Moving to an expensive Eizo, advice please.

[xGaffner]

Hello there.

I'm going to be upgrading my 22 inch Dell 2209WA e-IPS monitor to a £1000 24 inch H-IPS Eizo. Before anyone ridicules me for spending £1000 on a 24 inch monitor this is the way i see it:

24 inches is the perfect size for, any larger and it probably wouldn't fit where i wanted it and then i wouldnt want to get a 28" as the dot pitch would be too large for me as i sit close to the screen

Even if i did have room and i could just get a 30 inch easily for that price i don't have the GPU power to push 2560x1600 pixels

Your monitor stays with you through each upgrade of your PC so nothing wrong with buying the best, right?

It's my money

Anyway, my actual question: How much of an actual difference would i notice going from my Dell to this monitor, image quality wise?

Few tid-bids

No i don't do any pro graphics work or photography, mainly browse and mostly game but like i said, the monitor stays with you so why not buy the best.
Yes i have a hardware calibrator.
No it isn't wide-gamut.
I will still keep my Dell as a 2nd display.

Thanks.

 

[Alexrose1uk]

Whilst it would require a GPU update, as you said yourself, the screen stays with you through multiple upgrades and is often the 'longest lived' part of a machine, so the 2560x1600 screen would seem the more 'logical' choice.

I don't see a problem with wanting to get the best you can afford, and whilst the Eizo will be very good, I could see you regretting the purchase in a few years; either due to the resolution/cost and panel improvements.

You should see a decent improvement in the picture quality, but I honestly feel like you'd get more out of the higher resolution screen. We've got one here at work for development purposes, and they're staggering really, they feel massive in a way 1920x1200 24" can only emulate

 

[xGaffner]

Thanks for the answer.

I'm aware of the 2560x1600 screens being more "future-proof" however like i said i really dont have the desk space for one. Also i have heard that all of them are plagued with brightness uniformity issues and seeing as though i watch a lot of movies and view my monitor in the dark can be a huggeee problem. Also the 2560x1600 monitor path would be more expensive as i would have to buy the monitor itself, a new desk and a 5870-5970.

If there was one 30" i would buy it would only be the Dell 3008WFP as i heard the rest are plagued with input lag which is already 1 grand itself add on the cost of upgrades for the monitor like desk and GPU....

Also you mentioned panel improvements, H-IPS is the best panel type out right now if i'm not mistaken, the only improvement i can see will be LED backlight H-IPS which will cost a bomb, and OLED which will cost......... well.... lots lol

For all these reasons the Eizo seems like a more logical choice to me.

Anyone else have any other opinions?

 

[HowzThat]

Alexrose1uk is right. You will not notice so much of a difference moving up to 24". That size gets small real quick.

Yes you will have to upgrade your graphics card.....but....with the release of radeon 5850/5870 and who knows what by Nvidia these cards are proving adequate at running at these resolutions.

At least it is feasible now unlike in the days of the 8800gt. You can get playable fps now at 30" res with these cards in most games.

Be aware also...if you are about to drop so much cash....Eizo monitors can have problems too. After all no manufacturer is perfect.

Read prad forum (with German translation) to see Eizo owners that have problems with their expensive Eizo's particularly one guy that received 2 monitors with bad backlight unformity (unacceptable IMHO with monitors this expensive).

Can u wait ~6 months? NEC is coming out with their new PA range. High hopes for this range as it is their new top end IPS line up. All IPS panels from 23" to 30".

I was also about to pounce on either the NEC 2490 o Eizo sx2462.
Glad that I didn't however as 2490 is only wuxi2 vesion now and plagued with problems and Eizo also found to be non-defect free entirely.
Went the NEC 231wmi route. Fantastic IPS monitor (on par with the NEC 2490 wuxi2 @ 1/3 price) and will serve until new offerings from Dell and NEC come out in the new year (27" and 30" resp).

 

[Adrianr]

No i don't do any pro graphics work or photography, mainly browse and mostly game but like i said, the monitor stays with you so why not buy the best.
Yes i have a hardware calibrator.
No it isn't wide-gamut.
I will still keep my Dell as a 2nd display.

Then with all due respect I can only conclude you're buying one for the bragging rights. An Eizo holds absolutely NO advantage for you what-so-ever. Why do you even have a hardware calibrator if you do nothing that requires accurate colour?

Also, which Eizo monitor are you looking at specifically? 24", H-IPS and over a grand sounds like the CG243W, which is wide-gamut?

The only advantage I could see fr you is the 5 year warranty, and that's still only 3 years on the backlight IIRC (And only valid if using it at 120cd/m or below). You may aswell buy 2 HP's in that time.

Get a Dell 3008.

 

[HowzThat]

Then with all due respect I can only conclude you're buying one for the bragging rights. An Eizo holds absolutely NO advantage for you what-so-ever. Why do you even have a hardware calibrator if you do nothing that requires accurate colour?

Also, which Eizo monitor are you looking at specifically? 24", H-IPS and over a grand sounds like the CG243W, which is wide-gamut?

The only advantage I could see fr you is the 5 year warranty, and that's still only 3 years on the backlight IIRC (And only valid if using it at 120cd/m or below). You may aswell buy 2 HP's in that time.

Get a Dell 3008.

Maybe not bragging rights. I too can appreciate the value of accurate colors.

Especially when so many monitors factory calibrated settings are so off.

I think maybe the OP just wants the best visual quality possible and money is no object.

 

[Adrianr]

Maybe not bragging rights. I too can appreciate the value of accurate colors.

Especially when so many monitors factory calibrated settings are so off.

I think maybe the OP just wants the best visual quality possible and money is no object.

Surely accurate colours have no value if you do nothing that requires them? You don't need accurate colours to browse websites, nor to play games. You just want pleasing colours (Not the same as accurate ones - Hence why so many TV's and cheap monitors are hyper-saturated off the shelf) and a brightness setting that doesn't give you headaches.

I'm usually the last person to try and disuade someone from spending money on something they want as opposed to need, but the sort of visual quality a £1k Eizo Colouredge monitor provides is beneficial in wide-gamut colour managed environments. From the sounds of it the OP isn't after anything extending beyond sRGB, which is money instantly wasted buying the Eizo. Many of the benefits of this level of display are only realised if you know what you're looking for, and given it's intended uses I hope you don't mind me assuming the OP most likely doesn't.

It really does just make very little sense on so many levels. OP I would implore you to save your money and buy a monitor more suited to home entertainment uses. If you're not going to make use of the advantages an Eizo CG monitor affords you then quite simply don't buy one!