[DarkNovaNick]

I'm looking at getting an HDTV for use as a primary computer monitor. I'm looking at around a 40", viewed from 40-48" away.


I've been doing research and realize the need for 1:1 pixel mapping, but it seems as though most displays have that nowadays so that's not really a problem. Lately, though, I've seen talk of making sure that the display can display a 4:4:4 chroma signal without downsampling it, and I'm looking for some advice.


First, should I focus only on displays that can do 4:4:4 properly, or won't I be able to tell the difference? I am planning on using the display mostly for text, where it seems to make the most difference.


Secondly, which displays do 4:4:4 properly? Do most displays do it over their VGA port, or is that even hit and miss? Is there a list somewhere? Thanks.

 

[Michael2000]

In a word "yes". I have tested computers with TVs without 4:4:4 color, and in my opinion they look terrible. For instance, if you draw a circle on the screen, as the line creating the circle transitions to vertical, the line goes from a bright saturated color to a dull washed out color. I've also found some TVs also blur the pixels together, creating an even a more washed out image. I've even noticed some pixel dimming even on displays with so called 1:1 pixel mapping. I'm almost at the point now of going out and buying a professional large format monitor designed for the purpose, even if I lose a few of the video bells and whistles.


Michael

 

[thepoohcontinuum]

I agree with Michael2000 on all points. The lack of 4:4:4 chroma will cause edges to blurry and color uniformity will be slightly off.


Colmino has done a 4:4:4 test on several sets, and only the RCA 40LA45RQ passes (funny, I know). You can see the results here ( link ). He doesn't have the greatest camera, but his results gives an idea why 4:4:4 chroma is important.


As for which sets support 4:4:4 on the HDMI input, I've only seen proof for the LG xxLD450, the Samsung LNxxC530 (requires PC mode, which adds 20ms of input latency), and the aforementioned RCA. Generally speaking, most sets will do 4:4:4 on the VGA input (even if it doesn't on the HDMI input), but like you said, its hit or miss.

 

[DarkNovaNick]

Thanks for the responses. This helps clarify things and I realize that 4:4:4 chroma will be something I definitely want in the monitor. Its unfortunate that more monitors don't support it. Michael, have you tried either the LG xxLD450 or Samsung LNxxC530 and found them lacking? I'm interested in getting the LG as it seems reasonably priced, and well reviewed, as long as you get the IPS in the panel lottery.

 

[Michael2000]



Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkNovaNick /forum/post/19532067


Thanks for the responses. This helps clarify things and I realize that 4:4:4 chroma will be something I definitely want in the monitor. Its unfortunate that more monitors don't support it. Michael, have you tried either the LG xxLD450 or Samsung LNxxC530 and found them lacking? I'm interested in getting the LG as it seems reasonably priced, and well reviewed, as long as you get the IPS in the panel lottery.

I haven't tried either one of the two TVs mentioned.


I am now considering professional large format monitors instead. There are quite a few available these days, and as long as you don't go above 55", they are fairly reasonably priced. Some examples include:


Samsung 550DX and 550EX

NEC S521, S551, and P551

Sony GXDL52H1 (pricey)

Sharp PN-E521

LG MS203CCBA

Viewsonic CD5230 and CD5233


Michael

 

[officejunky]



Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkNovaNick /forum/post/19529758


Secondly, which displays do 4:4:4 properly? Do most displays do it over their VGA port, or is that even hit and miss? Is there a list somewhere? Thanks.

I can confirm that the Sony KDL-46EX505 does 4:4:4 nicely when hooked to a HTPC via HDMI and set to "game mode". Unfortunately it gives you an Input lag of 60ms. All other modes work better at 4:2:2.

 

[Michael2000]



Quote:
Originally Posted by officejunky /forum/post/19532664


I can confirm that the Sony KDL-46EX505 does 4:4:4 nicely when hooked to a HTPC via HDMI and set to "game mode". Unfortunately it gives you an Input lag of 60ms. All other modes work better at 4:2:2.

I always find it strange that color subsampling reduces lag times. You would think the engineers would just set the 4:4:4 color as a "straight thru" mode with no processing. There must be something else going on.


Michael

 

[officejunky]

Hi Michael,

i might have expressed myself somewhat misleadingly. What i ment is that in the game-mode the Sony presents itself with an input lag of 60ms, regardless of the chroma resolution settings. I have no data about what influence the 4:2:2/4:4:4 settings have on the lag itself, nor has http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/sony-...0100603700.htm

 

[Michael2000]



Quote:
Originally Posted by officejunky /forum/post/19543655


Hi Michael,

i might have expressed myself somewhat misleadingly. What i ment is that in the game-mode the Sony presents itself with an input lag of 60ms, regardless of the chroma resolution settings. I have no data about what influence the 4:2:2/4:4:4 settings have on the lag itself, nor has http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/sony-...0100603700.htm

Interesting article. They said that the Game Mode puts it into 4:4:4 color mode.


Michael

 

[irkuck]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael2000 /forum/post/19552912


Interesting article. They said that the Game Mode puts it into 4:4:4 color mode.


Michael

They mention it in a way suggesting that this is exceptional in TV sets (and 4:4:4 is not mentioned in any other of their reviews). Can it be true that the 4:4:4 color mode is exceptional in TV sets?


In my ignorance I thought any TV with HDMI can do it??? How about high-end sets like e.g. Samsung 8000 series? It is hard to believe they are not able to reproduce full signal from PC???

 

[Nielo TM]

The UK version of Toshiba 40RV753 support 4:4:4 in Game and PC modes. It also support 10-bit color and embedded with 10-bit dithered S-PVA panel.


If the US version is identical to the US version, it maybe the best choice as it is very cheap and has low lag (35ms)

 

[Nielo TM]



Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck /forum/post/19553543


They mention it in a way suggesting that this is exceptional in TV sets (and 4:4:4 is not mentioned in any other of their reviews). Can it be true that the 4:4:4 color mode is exceptional in TV sets?


In my ignorance I thought any TV with HDMI can do it??? How about high-end sets like e.g. Samsung 8000 series? It is hard to believe they are not able to reproduce full signal from PC???

The majority of Samsung sets do support 4:4:4 but only in PC mode and the source has to be connected to DVI/HDMI port(which is usually HDMI1)

 

[Colmino]

I feel compelled to chime in on this as it's my pidgin. As thepoohcontinuum noted earlier, I did a great plethora of tests on various current TVs and found that very few could pass 4:4:4 color under any circumstance. The RCA was one, but its screen quality and lack of features sort of put it off the map.


What wasn't mentioned was that I finally found a champion in the form of the LG 450 series (32 and 42 inch at least, and probably 47 inch, though I never tested it). Only the 450 series. The 520 and above, and the new low-end 400 models all fail 4:4:4.


As a bonus, the 450 series has monitor-like input lag when set up properly (~16ms on the 42 inch - top that), and gives you great control over color. Downsides are a scarcity of inputs (2 HDMI) and dubious viewing angle.


Samsungs can pass 4:4:4 but have some of the worst input lag, regardless of mode. Unless you like your mouse pointer to feel like it's attached to a spring, I'd avoid.

 

[Nielo TM]

Not all Samsung models have high input lag. Series 4 and 5 have excellent to good level of latency

 

[mike_j_johnson]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael2000 /forum/post/19532541


I haven't tried either one of the two TVs mentioned.


I am now considering professional large format monitors instead. There are quite a few available these days, and as long as you don't go above 55", they are fairly reasonably priced. Some examples include:


Samsung 550DX and 550EX

NEC S521, S551, and P551

Sony GXDL52H1 (pricey)

Sharp PN-E521

LG MS203CCBA

Viewsonic CD5230 and CD5233


Michael

Is there a thread here about pro displays? I have been eyeing the NEC P521 for a long time now (I have the NEC hardware calibration unit and software), but the Samsung 550EX looking mighty good [LED backlight (local dimming?), higher contrast ratio (dynamic?), faster response of 6ms, thinner, 120Hz (5:5?)]. Only downside is that the panel is 8 bit with dithering to make it closer to 10bit. Not sure if the NEC is the same.


I really think we need a pro display thread on AVS.

 

[Nielo TM]

Only certain LCD panels are 10+ bit native. The majority of 10+ bit panels are dithered from 8-bit. On the plus side, it does the job fine.

 

[thepoohcontinuum]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael2000 /forum/post/19532541


I haven't tried either one of the two TVs mentioned.


I am now considering professional large format monitors instead. There are quite a few available these days, and as long as you don't go above 55", they are fairly reasonably priced. Some examples include:


Samsung 550DX and 550EX

NEC S521, S551, and P551

Sony GXDL52H1 (pricey)

Sharp PN-E521

LG MS203CCBA

Viewsonic CD5230 and CD5233


Michael

This is only my conjecture, but I have a feeling the input lag on those displays might be horrendous. I briefly looked at the overview pages of some of the sets you mentioned, and it looks like these displays are designed to be running 24x7x365. Plus some are a bit more ruggedized to handle the punishment of bad environmental conditions (i.e., large temperature variations, shock proofing, etc). Generally high-speed electronics don't fare too well in conditions like this, so things have to be sacrificed a bit. Its analogous to the Panasonic Toughbook laptops -- built like a tank to withstand anything, but the performance is lackluster.


On a different note, since these displays are geared towards the business market, the support/sales staff will probably have more detailed specs available like input lag. Wouldn't hurt to shoot them an email or phone call to see if they have the info available.

 

[Colmino]

As far as high-end displays go...


Rather large panels (40-50 inch) were used in a Capcom-sponsored (I think) SF4 competition some time ago, and the last I read anything about it, people were still trying to figure out what those panels were. Input lag was reportedly not an issue. Price was speculated to be in the multiple thousands.

 

[irkuck]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Colmino /forum/post/19555015


I feel compelled to chime in on this as it's my pidgin. As thepoohcontinuum noted earlier, I did a great plethora of tests on various current TVs and found that very few could pass 4:4:4 color under any circumstance. The RCA was one, but its screen quality and lack of features sort of put it off the map.


What wasn't mentioned was that I finally found a champion in the form of the LG 450 series (32 and 42 inch at least, and probably 47 inch, though I never tested it). Only the 450 series. The 520 and above, and the new low-end 400 models all fail 4:4:4.

But how about non-miniature, real-size LCD sets: 55",60",65"?

 

[serialmike]

That uk test on the ex500 is incorrect. the ex5 sets run 30ms or less lag in game mode when properly tested.


Just saying.