LG announces CES-bound W2486L LED BLU 24-inch display

LG's announced its W2486L LED BLU display, which will be on hand for all to see at CES next week. The LED backlit 24-incher is super slim -- at about 20mm (about .79-inches) thick -- with a 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio. It boasts an automatic brightness control feature, a 2ms response rate, and LG claims it consumes about 50 percent less power than like-minded CCFL models. No pricing or availability info as of yet, but we'll keep our eyes peeled for this puppy in Las Vegas.

[Via HD TV Space]

[Cris T @ Dec 29th 2008 1:04PM]

Being a LED display it should be a little more expensive that a traditional monitor and consume 50% less electric.

[Platinum_Skeet @ Dec 29th 2008 1:13PM]

A 24-inch monitor with a 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio just screams *out of my budget* anyways.


Sidenote I think when you start thinking about getting a monitor this size you really start debating if you should just buy an HDTV for a monitor instead...

[Chase @ Dec 29th 2008 1:30PM]

true, but contrast ratio is really just a marketing scam and doesn't make a huge impact...

[a ham sandwich @ Dec 29th 2008 1:31PM]

it kinda bothers me when they attach a number like that to the contrast ratio. i just bought an awesome tv with a "2,000,000:1" contrast ratio. the point that the engadget reader inside of you should should take away from that is "this tv can display hella deep blacks". once you get above, say, 100,000:1, the number becomes sort of arbitrary and they can pretty much tack on whatever they want.

[Hooterman @ Dec 29th 2008 2:07PM]

@ Platinum_Skeet

A 24" monitor @ 1920x1200 > A 26" HDTV @ 1280x720

[TheWB @ Dec 29th 2008 9:42PM]

This would have higher resolution than a HDTV (only 1080 lines of resolution) so I still can't understand why HDTVs cost so much.

[loosely_coupled @ Dec 29th 2008 8:16PM]

2ms response time? So that probably means it uses a shitty TN panel right?

[BrianE @ Dec 29th 2008 1:10PM]

20mm is .7 inches - as you can see from the side shot. .07 inches and you wouldn't be able to see it from the side...

[BlurMagic @ Dec 29th 2008 1:20PM]

Please. Engadget was just introducing LG's New Thinner Than A Friggin Paper Monitor.

[EEaudio08 @ Dec 29th 2008 1:20PM]

My thoughts exactly. I read .07" and thought there was something wrong with my eyes.

[john @ Dec 29th 2008 1:12PM]

You may want to check the thickness provided in this post. 20mm=0.79 inches

[htd @ Dec 29th 2008 1:15PM]

the base looks so small, it looks like it's going to fall?
it's not adjustable?
any way, gorgeous display...

[Chris Anderson @ Dec 29th 2008 1:36PM]

Great...i'll take one!

[Dean @ Dec 29th 2008 1:41PM]

Anorexic people.
Anorexic (Apple) notebooks.
Anorexic Sony OLED TVs.

And now... anorexic LCD monitors..?

[Richard Glitter @ Dec 29th 2008 1:43PM]

Spectacular - great to see a new "class" of LCD monitors emerging for real consumers. I was just thinking the other day how old my Dell 2001FP 20-incher is getting and couldn't think of any compelling reasons to replace it. These types of monitors will be that reason. Lighter, thinner, better image, and less power consumption.

[Rick @ Dec 29th 2008 3:59PM]

Your 2001FP probably (I say probably cos I dont know the specs of this new LG) will still be better than this, in terms of the panel it uses. I'm guessing this will be a TN from the inflated contrast ratio.

The original Dell Ultrasharps use LG-Philips S-IPS panels and are actually really good monitors if you're concerned with image quality. Fair enough if you need more real estate and a higher res, other than that there'd be little reason to want this.

[Michael @ Dec 29th 2008 7:41PM]

Don't- your Dell has better image quality than this does, unless it miraculously happens to also have an IPS panel. The chances of that are slim-to-none.

[Jeremy K. @ Dec 29th 2008 1:53PM]

Who wants to bet it'll be less than the Apple display?

[Patriks7 @ Dec 29th 2008 2:34PM]

It most likely will be, as it probably doesn't use the same panel as the Apple one.. (I forget what it's called though, I'm not really a tech geek..)

[dzhiurgis @ Dec 29th 2008 3:04PM]

nor webcam, mic, speakers, usb hub, laptop charger...

[hkk6s01 @ Dec 29th 2008 1:54PM]

wish it had height adjustability.

[Abuzar Baloach @ Dec 29th 2008 2:03PM]

HORRIBLE picture though. Makes my eyes hurt.

[iHoppipolla @ Dec 29th 2008 4:54PM]

I'd put money down that it's more expensive than Apple's CED.

Look at Samsung's 24-inch LED-backlit offering:
http://www.buy.com/prod/samsung-xl24-24-lcd-monitor-1000-1-5ms-1920-x-1200-250cd-m-dvi-samsung/q/loc/101/206805422.html

$2000+ for Samsung's XL24...

One of the most blaze-worthy comments of this year came from those who didn't understand the simple fundamental differences between an LED-backlit screen and a normal LCD monitor and therefore razzed the new Apple CED for it's "exorbitant" price point

[Juice Daddy @ Dec 29th 2008 10:25PM]

:O !! My monitor (Soyo Topaz S) was about $1,800 cheaper than that with the same specs (sept mine is 500cd/m)

Is a LED back lite really worth that much more?

Or.. maybe it has one hell of an adjustable stand...

[Ryan Meray @ Dec 29th 2008 6:43PM]

If this is a H-IPS or MPVA monitor and costs under $700, I think I met my new monitor.

[Michael @ Dec 29th 2008 7:37PM]

What kind of panel is this? It can't be H-IPS with that contrast, and it's probably too thin for that type of panel. That leaves TN crap or color-shifting *VA...

I guess I'll be keeping my new HP LP2475w then.

[Al Bundy @ Dec 29th 2008 8:33PM]

nice to actually see LED LCDs going mainstream...

[Hamidxa @ Dec 29th 2008 10:57PM]

2ms response time screams crappy TN panel

As long as it uses a TN panel, no matter what other technologies have been incorporated into it, it would be like applying lipstick on a pig.

[iKurt @ Dec 30th 2008 2:06PM]

What an ugly crap compared to the Apple Cinema Display.