BenQ is on the warpath today, updating its
V series and crying from the mountaintops about unbeatable slimness and contrast ratios. We could care less about the supposedly class leading 10,000,000:1 dynamic contrast ratio, but the 15mm thinness on the flagship V2220 certainly intrigues. It's claimed as the thinnest 21.5-inch monitor around and its junior sibling, the 18.5-inch V920, shaves another millimeter of thickness off while claiming the same title for its size class. Naturally, they're supplemented by slightly bulkier 23- and 24-inch varieties (V2320 and V2420, respectively) for those who need the extra room, with H variants offering HDMI and headphone connection options. You can expect 1920 x 1080 (1366 x 768 on the V920) resolution, 250 nits of brightness, 5ms response time and a good 1,000:1 real contrast ratio across the board, with the Taiwan launch set for the next couple of months followed by global availability in June.
posted February 8th 2010 5:32AM
Someone please enlighten me because I just don't get the advantage of thin monitors/TVs except aesthetic benefits...
And even that, I feel is obsolete, since you are going to be whats' inside the bezel, not the TV.
Problem is of course in this case that the aesthetics aren't very nice. Gloss always looked yuk and low end, and that stand looks very cheap. HP got it right with their high end stuff.
@BUNT2 It's probably a budget monitor and for the expected price-point, it looks quite good.
@Outsider
A title of "World's Slimmest Monitor" is about as useful as the "World's Most Aerodynamic Kitchen Knife".
Interesting monit.... ooo, Samsung girl in the related posts corner.
@horchata
Jokes aside- If we're talking about aesthetics, I'd skip slimness for something with a flush border/bezel-less display.
*couldn't care less
@aLFaDaRK Seems people outside the UK have a real problem with this. For anyone reading it's couldn't care less not could care less.
@aLFaDaRK
Yup, I'm afraid I came in here to say the same thing. "Could care less" means, well, you actually care some. Which you shouldn't, not about dynamic contrast ratios lol.
@aLFaDaRK
http://incompetech.com/Images/caring.png
@petebob796 oh, 100% of people in the UK NEVER get this wrong? wow you people are all geniuses... or asses. see? stereotypes go both ways. JTFO
The size of the base isn't changed, its probably not easy to wallmount, so who cares how slim it is?
Want to impress me, give it a ultra-slim bezel so that I can put a couple side-by-side.
@Ducman69
I agree. It's strange that monitors aren't thinner though... The macbook air is 19.4mm and that includes a lot of computer components. Why is the monitor only 5mm thinner?
@(Unverified) bigger panels emit more heat, that heat has to go somewhere.
@(Unverified)
these displays are LED Backlit so will produce a very small ammount of heat, so little they feel cool to the touch
Aesthetics do matter.
On public computers... that screen some salesperson uses to show you the wonders of their phone plan, the desk of the receptionist, in your sexy little bachelor pad...
Looks matter. Hell, Apple relies on it to sell it's stuff.
For a lot of people here, it doesn't matter at all. In my messy study, with bits of PCs flung about the place, it matters not one bit.
I've never understood why monitors are so thick (and hot). I mean a laptop monitor is incredibly thin (and runs cool). The macbook air is thinner than any TV yet it contains a monitor and a computer inside.
@hughwyeth
They're bigger, brighter, they use more power, and most aren't LED backlit. Certain types of displays (like IPS panel displays) require a stronger backlight than your normal TN display also, and usually will use more power (see Dell 2209WA, Dell u2410 for a few examples) than comparable lower-end TN panels, thus generating more heat in the process.
@hughwyeth Laptop LCDs don't have the size or performance (brightness/viewing angles/reflection/etc) of big 22"+ desktop LCDs.
Its like asking why desktop computers are so much thicker than laptops, dollar for dollar, the desktop is much higher power and performance. =)
they'll be laughing all the way to the benq
@notbuttershift1
...groan...
I don't like the styling of this monitor, I have had the BenQ FP241W for a few years now, I remember that monitor was punned as "The worlds first monitor with a HDMI port". I don't like the look of these new fangled slim screens.
looks like another lousy TN...its slim...but its freaking ugly...
didn't acer release a 24" 15mm thick monitor a few months ago?
+1 on the "i don't care how thin a monitor is when it's not integrated to any portable device"
about time.
lots of development in making large flat screen TV's THINNER but nothing in the way of the good ol' computer monitor.
if LG can make a 42" LED TV 2.9cm thin with almost zero bezel, why can't / aren't they doing the same for computer monitors????
would love to have 2 24" super thin, almost zero bezel monitors side by side.
so c'mon LG, DELL and SAMSUNG, pull your thumb and get at it ;)
Price ? :) (Can't be much, since it doesn't even have 3D or Touch Screen :P)
Thats important, because I put my desktop monitor into my backpack all the time.
NAAAT.
Seriously, what is this obsession with thinness? I'd take a much thicker one with better specs instead.
@Nitesh
Ha ha, don't you mean "I do NAAAT put my desktop monitor into my backpack all the time"? ;-)
Or maybe "I put my desktop monitor into my backpack NAAAT all the time"?
OMG, it is half an inch thinner then my current monitor. If I would buy this the4 ditance tween my monitor and the backwall would be 4.5 inch instead of the current 5 inch.
Seriously, CRT-monitors took an inconvenient amount of backspace, but those days are over, who cares about that final half inch? Get it for free, okay, but pay in money or performance, no way!
I'm looking forward to someone claiming the biggest monitor (TVs used as monitors don't count). It has been a while since anyone has even released a new 30" monitor. I know it will take some scaling work for larger than 30" but I'd like to see that soon. Where is the Dell U3011? Where is the Apple 30" LED cinema?
@boe
monitor/tv it's the same thing.
My Westinghouse 37" 1080p lcd was sold as a "monitor" because it contained no tuner, just several video inputs. I think because of newer regulations, you can't sell a monitor as an HDTV unless it has a tuner (I could be wrong, but I swear I remember reading that).
I would prefer ALL displays to be monitors, they would be much cheaper. just give me a couple inputs and maybe some scaling options. tuners and netflix and internet should all be in another box in a cabinet, with just one hdmi and power cord going to the display.
@LazarusDark,
I wish that was true. Unfortunately TVs don't look very good for text entry, browsing the web etc as a real computer monitor do due to scaling issues and things beyond my primitive brain's comprehension. I have a 42" connected via hdmi to my computer and it is great for gaming but doesn't hold a candle to my 30" dell for other tasks.
@boe
If your GPU can do 1920x1080 then things look identical, maybe you need a better TV. My Bravia looks exceptional as a PC monitor to my crappy XPS 1530.....takes Dell out back and beats his money out of them for the whole Nvidia overheating fiasco.
@autobot,
That would be great, unfortunately that isn't the way it works. My TV is pretty good - a brand new G10 and as I say it looks great for games. By nature, TV's just don't get a high enough DPI/scale that monitors get. If you go to anandtech, guru3d or any other hardware website and people who know far more than me about this can explain in detail why TVs don't work as well as computer monitors for computers. I have an ATI 4870 video card and while that isn't cutting edge, it is more than adequate for driving a TV via HDMI.
@boe
I don't need a site to tell me how crisp text looks on my own TV, I don't mean that in a derogatory manner either ;)
I'm sure there are differences, its just the black levels on my TV are more than capable of creating the black against white needed to accurately display text.
I mean why would you think an LCD TV is any different than an LCD monitor other than the obvious size difference and refresh rate?
@autobot
DPI, pixel size
Still, 10,000,000:1 contrast is quite impressive even as a useless dynamic mode as thats basically genuine black which ive never seen any lcd come close to with the backlight as low as it goes. I dont believe it can do it tho.
The best comment on thin monitors was the Engadget editor who wrote something like "buy it, admire how thin it is, put it on your wall and forget all about it".
LCD Manufacturers: Forget the screen thickness and prove you're not a cartel by removing a bezel !
ffs, it's "couldn't care less" The phrase is supposed to indicate that you don't care. To say you "could care less" implies that you do in fact care.
@boe
DPI is adjustable, the pixels per inch is a fair argument though. If you were the proper distance from your TV this also would be irrelevant, the further you get from the TV the smaller the pixels become relatively speaking.
What I'm saying is if your monitor is 30 inches @ 1920x1080 native and your TV is 40 inches @ 1920x1080 native then you have the same amount of pixels its just the pixels are slightly larger on the TV. Therefore backing up from the TV would make the pixels appear the same size as the monitor your a foot closer to.