- Articles & News
- For IT Pros
- Your Opinion
In our first LCD round-up of the year, we put four monitors thorough our benchmark suite and find some surprising results. Even if you're an enthusiast with cash to spare, paying more doesn't guarantee a better display. Our tests explain why.
Despite all of the exciting display technology we saw at CES, it's going to be a while before OLED and autostereoscopic displays make their way to your desktop in any meaningful way.
As a result, we're in a bit of a lull when it comes to combining "new and exciting" with practicality in our monitor round-ups. But that doesn't mean there is any shortage of screens we still haven't reviewed. And that's why we have four more screens to add to our display analysis.
Until new technologies become more affordable, we're living in a display world where nearly everything employs LED backlighting. Even if you prefer CCFL-based monitors for their color accuracy, it's hard to ignore the power consumption- and form factor-oriented benefits of LED technology. Those positive attributes are reflected in today’s 23” LCD round-up.
Although all four of the screens we're reviewing sport the same dimensions and backlighting technology, there's a relatively large $100 spread between the most- and least-expensive models, and the benchmarks truly demonstrate some divergence between what these monitors can do. In the end, paying more for a display doesn't mean you're necessarily getting a better product.
|Response Time (GTG)||5 ms||2 ms||5 ms||2 ms|
|Energy Star Qualified||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Refresh Rate||60 Hz||60 Hz||60 Hz||60 Hz|