HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS LCD Review

[Skakruk]

.

 

[Capt.Toilet]

Well that was your first mistake, you bought an HP. They seem to be more bull**** than truth IMO.

Second I may have missed it but what was your refresh rate? The whole ghosting issue you are having is quite perplexing to me. I have only experienced ghosting once and that was on a ****ty 15 inch Sony. That little sucker had a 16 ms response time and that was a real pain in the backside. Since then I have owned a 2ms and a 5ms panel and both gave me little to no issues with ghosting.

 

[dragonfliet]

I loled pretty hard at this review. I know you're trying to be "unbiased" but since you're coming in with the idea that LCD is a crappy technology, it's no surprise that you found it to be so. You wanted something to game on and yet you chose something with a 16ms response time and then decry all LCD as having ghosting issues. Hmm. You pick a panel with wide gamut knowing that you don't run color managed programs, you're one of the few people that find LCDs WORSE on the eyes, etc., etc. I don't think you're a liar so much as I think you come at things with the worst intentions.

I know that I'm late to the party here, but next time, cough up a few extra bucks and buy yourself a Viera G10 plasma set. Great blacks, good color and freaking huge for a very nice price. The funny thing is, I come from the same background of Triniton monitors and was very disappointed with early LCDs (and find the current ones quite nice if not particularly great) but your attempt to appear objective is...tainted.

~Jason

 

[Kaleena]

There are LCDs without any blur (mostly the 120hz ones, but some 60hz ones are perfect too) and with 0 input lag. They do exist, but they may not be the best regarding colour accuracy and other things of course.

Also inverse (I call it reverse) ghosting is very rare and only happens on some bad LCDs - certainly not on decent ones nor on "all" LCDs.

And yes TN panels are quite awful. The area where no TN is decent is movies : they all look awful (unless you're like 2 or 3 meters from your monitor) and the colour banding is very very noticeable because they only have 6 BPP dithered colours and not true 8 BPP. Even a 1080p blu ray doesn't look perfect on the best TN panels.

The "pro" quake/ut players (who really need 120hz +) and such all say that 120hz LCDs run and feel as good as their old CRTs. They are not concerned about colours accuracy or movie watching however.

And yeh, have a look at plasmas although they are not supposed to be monitors, they are basically "flat CRTs".

Also have you tried all the other technologies like MVA or PVA?

http://www.digitalversus.com/article-357-4013-89.html

http://www.digitalversus.com/article-357.html

I'm not satisfied with LCDs at all either, no flexible refresh rate, no decent resolution scaling, no decent colours and contrasts etc etc but I can't have a CRT, I move often and don't have a car (nor even a license) I won't carry a 30k's CRT in the train nor on my back.

So I just picked a cheap but decent TN panel (http://www.digitalversus.com/article-358-4614-35.html)

... while waiting for better ones or new technologies to appear (ever heard of OLEDs, or SED/FEDs?).

I'm a Quake/UT player so I can say it feels perfectly responsive and "snappy". Of course 60zh means I get quite lot of tearing (I play my games at 100 or 120fps to minimize it without vsync) but ah well I couldn't afford a 120hz LCD and they have crappy colours and pixel pitch so that was a big no for me.

Colours are accurate by default but of course you get the TNs colour banding if you watch closely. Blacks are okay (they don't look blue or anything) and the pixel pitch is very good (closer to that of CRTs because it's actually 1920x1080 for a 21.5" monitor) - anti aliasing isn't really necessary if you play in native res.
Surprisingly, it has a good resolution scaling (if you don't go below 1280x "X", otherwise it's gonna start looking blurry and pixellated). I didn't expect that but it's quite good because it makes movies in less than 1080p look still decent in a way, and games as well.

The monitor has a 4/3 mode (that can force even a 16/9 res to look like 4/3) which works fine for older games. What I did was create a custom res of 1440x1080 in the nvidia control panel - the highest 4/3 I can use on it - and then I use the monitor scaling thing and it looks and feels fine (nividia scaling has always been broken for me, it sometimes works but then I'll update my drivers and the setting will disappear...).

 

[WedgeBob]

How does this compare to the Dell UltraSharp of this generation? I mean, the U2410, too, uses IPS tech, iirc. Of course, the version I have, the 2408WFP, uses S-PVA, which seems rather decent as well, how much better is this HP over the UltraSharp, by any stretch?

 

[chockimon]

I just bought a HP ZR24W, no dead pixels or back lighting problems, but I'm having major problems with gaming & watching movies, as any kind of motion is very blurry compared to my BenQ FP19G+ 19" LCD which recently died, which is the reason I bought the HP ZR24W. I tried overdrive which improved the blurring slightly, but made everything else like image quality & qhosting worse. The games where blurring is most noticeable is when I played PES 6, Pes 2010 & Fifa 10. I never had these problems on my Benq. Also for some reason during the two days Ive been using this monitor, my eyes have been hurting and are really strained. I've turned down the brightness to 0, but my eyes are still hurting. Maybe I'm just sensitive to the lower refresh rate of 60hz. My other monitors refresh rate was 75hz.

Watching movies is just as bad, the image quality and viewing angles are great, better than my Benq, but it's when there's any kind of motion, it's really blurry. Anyway, has anyone else had similar problems while playing Pes & watching movies or is this monitor faulty somehow?

I disagree about all LCD monitors having motion blur problems. I didn't have any whatsoever with my BenQ FP19G+ 8ms TN panel. Probably the reason why I'm so unhappy with HP ZR24w, as I was expecting more from a newer LCD with an IPS panel. The motion blur is really bad. It completely puts me off playing my favourite game PES 6 or watching movies.

 

[chockimon]

I'm sending my HP ZR24W back for a refund. I don't know what to buy next. There's just so many faults with LCD's. Backlight problems, lousy viewing angles, motion blur etc. They should of continued develpment on slimline CRT's which are definitely superior for playing games & watching movies. I'll probably just wait for the next gen of LCD's and see what the 120hz ones are like. In the meantime it's time to get the 14" CRT out of the loft or maybe get my Benq 19" LCD repaired.

 

[SkaarjMaster]

I still like my 24" BenQ G2400WD LCD and, even though it is supposed to be the best for fast-paced FPS gaming, I'm sure it still has its problems. It's the best I can do for now, so I'll just sit back and wait for the 120Hz ones to come out and come down in price a bit. Skakruk, hope the G420 lasts you until then.

 

[chockimon]

I assumed that over the last 4 years LCD technology has improved, but if my Benq FP91g+ is anything to go by, it obviously hasn't. My Benq monitor was only 19" but I had no problems with it apart from the vertical viewing angle which could of been better, but with a response rate of 8ms (75hz) it didn't suffer from any motion blur that I could see, as it had a refresh rate of 75hz. The HP ZR24W (60hz) on the other hand was absolutely inferior when it comes to motion blur, compared to my Benq. I expected more from a new monitor that costs twice as much. After being subjected to the awful motion blur of this monitor, it just goes to show how inferior modern LCD's truly are when playing games and watching movies. My friend borrowed me his Dell E770s 17" monitor and after playing PES 06 on it, there was no motion blur whatsoever, everything was perfect in regards to smoothness, and no motion blur problems at all. Why after ten years or so do LCD's still suck in this area? These days, most wide screen monitors are 60hz which basically means eye strain and lousy motion blur.

 

[chockimon]

I was using DVI with the Benq at 75hz and it was an excellent monitor. I took it apart earlier to see what might be wrong with it and it looks like some of the capacitors are faulty, as they are bulging. Hopefully I'll be able to fix it.

I basically want a monitor for all round general use, gaming, watching HD movies, surfing the net, editing photos & 3d modelling. I can't seem to find an LCD that's good in all areas though.

I've been looking at the Acer GD245HQ, but again it appears to have lousy 2d image quality due to the overdrive feature which can't be turned off in the OSD.

Any LCD recommendations?

 

[Deathmaker]

These days, most wide screen monitors are 60hz which basically means eye strain and lousy motion blur.

This bit made me lol. You're confusing CRT tech with the way LCD's work. The flicker that results in eye strain with CRT's at low refresh rates is due to the phosphor decay between electron beam scans, LCD's are completely different. With LCD's the transistors stay either open or closed until the image changes, so no decay induced flicker.

Refresh rate also has very little to do with motion blur, either. That's caused by a slow response time; anything under 16.7ms on a 60Hz. LCD shouldn't produce motion blur.

To generalise that LCD's suck for gaming and watching movies is just wrong. Sure, some aren't good for anything other than office use by Mr Magoo, but not all LCD's are created equally.

I too resisted the move from CRT as I hadn't seen an LCD that came anywhere near my Iiyama 454vmPro (which was on many reviewer's A-list for an age), that was until I took the plunge & bought a BenQ 241W. It handles everything with aplomb and makes my Iiyama look quite plain.

 

[Deathmaker]

Maybe I should have added discernible to my statement. Photographs of any monitor will no doubt show up some irregularities, does that mean CRT's are pants because a photo only showed the top half of the rendered screen?

I see monitors in all shapes & sizes on a regular basis, from professionally calibrated jobbies to seizure inducing fish bowls, so I know not to generalise saying that all LCD's suck donkey balls next to a CRT. Maybe you just haven't seen a properly working LCD?

 

[Deathmaker]

Is there any need to be a knob head about this? Did I touch a nerve or something?

The fact is, you & the other guy are spouting off that LCD's are the Devil's spawn & are no where near as good as CRT's, which is quite obviously wrong. Just as wrong as saying 60Hz. on an LCD causes headaches & motion blur.

<whiny 6 year old kid voice> Next you'll be spouting the "refresh rate doesn't matter because humans cant see past 25fps" argument or some such nonsense.</voice>

Here's an idea, grow the **** up.

 

[SkaarjMaster]

Just for the record, Skakruk is very sensitive to the screen tearing associated with input lag (vsync, etc.). I, for one, do not notice it and I'm not sure why.......probably because I'm 46 and my eyes are getting f-ed up or I'm just not used to it enough and don't know what to look for. I like the picture on my LCD and it's probably good enough for me, but I'm sure it could be better. It's one of the best LCDs for gaming, but I've still heard people complain about it for various reasons. Hopefully, the technology will advance enough to make even better gaming monitors and ones without stuck or dead pixels.

 

[~Psycho~]

Is there any need to be a knob head about this? Did I touch a nerve or something?

The fact is, you & the other guy are spouting off that LCD's are the Devil's spawn & are no where near as good as CRT's, which is quite obviously wrong. Just as wrong as saying 60Hz. on an LCD causes headaches & motion blur.

<whiny 6 year old kid voice> Next you'll be spouting the "refresh rate doesn't matter because humans cant see past 25fps" argument or some such nonsense.</voice>

Here's an idea, grow the **** up.

Hey he might be acting like a snob, but you are the one namecaling and writing in an abusive manner. And he does have a point... There are a ton of people out there who naturally do not notice such things as blur etc. I didnt even notice about screen-tearing until somene actually pointed it out to me. So there is quite a possiblity that the average user (you included0 will be less effected by the blur and that kind of thing than graphics pro or "videophile". So yeah... LCD might be ok for most people but if you are talking about which technology is BETTER, you have to go by the highest common denominator... that is, to think from a "videophile" perspective. just saying that you don't see it si not enough.

But the reason I joined this thread was to ask: does ayone know of a modern LCD in the 4:3 ratio? I'm looking to buy a new screen, but I want it to be the same shape as the old CRT so that Unreal can keep it's traditional look (does it even fit normally to widescreen?). It looks like all LCD screens these days are wide...

 

[SkaarjMaster]

Most of the LCDs screens are wide and it's very hard to find, especially, a bigger one that isn't wide. I finally just gave up early last year and got the widescreen. The tops and bottoms are cut off slightly, but the left and right sides of the screen are wider. After playing for a while, I've gotten used to it and I can now play either way; I also have the same games installed on my old CRT system that is still set up.

The thing about screen tearing is I think I did see it before but do not seek to see it right now as I'm afraid if I notice it too much then my gaming experience will be blown.

 

[chockimon]

This bit made me lol. You're confusing CRT tech with the way LCD's work. The flicker that results in eye strain with CRT's at low refresh rates is due to the phosphor decay between electron beam scans, LCD's are completely different. With LCD's the transistors stay either open or closed until the image changes, so no decay induced flicker.

Refresh rate also has very little to do with motion blur, either. That's caused by a slow response time; anything under 16.7ms on a 60Hz. LCD shouldn't produce motion blur.

To generalise that LCD's suck for gaming and watching movies is just wrong. Sure, some aren't good for anything other than office use by Mr Magoo, but not all LCD's are created equally.

I too resisted the move from CRT as I hadn't seen an LCD that came anywhere near my Iiyama 454vmPro (which was on many reviewer's A-list for an age), that was until I took the plunge & bought a BenQ 241W. It handles everything with aplomb and makes my Iiyama look quite plain.

I know how CRT's & LCD's works, as I've owned both, but I'm just saying that low refresh rates on LCD's still hurt my eyes. Anything below 75hz does. It was the same with my Benq LCD when the refresh rate was set at 60hz, thankfully I could bump it up to 75hz which solved the problem and my eyes no longer hurt. Unfortunately all LCD's now have refresh rates of 60hz which is no good. I used the HPZR24W IPS panel for three days and my eyes were screaming after just 5 minutes of use.

You're right about no two LCD's being created equally, even the same LCD's models are not created equally, which is obviously due to the manufacturing process. I bet there's a lot more faulty LCD's being returned than all the CRT's ever created. You don't need to tell me that LCD's are imperfect, as there's no such thing as the perfect LCD. It's a case of buying one and hoping for the best, that there's no dead pixels, no motion blur or back lighting problems etc.

My Benq is going to cost £60 to repair, which is hardly worth it, so it looks like I have no choice but to buy a new LCD. I might as well try the Acer GD245HQ 120hz and see what it's like. I just hope it doesn't have any dead pixels.

Everyone is different and is therefore entitled to their opinions.

To test out the motion blur on LCD's, try this neat little program.

PixPerAn: On the HP ZR24W, the motion blur was very obvious and quite bad and on my CRT 17" Dell E770, there's none whatsoever.

 

[chockimon]

Hey he might be acting like a snob, but you are the one namecaling and writing in an abusive manner. And he does have a point... There are a ton of people out there who naturally do not notice such things as blur etc. I didnt even notice about screen-tearing until somene actually pointed it out to me. So there is quite a possiblity that the average user (you included0 will be less effected by the blur and that kind of thing than graphics pro or "videophile". So yeah... LCD might be ok for most people but if you are talking about which technology is BETTER, you have to go by the highest common denominator... that is, to think from a "videophile" perspective. just saying that you don't see it si not enough.

But the reason I joined this thread was to ask: does ayone know of a modern LCD in the 4:3 ratio? I'm looking to buy a new screen, but I want it to be the same shape as the old CRT so that Unreal can keep it's traditional look (does it even fit normally to widescreen?). It looks like all LCD screens these days are wide...

Most monitors are now widescreen and I'm assuming they all have a 4:3 option in the OSD. You'll get black borders down either side, but it's acceptable. At least the HP ZR24W I just sent back did. The only square monitors with a 4:3 ratio that I'm aware of are 17" or 19" LCD's which can be found on Amazon, but as they are quite old, they're not HDCP compliant. You're probably better of with a decent wide screen and then you can have the best of both worlds.

Have a look at the Acer GD245HQ. That's the LCD I'll probably get next.

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/188344

or 19" LCD's

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias=aps&field-keywords=19"+lcd+75hz

 

[Deathmaker]

Hey he might be acting like a snob, but you are the one namecaling and writing in an abusive manner.

Hardly, I made no reference to hamsters or elderberries & I was quite civil until someone decided to be presumptuous and tell me what I'm about to say and what people's opinions should be. Vehemently denying other people's views & experience doesn't make one's own true.

Still, not the best reaction though from myself, but some people just have the knack of bringing out the worst in others.

 

[chockimon]

Unfortunately it's more than just caps as one of the chips is blown and it will cost £9 to replace. Even if I do replace all the caps and the chip, there's still no guarantee that it will work. Therefore it's hardly worth it. I was looking on Ebay for a new inverter board and I found one for only £8, but the postage is £35 as it's from China. It's a shame I can't find one in the UK at this price. I also contacted Benq and they told me it would probably cost about £45 to repair the monitor including delivery charges, so again it's hardly worth it. Anyway I've already ordered the Acer and it should be coming today. I just hope there's nothing wrong with it.