Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Which is the better ?
Type TN (Twisted Nematic). 0 (0%)
Type PVA (Poles Vertically Aligned). 1 (33.3%)
Other. 0 (0%)
I don''t know. 2 (66.7%)
Total Votes: 3
TFT monitors; Types TN and PVA
Topic Started: Jun 28 2005, 12:34 AM (330 Views)
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Twisted nematic (TN) LCDs, in-planeswitching (IPS) LCDs, and vertically aligned (VA) LCDs are common modes used in TFTs.
Where these are liquid crystal display modes.

Anyone got a feel for which is the better ? Why ?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Why is this a poll? Why not discuss this instead?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Admiralbill_gomec
Jun 28 2005, 06:38 AM
Why is this a poll? Why not discuss this instead?

No one is stopping anyone from voting or voting and commenting / discussing or just discussing the TFT technologies available in mover "LCD" screens and the pros and cons of these.

Feel free to contribute any ideas or views or information you might have , or even what you have had heard about the competing technologies.

From what research I did in selecting a new TFT (19") monitor recently I found that that the manufacturers of these screens are producing principally two main types (PVA and TN-II) , and currently all (well all I could find technical specs for) are either PVA or TN (currently TN - Type II).
Deciding which is best - that's a tough call.
My money is on PVA , if you can get it in the TFT size you want and V/H angle and contrast are prime concerns and a slower response time is acceptable. See my comments on Samsung's 910T and 913B which happens to be a TN-II. I had to settle for a 913B.

These devices are catagorised by the orientation of the liquid crystals in the matrix of the active TFT screen.
Maybe
MVA, PVA and IPS, what's this all about?
and from above
Quote:
 
TN film (Twisted Nematic) panels where the first panels to be used and are still widely implemented in many TFT’s today, especially mid to low end screens. This is due to the low manufacturing costs of TN panels. However, they are not always very good at displaying blacks and also there is a problem with pixels dying and becoming a bright colour rather than just completely going out (black). The main restriction of TN film panels is that they have restrictive viewing angles of up to about 140 horizontal. Vertical viewing angles are very poor generally. TN film panel traditionally offer the fastest pixel response times, and with the implementation of "overdrive" technologies, the grey to grey transitions are becoming even faster.

     IPS (In Plane Switching) was introduced to try and improve on some of these drawbacks. It was developed by Hitachi and was dubbed “super TFT”. They improved on viewing angles up to about 170H. This was done by controlling liquid crystal alignment slightly differently, but unfortunately, can affect response rate of the pixels. As such they are not as good for gaming as TN panels. They didn’t make any improvements on black reproduction really either, but dead pixels only show as black, not bright colours. IPS panels were later developed into Super-IPS (S-IPS) panels and production costs were lowered which has meant they have become more widely used. S-IPS offer perhaps the most accurate colour reproduction available in the TFT panel market, but response times and black levels remain inferior to those of MVA/PVA technology.

     The third type is VA (Vertical Alignment) panels. The early VA panels have been scrapped due to poor viewing angles, and in their place came the MVA and PVA panels. These offer superior colour reproduction compared with TN film, but not quite as good as IPS / S-IPS. They do however have the advantage of being able to show good black levels and viewing angles are also very good . This is done by having all the colour elements of the panel split into cells or zones. These are formed by ridges on an internal surface of filters. The purpose of this design is to enable liquid crystals to move in opposite direction to their neighbours. It allows the observer to see the same shade of color irrespective of a viewing angle. There have been improvements to the MVA (Multidomain VA) and PVA (Patterned VA) technologies which has given birth to the Premium-MVA (P-MVA) and Super-PVA (S-PVA) technologies.

With the implementation of overdrive features, panel manufacturers including AUO and Samsung have managed to lower response times of P-MVA and PVA panels significantly in order to make gaming more enjoyable. This has allowed these panels to even compete with TN film panels in terms of pixel response, at least across grey to grey transitions

For more information about the different panel technologies, see below

might be enlightening.
As well as these extracts from a recent report :
TN+Film Matrices
IPS Matrices
MVA Matrices
PVA Matrices

Some vaguely defined specs given by the manufacturers

CR = Contrast Ratio

Niceties of Brightness and Contrast
Color
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Now isn't that better?? Sure it is...
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
digifan2004
Member Avatar
Electronic genius
Admiralbill_gomec
Jun 28 2005, 08:30 AM
Now isn't that better?? Sure it is...



Frankly I don't really care what type of connections my new LCD monitor had. As long as it works it's fine by me.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
digifan2004
Jun 28 2005, 12:03 PM
Admiralbill_gomec
Jun 28 2005, 08:30 AM
Now isn't that better?? Sure it is...



Frankly I don't really care what type of connections my new LCD monitor had. As long as it works it's fine by me.

Actually it's more to do with the microstructure of the LCD (or TFT) and how the liquid crystals respond to the application of a voltage than "connections".
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
A consumer will, most likely, buy whichever is cheaper and not concern himself with the type of LCD monitor it is.

Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
digifan2004
Member Avatar
Electronic genius
Admiralbill_gomec
Jun 29 2005, 11:05 AM
A consumer will, most likely, buy whichever is cheaper and not concern himself with the type of LCD monitor it is.

Not necessary true. I shop around for a while before buying my new 17' HP LCD monitor. Sometimes it's the brand name and its quality that will sell a product, not just its price.

For example I know Samsung sell LCD monitors as well that are cheaper than HP but I like HP products. They are made in the US and has serve me quite well over the past years.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
I would say you are the exception rather than the rule. With the price being often 100 dollars between the highest and lowest quality 17" LCD monitor, most people go with the lower price. Why? Because it isn't going to last a year then quit. Most users find the resolution options fit their needs quite well.

I just bought a 19" LCD monitor earlier in the month. I walked into CostCo and looked at the selection of monitors they had. There was a DCL for $300, an Acer for the same price, a Princeton for $330, and an HP for $420. (I still have the prices written in my Palm Pilot; my memory isn't THAT good.) I weighed the options (all but the Acer came with speakers) and saw them all operating. No surprise, but I bought the DCL. In addition I got $40 off my purchase (actually only $40, as it comes off after tax). So, I saved $130 (plus tax) off the top and an additional $40 for a total of $170.

Would I pay a 60% premium for a name? Nope.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

Admiralbill_gomec
Jun 28 2005, 08:30 AM
Now isn't that better?? Sure it is...

AB stop baiting or i will report you to the moderator of this forum.
| Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Admiralbill_gomec
Jun 29 2005, 02:19 PM
I would say you are the exception rather than the rule. With the price being often 100 dollars between the highest and lowest quality 17" LCD monitor, most people go with the lower price. Why? Because it isn't going to last a year then quit. Most users find the resolution options fit their needs quite well.

I just bought a 19" LCD monitor earlier in the month. I walked into CostCo and looked at the selection of monitors they had. There was a DCL for $300, an Acer for the same price, a Princeton for $330, and an HP for $420. (I still have the prices written in my Palm Pilot; my memory isn't THAT good.) I weighed the options (all but the Acer came with speakers) and saw them all operating. No surprise, but I bought the DCL. In addition I got $40 off my purchase (actually only $40, as it comes off after tax). So, I saved $130 (plus tax) off the top and an additional $40 for a total of $170.

Would I pay a 60% premium for a name? Nope.

Research that I have done indicates nearaly all 17" TFTs are type TN.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
A question:

Does anyone ever look to see what kind of LCD monitor they are buying?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Admiralbill_gomec
Jun 30 2005, 08:57 AM
A question:

Does anyone ever look to see what kind of LCD monitor they are buying?

Few manufactures are that specific in their monitor specifications and it takes considerable digging to extract this kind of information (LCD excitation mode).

I think all manufacturers should specify this in their advertising for their TFTs for each model.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
« Previous Topic · Science and Technology · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus