contrast ratio

Associate
Joined
21 Jun 2010
Posts
787
Location
infornt of my PC
I have been looking at OCs 22" monitors once again.

Having noticed varying contrast ratios I am confused, some are 10,00
some are 50,000 and some are 500,000.

Does the contrast ratio range from 50K to half a million or are the descriptions incorrect?

All these (and they are just a few examples) are around the same price but as you can see the contrast ratio is vastly different
LG W2246S-BF 22" Widescreen LCD Monitor - Glossy Black
1920x1080 Resolution, 1000:1 Contrast Ratio

Iiyama ProLite E2208HDD 22" Widescreen LCD Monitor - Black
1920x1080 Resolution, 10000:1 Contrast Ratio

LG Flatron W2261V-PF 22" Widescreen LCD Monitor - Black
1920x1080 Resolution, 50000:1 Contrast Ratio

IIyama Prolite E2271HDS 22" Widescreen LED Monitor - Black
LED Backlit, 1920x1080 Resolution, 5000000:1


Please can someone clarify
 
Just a quick sum up as i'm not sure what cmndr has linked you to.. but LED backlit monitors are able to achieve greater contrast ratios's than standard LCD screens.

You won't notice much of a difference between 10k and 50k. But you'll notice it between 50k and 5mil.
 
You won't notice much of a difference between 10k and 50k. But you'll notice it between 50k and 5mil.

That's just dynamic contrast ratio - the true, static contrast ratios are usually less than 2000:1, have a read of that article I linked to.

The only time you will see true contrast ratios of 10,000:1 or better is if the monitor is using a full-array LED backlight (local dimming), plasma or OLED. Since none of these technologies are used by consumer-grade monitors - then these crazy high numbers just seem silly marketing. The best contrast you will get from a consumer grade LCD monitor is one with a VA type panel - and one like this BenQ has contrast ratio of 3000:1, which is actually very good for an edge-lit LED monitor.
 
Last edited:
So if these dynamic figures are generated by sales people, should one still use them when comparing monitors or take them as useless with no common point of reference to use as a comparative?
 
The latter. Use reviews on mine and Baddass' website and user reviews in forums etc. as they tell you more than some barmy figures ever will. Unfortunately monitors aren't like graphics cards or other computer components as a lot of the assessment has to be qualitative and is subjective in nature. Nothing beats seeing a monitor first hand before buying, but the typical highstreet range is sadly limited. This is why the Distance Selling Regulations (DSR) are so important so make sure you're aware of your consumer rights when buying online. :)
 
Last edited:
i agree with what PCM2 has said above. for the purposes of trying to compare monitors on paper, the static contrast ratio figures are 'reasonably' useful, but should not be 100% trusted. I think it's important to understand the different panel technologies as well which have a bearing on contrast ratios. A static contrast ratio figure will tell you how nit performs in normal use really and give you an indication of black point.

DCR figures are largely meaningless and you can only really use DCR in movies and games. many people dont even like the technology so dont use it, making that spec meaningless to them. a DCR of anything >10,000:1 is pretty pointless as well, you dont need it and you wont notice any practical difference. in fact most screens would never realise their full potential in the DCR figure in normal use
 
Back
Top Bottom