Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

BenQ 17" LCD Monitor

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 28, 2004 7:45:04 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

I bought a BenQ T701 LCD monitor from Micro Center and the specs say
1024x768 with 25 ms response time. However, when I did a google search on
the model it showed different specs. The photo looks exactly like my unit.

AUSTRALIA T701

http://www.i-tech.com.au/products/3607_BENQ_T701_17__LC...

AMERICA

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=13468&vpn=T7...


Are there two T701 models?

More about : benq lcd monitor

Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
December 28, 2004 8:19:00 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"Gary" <GParent@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:kx5Ad.15443$vF5.12654@trndny07...
>I bought a BenQ T701 LCD monitor from Micro Center and the specs say
> 1024x768 with 25 ms response time. However, when I did a google search on
> the model it showed different specs. The photo looks exactly like my unit.
>
> AUSTRALIA T701
>
> http://www.i-tech.com.au/products/3607_BENQ_T701_17__LC...
>
> AMERICA
>
> http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=13468&vpn=T7...
>
>
> Are there two T701 models?
>

According to BenQ Australia, the T 701 is a 16ms screen

http://www.benq.com.au/HomeShowProduct.asp?Prodid=353

so I'd say the info from Micro Centre is wrong. NCIX is a good site and
GENERALLY accurate. It's Canadian BTW...and there IS a difference!!

What does it say on the Specs page of your manual?
December 28, 2004 7:04:57 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"Barney Rubble" <nowhere@nothing.com> wrote in message news:816Ad.598485> >
> so I'd say the info from Micro Centre is wrong. NCIX is a good site and
> GENERALLY accurate. It's Canadian BTW...and there IS a difference!!
>
> What does it say on the Specs page of your manual?
>
>

(1) The Quick Start Guide is for FP731/FP737s LCD Monitor, not T701!.

(2) Manual is on CD. It lists the following models:

FP531, FP731, FP931, FP737s, FP737s-D

So, on paper and on CD, my model is not listed in what came with my LCD.
Again, I purchased it from Micro Center and it was a special sale item. They
sold out of them in 30 minutes, for $149 each after two rebates. Its not a
fake, its a real BenQ. At this point, I have no idea what it is physically,
since BenQ could have stenciled white lettering on any of their 17" models.

In fact, the FP731 looks like my model. But I have to go on the T701 model
that I purchased. Bottom line, I don't know.
Related resources
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
December 29, 2004 3:07:32 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"Gary" <GParent@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:JufAd.4729$PY6.4529@trndny02...
>
> "Barney Rubble" <nowhere@nothing.com> wrote in message news:816Ad.598485>
> >
>> so I'd say the info from Micro Centre is wrong. NCIX is a good site and
>> GENERALLY accurate. It's Canadian BTW...and there IS a difference!!
>>
>> What does it say on the Specs page of your manual?
>>
>>
>
> (1) The Quick Start Guide is for FP731/FP737s LCD Monitor, not T701!.
>
> (2) Manual is on CD. It lists the following models:
>
> FP531, FP731, FP931, FP737s, FP737s-D
>
> So, on paper and on CD, my model is not listed in what came with my LCD.
> Again, I purchased it from Micro Center and it was a special sale item.
> They
> sold out of them in 30 minutes, for $149 each after two rebates. Its not a
> fake, its a real BenQ. At this point, I have no idea what it is
> physically,
> since BenQ could have stenciled white lettering on any of their 17"
> models.
>
> In fact, the FP731 looks like my model. But I have to go on the T701 model
> that I purchased. Bottom line, I don't know.
>
>
>
>OK..if there's no real support docs, what does it say on the monitor ITSELF
>? There must be some identification on the back?
If you're in doubt, email / phone Benq and ask them? If there's a serial
number...surely they can tell you from that? ....

At that price does it REALLY matter?
December 30, 2004 9:45:26 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"Barney Rubble" <nowhere@nothing.com> wrote in message
news:8zmAd.583400$Pl.565101@pd7tw1no...

I checked the label on the box and it says T701, but it also has Q7T3, below
it. Go figure. Here is the exact monitor that I have, selling on EBAY:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=...

Also found this:

http://210.202.108.82/p4-2.asp?idx=3022



LCD Monitor Specs:

Model Name Q7T3
LCD Size 17"
Display Area 13.3" x 10.6"
Brightness 260 cd/m2
Contrast 450:1
Response Time 25 ms
Pixel Pitch (mm) 0.264
Viewing Angle (H/V Degrees) 140/130
True Panel Resolution (Max.) 1280 x 1024
Display Color Palettes 16.2 million (With Dithering)
Input Signal D-sub
Integrated Speakers No
Pivot No
Swivel No
i Key Auto Calibration Yes
OSD Controls Yes
VESA Wall Mounting Support Yes (100x100mm)
Digital Photo Frame -
Low Radiation TCO99
Kensington Lock Support Yes
Horizontal Frequency (Max) KHz 31 - 81
Vertical Frequency (Max) Hz 56 - 76
Video Bandwidth (MHz) 25 - 135
Power Supply Built-in
Power Consumption (Max.) 45W
Casing Color Black

Net Weight 9.7lbs
Dimensions (W x H x D) 14.8" x 14.5" x 6.1"
Gross Weight
12.0 lbs
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2004 3:59:18 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"Gary" <GParent@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:auNAd.5994$PY6.34@trndny02...
> "Barney Rubble" <nowhere@nothing.com> wrote in message
> news:8zmAd.583400$Pl.565101@pd7tw1no...
>
> I checked the label on the box and it says T701, but it also has Q7T3,
> below
> it. Go figure. Here is the exact monitor that I have, selling on EBAY:
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=...
>
> Also found this:
>
> http://210.202.108.82/p4-2.asp?idx=3022
>
>
>
> LCD Monitor Specs:
>
> Model Name Q7T3
> LCD Size 17"
> Display Area 13.3" x 10.6"
> Brightness 260 cd/m2
> Contrast 450:1
> Response Time 25 ms
> Pixel Pitch (mm) 0.264
> Viewing Angle (H/V Degrees) 140/130
> True Panel Resolution (Max.) 1280 x 1024
> Display Color Palettes 16.2 million (With Dithering)
> Input Signal D-sub
> Integrated Speakers No
> Pivot No
> Swivel No
> i Key Auto Calibration Yes
> OSD Controls Yes
> VESA Wall Mounting Support Yes (100x100mm)
> Digital Photo Frame -
> Low Radiation TCO99
> Kensington Lock Support Yes
> Horizontal Frequency (Max) KHz 31 - 81
> Vertical Frequency (Max) Hz 56 - 76
> Video Bandwidth (MHz) 25 - 135
> Power Supply Built-in
> Power Consumption (Max.) 45W
> Casing Color Black
>
> Net Weight 9.7lbs
> Dimensions (W x H x D) 14.8" x 14.5" x 6.1"
> Gross Weight
> 12.0 lbs
>
>
Well after all this...are you happy with it? If it REALLY bugs you call BenQ
directly. Seems the only sensible solution.
December 31, 2004 7:41:12 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"Barney Rubble" <nowhere@nothing.com> wrote in message
news:Gv1Bd.610352$Pl.424993@pd7tw1no...
> Well after all this...are you happy with it? If it REALLY bugs you call
BenQ
> directly. Seems the only sensible solution.

Its my first LCD monitor. Funds were tight and I am happy I got this new for
$149. The specs are very good but if I could change one thing it would be a
faster response time. Not for games but for video editing. Still, its great
compared to a 19" NEC that went white line on me. Besides, I have been
reading about some giant leaps in new LCD technology coming in 2005. Like no
fluorescent tube but LEDs for the light source, and other technologies from
Samsung and LG. I figure that I will get something far superior in late
2005, or early 2006. No hurry.

A couple of question, if you don't mind:

(1) Do these LCD monitors (mine, actually) have the ability with their
analog interfaces to change the refresh rate and have the monitor respond?

(2) What is the aspect ratio of a LCD monitor pixel. Is it square? Does the
geometry depend on the resolution of the display. (e.g.. 1024x768 vs.
1280x1024)?

Why? I am now running at 1024x768 but I believe the native resolution is
really 1280x1024 and I want to make sure that circles look like circles and
not ovals.

Thanks,

Gary
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 18, 2005 5:25:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

I just purchased a BENQ T701 from Micro Center as well and I used the
FP531 driver from the CD it came with it now says "unknown monitor" in
Device Manager. I looked and BENQ's website does have the T701
drivers. I have not tried to update them but will let you guys know
what happens. I also was suspicious with the different specs listed. I
read that the response time is either 25 or 16ms - what gives? Does
anyone have the phone number handy?

TommyRox
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 18, 2005 6:12:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

I just got off of the phone and was told that the T701 has a 25ms
response time and uses the FP531 or PF731 driver.

TommyRox
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 19, 2005 10:30:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

I took it back and got a 19" Proview

TommyRox
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 24, 2005 11:32:27 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

While we're talking about response times, what's the average response
time for a CRT Monitor? I was thinking about going LCD but as my PC is
used primarily for games this might not be a good way to go. I've heard
Benq has released a 19" LCD with a 12ms response time but I think it'd
be a bit pricey for me.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 25, 2005 3:42:23 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"Dr Craniax" <drcraniax@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1106627547.192504.105710@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> While we're talking about response times, what's the average response
> time for a CRT Monitor?

There's really no good way to answer this question - CRTs and
LCDs are VERY different beasts in this regard. In the LCD, rows
of pixels are written (and the pixels in them turned on or off, or at
least "more on" or "more off") more or less simultaneously, and
then stay in the proper state (again, more or less) until re-written
on the next frame time. The "response time" specs tell you how
quickly the LC material changes to its new state after the video
information is written to the pixels. (Still somewhat of an over-
simplification, but it will have to do.) This means that the LCD is
a pretty stable light source, except for those times of transition when
a pixel is changing state.

On the other hand, a CRT works by scanning an electron beam
over a phosphor screen, lighting up tiny areas of that screen to the
proper intensity and then moving on. (These "tiny areas" are NOT
exactly "pixels," but at least for this comparison if it help you to think
of pixels being written, be my guest. We can correct that mis-
understanding later if need be...:-)) When struck by the beam,
the phosphor lights essentially "instantly" - and then the question is
how long it will keep emitting light after the beam has moved on.
This is described in a phosphor specification known as "persistence,"
and it is surprisingly short for standard color CRT phosphors. For
these, the phosphor is down to less than 10% of its original light output
just a few hundred microseconds (at most! - and the persistence is
NOT the same across all three colors) after the beam is removed
from a given area. You would think that this would result in a horrible-
looking display, but the phosphor actually emits a LOT of light in that
short time, and then the eye integrates those high-amplitude pulses of
light between frames to give the illusion of a stable image. (If you
don't make the pulses often enough, though, the eye can and will pick
up on the fact that this isn't really a stable light source - which is where
"flicker" comes from.)

The bottom line is that LCD "response time" and CRT "persistence"
values are in no way comparable, and the two technologies will
always have a different "look" just due to the fact that one IS
providing a fairly constant, steady light output during the frame times
and the other most definitely is not. This shows up most clearly in
comparing the appearance of motion video on the two. To help the
situation, many LCD displays are starting to insert "black time" (i.e.,
set the whole screen to black) in between the video frames, to give
a more pleasing or "CRT-like" appearance - and this, or various
other methods, would still be needed to provide this appearance
even if the LCD could provide a truly zero response time!



Bob M.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 25, 2005 11:47:10 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

> Bob Myers <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote:

> ... many LCD displays are starting to insert "black time"
> (i.e., set the whole screen to black) in between the
> video frames, ...

I trust this experiment is restricted to LCD TVs.

> ... to give a more pleasing or "CRT-like" appearance ...

That's debatable. I rather prefer the "stable emitter until
new data arrives" paradigm of LCD (for computer use).

Had LCD arrived prior to CRT, do we suppose that LCD
would seek to emulate the artifacts of CRT?

On computer monitors, at the very least, I would assume
that "black time" would require upping the recommended
raw signal rate from the typical 60Hz to more CRT-like
ergo rates (which will be a major issue above 1920x1200,
since 60Hz maxes-out a single-link DVI-D) ...

.... or is the LCD merely performing a local re-flash at
an arbitrary rate, much like multi-bladed shutters do
in film projection?

--
Regards, Bob Niland mailto:name@ispname.tld
http://www.access-one.com/rjn email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet Service Provider.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
January 25, 2005 11:47:11 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"Bob Niland" <email4rjn@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:o psk6vcwzgft8z8r@news.individual.net...
> > Bob Myers <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote:
>
> > ... many LCD displays are starting to insert "black time"
> > (i.e., set the whole screen to black) in between the
> > video frames, ...
>
> I trust this experiment is restricted to LCD TVs.

So far, although it may trickle down to monitors
eventually.

>
> > ... to give a more pleasing or "CRT-like" appearance ...
>
> That's debatable. I rather prefer the "stable emitter until
> new data arrives" paradigm of LCD (for computer use).

Sorry, Bob, but I think you're worried over nothing here.
Inserting black time the way it is being done in the latest LCD
TVs does not necessarily result in the same sort of flicker
problem, even at 60 Hz frame rates, as seen in CRTs.

Remember, with the CRT you are talking about what is in
reality an EXTREMELY bright but short-duration light
source; most of the screen is actually nearly dark most of the
time. Putting a few milliseconds of black into every LCD
frame time isn't quite the same thing, and does result in a
more convincing portrayal of motion than otherwise would be
the case. There are also other techniques being tried, but the
bottom line is - don't knock it until you've seen it for yourself.


Bob M..
!