I recently was planning on buying another monitor for another computer i'm building and I noticed the monitor I was planning on buying is LED not LCD like the one I bought befor. The only diffrence i can see is the LED has 1000000:1 Contrast and the one I bought befor has 50000:1. There the same price and the other one does offer better contrast but I was wondering whats the catch does the LED die faster or something?
-
Multi-million dollar Cheyenne supercomputer auction ends with $480,085 bid — buyer walked away with 8,064 Intel Xeon Broadwell CPUs, 313TB DDR4-2400 ECC RAM, and some water leaks
jaguarskx
Titan
- Apr 19, 2006
- 27,979
- 3
- 84,965
"LED monitors" are simply LCD monitors with LED backlight instead of florescent backlight.
Dynamic contrast ratios (DCR) are basically total BS. You will never see the full range of contrast because the range will be limited to the Static Contrast Ratio (SCR) which is typically 700:1 to 1000:1. There could be different settings with predefined dynamic contrast ratio, but the range will somewhat narrow. For example, suppose you choose "Movie Mode" that will set the DCR to 60,000 as minimum, and the maximum could be 70,000. Each incremental increase / decrease would be by 10's (10,000 DCR range divided by 1,000 SCR).
LED generally do not die out as fast a florescent.
Dynamic contrast ratios (DCR) are basically total BS. You will never see the full range of contrast because the range will be limited to the Static Contrast Ratio (SCR) which is typically 700:1 to 1000:1. There could be different settings with predefined dynamic contrast ratio, but the range will somewhat narrow. For example, suppose you choose "Movie Mode" that will set the DCR to 60,000 as minimum, and the maximum could be 70,000. Each incremental increase / decrease would be by 10's (10,000 DCR range divided by 1,000 SCR).
LED generally do not die out as fast a florescent.
Thanks alot the LED does look more sleek just wanted to make sure it didn't die after a year. Wish i had know this befor i bought the first one i would of gotten LED instead. Was told plasma has a high failure rate and the picture gets stuck if you pause...
amnotanoobie
Distinguished
- Aug 27, 2006
- 1,493
- 0
- 19,360
If you search enough, you'll see that there are two types of LED-backlit LCD's.
- CCFL replaced with LED
Literally, the fluorescent was just replaced with LED's. The screen may produce a bit better whites, but the blacks are still not-so-black. Power consumption would be less and it doesn't degrade like fluorescents do over time.
- Local-dimming LED
These types of screens aren't cheap. Literally the whole backside of the LCD has LEDs, and it could turn off individual LEDs to make a "true black". These are also probably as bulky as their florescent counterparts.
- CCFL replaced with LED
Literally, the fluorescent was just replaced with LED's. The screen may produce a bit better whites, but the blacks are still not-so-black. Power consumption would be less and it doesn't degrade like fluorescents do over time.
- Local-dimming LED
These types of screens aren't cheap. Literally the whole backside of the LCD has LEDs, and it could turn off individual LEDs to make a "true black". These are also probably as bulky as their florescent counterparts.
MMclachlan
Distinguished
- Jul 11, 2007
- 286
- 0
- 18,810
^+1 And because the 'cheaper' LEDs are side-lit like the CCFLs, they still suffer the same issues with backlight bleed (where the edges are significantly lighter than the centre of the screen) just like the CCFL variants do.
I looked into all this recently while deciding on a telly and the only bonusses with side-lit LED are the slimmer form factor, and the lower power consumption. But when you consider over here in the UK you pay about £100 more for the LED version of any telly - so you would need to run it for a long time to realise that power saving! And also when you consider that colour repro and backlight uniformity are usually better on a CCFL of the same price as they can spend the money on a more expensive matrix like an IPS-a or S-PVA I went with a good 100hz CCFL one in the end over a mediocre LED…. No doubt they will be the future though, just not cheap enough yet.
I looked into all this recently while deciding on a telly and the only bonusses with side-lit LED are the slimmer form factor, and the lower power consumption. But when you consider over here in the UK you pay about £100 more for the LED version of any telly - so you would need to run it for a long time to realise that power saving! And also when you consider that colour repro and backlight uniformity are usually better on a CCFL of the same price as they can spend the money on a more expensive matrix like an IPS-a or S-PVA I went with a good 100hz CCFL one in the end over a mediocre LED…. No doubt they will be the future though, just not cheap enough yet.
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,043
- 0
- 50,960
OLED!
As already mentioned it depends on the type of LCD and how the LED lighting is done (Local Dimming RGB is a nice add on too but extremely expensive, ours here at work cost $1,200-1,500 in bulk), but also as mentioned the good ones are expensive. It's just like the CRT vs LCD discussion, where to get an LCD worthy of replacing a CRT you had to (still do) pay a premium for a worthy panel.
The LED screens tend to have better light distribution for the same price (usually the cheap CCFL panel are single source whereas the more expensive ones are multiple source).
The rule of thumb with most monitors/panels/TV is to compare them side by side with content you intend to use few panels are great at everything, and those that come close are usually expensive.
Sniper Wolf
Distinguished
- Jun 10, 2010
- 38
- 0
- 18,540
I would go for LED because graphics is much clearer with LED. The difference of both is LCD uses backlight in the middle of you monitor aligned in a row then emits light. While the LED uses tiny backlight at the edges of your screen aligned in row horizontally and vertically.
If you look more closely and compare an LCD to a LED the edges of LCD screen seems darker compared to the LED. LED distributes light all throughout the screen, that is why it is much clearer than LCD.
If you are thinking of buying LCD or LED, I would choose LED... seeing that it is brighter, clearer, and more new compared to the LCD. The downside is, the LED is much more pricey than the LCD.
If you are a gamer or a movie addict/fanatic and wants crisp and clear QUALITY graphics, I would choose LED with FULL HD capability. Also, LED has a lower energy capacity.
If you look more closely and compare an LCD to a LED the edges of LCD screen seems darker compared to the LED. LED distributes light all throughout the screen, that is why it is much clearer than LCD.
If you are thinking of buying LCD or LED, I would choose LED... seeing that it is brighter, clearer, and more new compared to the LCD. The downside is, the LED is much more pricey than the LCD.
If you are a gamer or a movie addict/fanatic and wants crisp and clear QUALITY graphics, I would choose LED with FULL HD capability. Also, LED has a lower energy capacity.
amnotanoobie
Distinguished
- Aug 27, 2006
- 1,493
- 0
- 19,360
You're talking about a LED-backlit LCD vs a CCFL-backlit LCD, they're still both still Liquid Crystal Displays.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
News Firefox user loses 7,470 opened tabs saved over two years after they can’t restore browsing session- Started by Admin
- Replies: 58
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram