27" LED Monitors

Need to get 2 new 27"s and the LEDs seem decent now, and have less problems w/ glare/reflection than LCDs.

Anyone have the faintest batshit idea which is the best out of all of these?

Asus VE278Q
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/27-a...080-2ms-300-cd-m-hdmi-d-sub-dvi-d-displayport

AOC E2795VH
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/27-a...-vga-1920x1080-300cd-m-200000001-2ms-speakers

Philips 273elhsb
http://www.ebuyer.com/267933-philips-e-line-273e3lhsb-27-lcd-led-hdmi-monitor-273e3lhsb-00

Samsung S27A550H
http://www.ebuyer.com/260590-samsung-syncmaster-s27a550h-lcd-led-27-hdmi-monitor-ls27a550hs-en

Viewsonic VX2753MH
http://www.ebuyer.com/271014-viewsonic-vx2753mh-27-lcd-led-full-hd-monitor-vx2753mh-led

LG 2770V
http://www.ebuyer.com/265025-lg-e2770v-bf-27-full-hd-lcd-led-monitor-e2770v-bf

i heard some sick reports about the eizo screens. people said that once you get to toy with an eizo, you would ditch all other screens. i am running 2 samsung syncmasters myself - 22 and 26 inch, but i am really keen on trying out what eizo looks like.

The main difference is that all these cheap panels are TN, the expensive panels ( eizo, dell, apple, ) are all IPS which are definitely better quality, but also 4x the price.

Buy 1x 30" for £1000, or buy 2x27" for £500? Pretty easy choice unless you're in graphics design and have a hardware calibrator level nerd factor for monitors

ah that's why the quality difference. oh well for us the normal gamers/casual stuff works just fine. i never had any eye for design/colors anyway. not that i did not try but i just pick shit colors every time.

Does it have to look good (the monitor itself)? Otherwise the LG has a nice Price/quality.

The LG has some nice reviews and seems to be a UH-IPS panel ( which is like a cheap IPS technique ).

Looks like the frontrunner atm.

If i am not mistaken the LG one has higher response time(5ms) which is ok tbh but why not pick up the Samsung from that list with a response time of 2ms and by far better quallity in blacks. Generally Samsung is a great choice for the money you pay both for computer monitors and TV's.
Phillips is a different story though, it's been more that 5 years since Phillips brought out a panel that felt great to look at and was a good deal moneywise.
I am still looking at the speccs of each one but so far the Samsung would be number 1 for me.

Edit
nvm seems this LG has better blacks like you said Shan
http://www.overclock.net/monitors-displays/995181-updated-lg-e2770v-bf-review-thread.html

http://www.elgiganten.se/product/da...LED/packard-bell-maestro-24-led-skarm-240-led

wtf?? does this screen make things real!??

Can't believe packard bell still sells stuff, its the biggest pile of shit you could get.

@Ketz about ms:

from http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?216877-LCD-Response-Time-2ms-vs-5ms-(Gaming)

Even though I disagree with the guy that you cannot feel the difference between 25 or 120 FPS, you will. But the tiny 0,64 frames, not really.

Just adding a few more for further investigation

HP 2711x 27-Inch LED Monitor - Black

Acer S273HL bmii 27" Full HD LED Monitor
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=6764193&CatId=3774

You can tell the difference between a game running at 30fps, 60fps, 90fps and 150fps very easily.
If you don't bleev me drag out your old iiyamas and load up a copy of Q3.

I also didnt say see, I said feel. And I don't really know how you describe it, but you definitely ''notice'' the difference, I have a 60hz screen next to my 120hz LCD and running battlefield with frame sync on @ 60 FPS is a lot less smooth than 120fps, ofcourse I put the settings extremely low otherwise you'd get minimal FPS lower than 120.

Unfortunately there's no way to prove it, as if I recorded it you would watch the recording on a 60hz monitor .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate

wikipedia is not considered a viable source

More reliable than no source at all
There's a reason why movies are recorded at 24 fps since 1920 while videogames require at least 60 fps to be considered fluid. Just check a single movie frame of an action scene and then compare it to a videogame's one and you'll understand why

I hate to say this but movies are recorded at 24 fps because people thought anything higher didn't feel right. Also has to do with homecams being 60 fps.

First part is correct, 24 fps is what feels natural to the human eye. Second part is 99% wrong since most homecams record at 25 fps(pal) and 720*576 and if there a few models that record more they are not the rule but the exception. Also and very important fact is that Film(the material, not movies) is recorded at 24 fps because film does not include fields(no way i am gonna go in all the tech details while writting from my phone). Digital film is another story and can vary from 20 to 1000 fps depending on the fact if you wanna do Super slow motion amd of course depending on the camcorder.

So far i am between these 2 Shan

LG 2770V
and
Acer S273HL bmii 27" Full HD LED Monitor.
Hopefully this time i ll make up my mind and buy one