The oft-irrational quest for thin already overwhelming television R&D budgets just hit our beloved LCD monitors. Meet the BenQ V2400W billed as the "world's slimmest 24-inch LCD monitor." BenQ claims that the LCD's 2.44-inch max depth is 21% thinner than any of its chubbier competition. Unfortunately, while BenQ happily drones on and on about the monitor's B-2 stealth bomber inspired design, it remains tight-lipped on the specifications. We know it offers a 4,000:1 dynamic contrast ratio, 2-ms response, touch control panel and selection of ports including HDMI, DVI and VGA inputs. However, the V2400W's brightness, panel resolution or backlighting tech, color reproduction capabilities, HDCP support for that DVI jack, and something so trivial as price all remain closely held secrets. Nevertheless, it'll be available at the end of this month in Asia then heading to North America and Europe in April. You know, if you can find it.
Update: Some of the specs
found: 1920 x 1200, 250 cd/m2 brightness, 16.7 million colors, and 160-degree viewing angle.
[Via
Fareastgizmos, thanks Strayan]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
rodcadneo @ Mar 17th 2008 6:23AM
ontopic:look like a very nice screen (waiting on price), the 22 inch screens will drop down in price these days!, i am gonna buy a 22 inch when de price hits the fence
offtopic:firstguy you have the world's thinnest brains ?
E71 @ Mar 17th 2008 11:22AM
That screen's stand looks like it's about to snap.
shamrock593 @ Mar 17th 2008 6:32AM
"color reproduction capabilities"
TN panel, so it will display 262 thousand colours + 16 mil dithered colours.
Zelbinian @ Mar 17th 2008 6:40AM
I think thinner is definitely better, for all kinds of reasons, even if the unmentioned tech specs don't turn out to be quite as good as it's "chubbier" competition. I mean, 4,000:1, 2ms? Jesus. Do people really notice the difference between that and, say, 3,000:1 and 6ms? I'm guessing that, just like for mp3's, the average user probably does not, so even there that's damn good enough.
I suspect that thinner will be more sustainable, both in terms of materials and power, as well as more practical on one's desktop.
strayan @ Mar 17th 2008 6:45AM
http://www.benq.com/products/LCD/?product=1313&page=specifications
Don't you people read the article you link to?
shamrock593 @ Mar 17th 2008 8:30AM
No, most people can't tell the difference between 2ms and 6ms, but what this does indicate is that the panel technology is inferior to ones with better colour reproduction and viewing angles. Response times and contrast ratios are the least important, colour reproduction and viewing angles count the most IMO.
Dan @ Mar 17th 2008 1:26PM
When it comes to response times, lower is better so the second example monitor you mention would have a better contrast ratio but a poorer response time. Given the choice, gamers would opt for 2ms over 6ms any day.
Beau @ Mar 17th 2008 6:56AM
Anyone think they could throw me a link for that wallpaper?? (Preferably 1200x800)
Many thanks!
-Beau
initialxy @ Mar 17th 2008 7:01AM
it looks kinda physically unbalanced, is that good?
sdh @ Mar 17th 2008 7:24AM
Looking sexy.
Nate @ Mar 17th 2008 7:31AM
This is so not for people with OCD like me. I don't think I will ever be able to get over the off centered spine.
Khattab @ Mar 17th 2008 7:38AM
"...claims to be world's thinnest, stealthiest..." und ugliest monitor ever designed. C'mon, BenQ, is that all you've got?
Sam McDonald @ Mar 17th 2008 8:34AM
Anyone else think it looks like it is going to eat you?
J.D. Fournier @ Mar 17th 2008 9:52AM
I've said it before, and will say it again. Who cares how thin it is? This is a desktop monitor. The monitor stand is usually the thickest part. Anything less than 6 inches is fine.
crsh @ Mar 17th 2008 10:41AM
Stealthy hardware.. what's it going to do, bomb you from above after avoiding radar detection?
happy_penguin @ Mar 17th 2008 12:48PM
That is one sexy looking monitor.
Eh @ Mar 17th 2008 5:37PM
Looks great, its too bad its completely worthless. Using TN is the best way to ruin your monitor, bravo BenQ, and a 24" TN... my god the viewing angle must be horrendous. When will monitor makers learn that the LCD panel is the heart of the monitor? Using TN instead of S-IPS or even PVA is like replacing a car's engine with a huge pile of feces and then trying to sell it based on looks.
hiujil @ Mar 18th 2008 5:50AM
真的沒有很好看.
該不會又得到什麼設計獎項吧..!
wiglaf @ Mar 19th 2008 7:16AM
It won this year's iF and Reddot design award!