# 1920x1080 has best picture how do you get better picture?

Tags:
Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
February 13, 2013 6:22:01 PM

ok so iv heard basicly higher resolutions then 1920x1080 makes no difference so much in pictur so i was wondering what makes a better picture for a computer monitor will be gaming to but not extreame gaming.

i notice that most monitors only have 16.2million colors so was wondering since this dell has 1.07billion colors if that makes a huge difference http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

thing is i dont want to pay 480 for a monitor i cant afford it are there other monitors out there 350 is my limit that has alot more colors or what makes a monitor better?

this is the monitor i have
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
a b C Monitor
February 13, 2013 7:39:38 PM

Very little software (and no games) will use 16bit per channel color, so it is a waste for games.
m
0
l
February 13, 2013 9:05:10 PM

whats a waste the dell monitor? or higher color in general
m
0
l
Related resources
a b C Monitor
February 15, 2013 9:38:07 PM

Higher color in general.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 195 C Monitor
February 16, 2013 2:39:34 AM

Generally speaking, it is the panel technology itself that has the most importance when it comes to image quality.

TN panels are cheap and they have fast response times for games. But of all the different LCD panel technologies they also have the "worst" image quality. Good enough for the average consumer though. TN panels uses 6-bit color technology. Each primary (Red, Green, Blue) has 6 bits used to register how many shades can be displayed for each primary color.

Using binary math 2^6 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x2 = 64; there are 64 shades for each color. Therefore, the total number of actual colors a TN panel can display is 64^3 = 64 x 64 x 64 = 262,144. Using temporal dithering the monitor can create up to 16.2m - 16.7m colors. Temporal dithering basically means the if the panel cannot create a particular color, then the pixels quickly pulses between two different colors to make the desired color. The pulsing is so fast that your brain registers it as a solid color. For example, if a TN panel monitor cannot display purple, then it quickly pulses between Blue and Red. This can lead to a little bit of discoloration and image artifacts, but the average consumer wouldn't be able to notice it unless they know what to look for.

That monitor you linked to is an e-IPS panel monitor. e-IPS panels are also 6-bit panels. But due to the different panel technology, it is the better of the two types of 6-bit LCD panels. Better colors, fewer artifacts, wider viewing angles. But a bit more expensive than your average TN panel and also slower response time of 8ms. I think some have 6ms, but the one you linked to has 14ms response time.

The Dell U2410 uses one the three different 8-bit IPS panels; S-IPS, H-IPS and P-IPS. For argument sake they are all basically the same. The Dell uses a H-IPS panel. These types of monitors can truly create 16.7m colors. Since these are 8-bit panels, there are 8-bits used to register shades of each of the three primary colors (Red, Green, Blue). Again using binary math 2^8 = 256; there are 256 shades of each color. Total number of colors = 256^3 = 256 x 256 x 256 = 16.7m.

I only use H-IPS panel monitors for every day use. They are fast enough for games at 6ms (my Planar PX2611w is 5ms) response times. Colors look great once calibrated for accuracy. However, most people like "richer" colors, so gamers might not like the "toned down" colors when the monitor is calibrated to provide the best color accuracy (important for graphics artist who need color accuracy). IPS panels also have the least color shifting. That means when you shift your head you will not notice color changes.

The Dell has a color look up table (LUT) which can be used to display more precise colors (this causes a very slight delay). The graphic card must be able to take advantage of this capability in order to access the LUT.

There is a difference between color accuracy and "a good picture'. As I alluded to above, accurate colors do not necessarily make a picture look "better" because some people really like seeing over saturated colors. It kinda gives a "pop" especially if you have a glossy screen as opposed to a matte for anti-glare screen.

I do have a TN panel monitor (Asus VK246H), but it is mostly used only to monitor some process on my HTPC. Therefore, at most it is used for 4 hours per month. In many months actual usage is less than 2 hours.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 195 C Monitor
February 16, 2013 3:07:53 AM

Generally speaking, the best way to get better picture quality is to go for ever higher resolution. Take a camera for example. A 7 mega pixel camera can take better pictures than a 3 mega pixel camera. The extra pixels allows the digital photograph itself to contain more details.

However, that doesn't work with monitors....

The best picture quality you can get with a monitor, excluding the panel technology itself, is to simply watch the movie at the video's native resolution. When playing games, it is to simply play games at the native resolution of the monitor.

m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 105 C Monitor
February 18, 2013 4:34:22 PM

where higher bit depth does come into play is when viewing gradients. a 6bit monitor may create a splotchy/grainy gradient while an 8bit will create a smooth gradient (depending on game coding of course).

i can say that 8bit ips does look noticibly better than 6bit tn for gaming. if not for the color depth then definitely for the viewing angle.

you're not likely to get 8bit at a \$350. the best you can likely get is 6bit e-ips which will give you a better viewing angle but thats about it. if you need a new monitor perhaps its for you but if you already have a monitor its not worth an upgrade.
m
0
l
!