if your get your jollies from cutting people down, then whatever. CCFLs use VERY small amounts of power, less that a hot cathode(CFLs, regular fluorescent tubes) which already uses a small amount of power. You obviously missed when many LCD manufacturers switched from hot cathode to cold cathode backlights to decrease power consumption. I will say this, LEDs do have more potential, and we are just seeing them used in applications like this because they have literally just become cheap and powerful enough for this type of application. As the processes behind creating LEDs becomes more efficient we will see LEDs in more applications and they will better suit them as well.

However, there is still an issue behind LEDs for backlighting, which is their production of the color white. There are two ways LEDs produce white light, a blue phosphor coating that emits what looks like white light to our eyes, and then combining red/green/blue LEDs. The latter is the best option, but is more costly and takes up more space, yet still isn't a perfect reproduction of white light. I'm sure at some point this will be overcome as well, but in the meantime, i would think it would effect picture quality. The other issue with color rendering is heat, LEDs are very sensitive to heat and they change their color frequency depending on how hot they are. This can also be a problem because of their thermal runway. If they get to hot, they will go into self destruct mode. Increasing heat will increase resistance and heat will continue to rise and the LEDs will burn out. This is why you see those huge heat sinks on commercial LED lights, cooling is very important. The downside to that is you have to add the cost of whatever heatsink material to the monitor.

As far as gains go, you would still have to stuff a lot of LEDs in the area to cover enough ground to light the whole screen vs a tube. Anyways, i can see about 5-10w in power reduction, and that is it, especially in something this small. This figuring they are using class II 1w emitters.

you're telling me i'm wrong, that the people who make LCD's are wrong, and that the marketing people are obviously lying because its impossible to reduce the power consumption.

and yes, it is entirely true that the LCD itself uses very little power.
CCFL's use less power than a hot cathode - and LED's use about half again what cold cathodes use.

how about this: i provide evidence and proof, and you counter with your own evidence - not merely things you've 'decided' are truth.


Older, 24" LCD screen - CCFL backlight.
www.vdhsoft.be/sp32/32058.htm

Power
Form Factor Internal
Power Consumption Operational 85 Watt
Power Consumption Stand by / Sleep 1 Watt
Voltage Required AC 120/230 V ( 50/60 Hz )

Modern LED backlit 24"
www.eyo.com.au/prod_H-2494HS_proddesc_SAMSUNG_2494HS_LCD_23.6_W_BLACK_5MS_HDMI_SPK_LS24KIVKBQ_XSA.html

POWER CONSUMPTION:
48 Watts, STAND BY POWER(DPMS): 1.5W

85W to 48W is a 44% decrease - so, uhh... 50% claims really arent BS?

get offended all you want, if you're the kind that cant take being proven wrong - but rest assured that i do my very best to make sure people dont spread false information around here and mislead people. (and i do get proven wrong on occasion, and admit it - but this is not one of those cases)

Most LED's today are not really white but blue. The result is less than perfect color reproduction. White LED's are actually white and are a big breakthrough. I do not believe that they are referring to the cabinet color.

flashstarMost LED's today are not really white but blue. The result is less than perfect color reproduction. White LED's are actually white and are a big breakthrough. I do not believe that they are referring to the cabinet color.

:laugh: I honesty thought he was being sarcastic, but I guess its good to clarify either way.

theonedub:laugh: I honesty thought he was being sarcastic, but I guess its good to clarify either way.

Nope. Wasn't being sarcastic at all. Wile E's reading comprehension, FTL!! :o :laugh:

flashstarMost LED's today are not really white but blue. The result is less than perfect color reproduction. White LED's are actually white and are a big breakthrough. I do not believe that they are referring to the cabinet color.

yeah that's true my lappy definitely has a blueish hue to it... its white - but a very cold white.

h3llb3nd4the stand needs to be redesigned

Yeah the base of the stand looks like a toilet seat. :laugh: