Monitor 24" x 1920 x 1200 suggestions please

Forums › Desktop computing › Monitor 24" x 1920 x 1200 suggestions please

geekIT

2474 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3799

#185137 11-Nov-2015 11:55

My current screen is a 24" 1920 x 1200 Asus PA248Q, and it's probably the best monitor I've ever had.

But when I tried to buy a second one for my wife, I find that the model is apparently not available any longer, so it looks like I'll have to buy a different brand.

Anyone able to suggest a suitable replacement? As I said, my main requirement is a resolution of 1920 x 1200 (or 16:10), NOT 1920 x 1080 (which is 16:9).

There's a Dell Ultrasharp which fits the bill, but I haven't read good things about it, so dunno if it'd be a clever buy.

Advice would be welcomed :-)

Trump crowned? No faux King way!

Dynamic

4015 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1851

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1426130 11-Nov-2015 11:58

We use 24" 16:10 monitors in house and love them, but all ours are older models.

Have a look at Samsung LS24E65UDWM/XY or HP EliteDisplay E241i

If you have access to the Ingram Micro web site I think their search results filtering on the left hand side lets you specify your desired resolution.

“Don't believe anything you read on the net. Except this. Well, including this, I suppose.” Douglas Adams

geekIT

2474 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3799

#1426401 11-Nov-2015 17:49

Thanks Dynamic. Yep, I have an Ingram account and I think can see the Samsung you're referring to, but they call it 'S24E65UDW', not LS. I assume it's the same. Good response time at 4ms. Looks like it could be good, at NZ$400 or so.
Cheers :-)

Trump crowned? No faux King way!

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#1426403 11-Nov-2015 17:54

A proper Dell ultrasharp IPS, but not one of their cheaper ones. They have different grades. I do have two different dells, both more than 3 years old, and one has a better quality panel than the other, so pays to read reviews.

Sideface

9649 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15596

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1426410 11-Nov-2015 18:23

Why 1920 x 1200?

I have no doubt that your Asus PA248Q was an excellent monitor - but why not move on to 2560 x 1440? - the extra pixel density makes a huge difference.

Most graphics cards can easily cope with this resolution.
I bought one of these 2 months ago (a 27" BenQ) and fell in love with it instantly.
Since then I've also bought a 32" 2560 x 1440 BenQ - even better.
I'll buy a larger one when it become available.

WARNING: highly addictive !

Sideface

sidefx

3775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1295

Trusted

#1426415 11-Nov-2015 18:28

Yeah, go 1440p.

My previous 2 monitors were 24 inch dell 1920x1200 monitors (U2412M IPS most recently, was very happy with that) and moving to a 27 inch Shimian 1440p monitor was a revelation - similar to the move from 1080p to 1200p but better. I just can't live without the extra pixels now. I still run the IPS dell as a secondary monitor, but I'm keen to get another 1440p monitor now... yes highly addictive :)

"I was born not knowing and have had only a little time to change that here and there." | Octopus Energy | Sharesies
- Richard Feynman

Amosnz

569 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 131

Lifetime subscriber

#1426419 11-Nov-2015 18:41

1440p vote from me too. I used a Samsung SA450 24" 1920x1200 and recently moved it to a secondary monitor as I got a Qnix QX2710 27" 2560x1440 for the primary.
I love the extra screen space, I often VNC into other users 1920x1080/1200 computers and its very handy not having to scroll everywhere.

Speedtest

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

geekIT

2474 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3799

#1426734 12-Nov-2015 09:17

Guys, I'm pleased that you're happy with your new screens, but to repeat what I said earlier, I do NOT want a 16:9 screen, no matter how good the resolution of 2560 x 1440.

Even with the preferred 16:10 format of my PA248Q, I have my taskbar (which can still be tweaked to take shortcuts in W7) parked vertically on the right-hand side of the screen, about 50mm wide. So my view-able area is 465mm wide by 325mm high. Which suits me just fine.

Oh sure, if I could achieve exactly the same screen real estate with a higher res, I have no doubt I'd be pleased with it.

But apart from the fact that I'm totally uninterested in the crashing, flashing and smashing of modern games, I simply can't afford to spend vast amounts on fancy monitors and high-priced graphics cards. We have $150 disposable income per fortnight.

As well as impecuniousness, there's another delightful factor that most of you guys can look forward to as you age: failing eyesight. For computing I wear specs that give me a sharp focus at around 500mm from the screen. At this point, even a 465mm wide viewing area can require a fair bit of head turning for wide web pages.

No, I'm happy with my 1900 x 1200 screen. All I wanted to know was how I could replace my Asus PA248Q when it finally packs a sad.

I think Dynamic might have nailed it with his suggestion of a Samsung S24E65UDWM from Ingram Micro. Another geriatric wants me to build him a rig, so I'll try the screen on him first. :-)

Thanks for your comments, people.

Trump crowned? No faux King way!

Sideface

9649 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15596

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1426779 12-Nov-2015 10:38

geekIT: ... But apart from the fact that I'm totally uninterested in the crashing, flashing and smashing of modern games, I simply can't afford to spend vast amounts on fancy monitors and high-priced graphics cards. We have $150 disposable income per fortnight.

As well as impecuniousness, there's another delightful factor that most of you guys can look forward to as you age: failing eyesight. For computing I wear specs that give me a sharp focus at around 500mm from the screen. At this point, even a 465mm wide viewing area can require a fair bit of head turning for wide web pages. ...

I have a GoldCard.
I live on a pension.
I am not a gamer.
I have increasing visual problems, with a shallow depth of focus and cateracts. (senile decay

)

The beauty of the higher-res screen is that it is much easier to see and use if you have eye problems.

You don't need a "high-priced graphics card" - I can run mine without any graphics card at all using a 4th gen i3 Intel CPU (not so good for videos)

At least try one before you dismiss it as an option

Sideface

geekIT

2474 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3799

#1426787 12-Nov-2015 10:50

Sideface, LOL. Good to know I'm not the only aged and financially challenged computer buff here.

But I still don't like 16:9. Too wide, too skinny. I mean, it ain't that long since I was using a glorious Philips 4:3 CRT. (104P?) Even bought up all the used ones I could find so I'd never need to go digital. Then shifted house and ending up giving them all away! Sheesh.

But since I posted last, I've been checking out motherboards and was gobsmacked to find a $135 board with onboard gfx better than my EVGA GTX560Ti! Caramba!

But there still remains the cost of a new monitor, when I don't really need one yet. Unless I give my PA248Q to my wife <gr>.

Cheers :-)

Trump crowned? No faux King way!