Asus Launches Two Widescreen LCD Monitors

[malware]

http://www.techpowerup.com/img/07-02-05/Asus_MW221U_thm.jpg (http://www.techpowerup.com/img/07-02-05/Asus_MW221U.jpg)

ASUS has introduced two new widecreen LCD monitors the MW221U and MW201U, sharing 1680 x 1050 resolution, 700:1 contrast ratio, support for HDCP (High-Bandwidth Digital Content Protection) and Microsoft Windows Vista Certification. The MW221U and MW201U both incorporate ASUS's exclusive Trace Free Technology, which accelerates response time to 2ms to enable smooth video quality without ghosting and video delays. Both monitors display 16.7 million colors and adopt ASUS Splendid Video Intelligence Technology for more spectacular Vista experiences making the MW221U and MW201U the best choices for visually upgrading the system.

Source: ASUS (http://www.asus.com/news_show.aspx?id=6024)

[BXtreme]

awesome, how much are these gonna cost ?

[Wile E]

awesome, how much are these gonna cost ?That's my question, too.

[BXtreme]

as Vista enhanced displays, i'm gonna get these (if) it fits my budget ;)

[ex_reven]

they look sexy

[BXtreme]

It's Here---------
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824236011

and

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824236012

[Wile E]

It's Here---------
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824236011

and

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824236012
Thanx for the heads up, BX. Too pricey for me tho. :sigh:

[BXtreme]

ya, out of my budget too....

[C.Ash]

2ms on a 22"? Thats amazing! But I would prefer Dell or Samsung as my monitor brand name..

[ex_reven]

i saw samsungs on newegg when i went to that link for more expensive than this monitor
and i dont think they were 2ms...

[Pinchy]

Look pretty damn sweet

[dmce]

Whats the deal monitor resolutions and 1080P. Do you get any? This has a max of 1680x1050 yet 1080p is 1920x1080.

[NamesDontMatter]

no hdmi either?

[WarEagleAU]

Im figuring the deal is 720p is gonna be the standard. I did not knowAsus even made monitors. A tad too pricey, if they get in the $200 range, we will be in business, though I would prefer 1920 x 1080

[BXtreme]

just if their price was say 240$ it would've been a gd buy....too bad.

[lemonadesoda]

WHEN will manufs stop with this silly 1680 x 1050 format? While the screens are getting bigger and bigger in inches, the dot-pitch is getting worse and worse. And the pricing is usually the same or higher than 1600 x 1200, yet the screen real estate (no. of pixels) is lower.

IF ANYONE has tried reading PDFs on 1680 x 1050 you'll know the y-resolution is just too low. I cannot recommend this res. to any power user.

IMO the industry needs to move to 1920 x 1200 for widescreen, or higher... and certainly nothing lower than 1200 in the y. It seems to me that the manufs are using the existing marketing on "high definition TVs 1080i format" and consumer ignorance to get interest in these LOW RESOLUTION PC monitors. Remember this: high resolution TV is in fact 1920×1080 ... so a 1680 x 1050 will not show all the details... and you still get the letterbox effect. Also 1920 x 1080 was not designed for reading text! It's a huge improvement over normal DVD... but the target is TV and movies. The resolution was NOT designed for screen reading.

The Vista desktop is designed to be independent of screen resolution... hence the higher-resolution the better it will look (without icons and text getting smaller... rather... it begins to look better and better). So I want manufs to start producing WQXGA in bulk 2560×1600... so we can ALL enjoy better resolution at reasonable prices (Apple Cinema 30" is too expensive IMO).

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

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

[niko084]

no hdmi either?

Unless you really want to use the speakers in the screen, hdmi is useless and the cables cost more..

The only difference between HDMI/DVI is HDMI carries audio signal also.. As far as picture is concerned they are the same.

[niko084]

Whats the deal monitor resolutions and 1080P. Do you get any? This has a max of 1680x1050 yet 1080p is 1920x1080.

Because the worlds smallest "TRUE" 1080 I or P screens are still around 40"....

[niko084]

Question to go with this though...

Has anyone used a Asus lcd before? I have always liked their mainboards for intel chips,
but haven't used anything else by them besides a few ATI graphics cards.

Do they do anything else well? I mean I have seen cases / optical drives, all sorts of stuff lately.

[EastCoasthandle]

WHEN will manufs stop with this silly 1680 x 1050 format? While the screens are getting bigger in inches, the dot-pitch is getting lower and lower. And the pricing is usually the same or higher than 1600 x 1200, yet the screen real estate (no. of pixels) is lower.

IF ANYONE has tried reading PDFs on 1680 x 1050 you'll know the y-resolution is just too low. I cannot recommend this res. to any power user.

IMO the industry needs to move to 1920 x 1200 for widescreen, or higher... and certainly nothing lower than 1200 in the y. It seems to me that the manufs are using the existing marketing on "high definition TVs 1080i format" and consumer ignorance get interest in these LOW RESOLUTION PC monitors. Remember this: high resolution TV is in fact 1920×1080 ... so a 1680 x 1050 will not show all the details... and you still get the letterbox effect. Also 1920 x 1080 was not designed for reading text! It's a huge improvement of normal DVD... but the target is TV and movies. The resolution was NOT designed for screen reading.

The Vista desktop is designed to be independent of screen resolution... hence the higher-resolution the better it will look (without icons and text getting smaller... rather... it begins to look better and better).

I want manufs to start producing WQXGA in bulk 2560×1600... so we can ALL enjoy better resolution at reasonable prices (Apple Cinema 20£ is too expensive IMO).

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions
:rockout:

I was just thing the same thing, 1680 x 1050 is way to low and will stretch your games out.

[newtekie1]

Asus makes a good monitor, my only complaint is that they need to spend some time on their stands and make them more adjustable than just tilt. As for the resolution thing, If you want a higher resolution then get a bigger monitor. 1680X1050 is perfectly fine for a 20.1" widescreen monitor, even a 22" monitor.

[Zero Cool]

Oh thats my monitor! had it for 4 weeks now, it is amazing!!!!!!! the 2ms response time is really true :twitch: I worship this monitor, I will never exchange it for anything else! (except for a bigger one) :cool:

[lemonadesoda]

@zero... once you've tried a 1600x1200 or a 1920x1200 or a 2560x1600... you will throw that piece of low-resolution-technology away. If you program, read PDFs, use large spreadsheets, or edit in photoshop... then while the screen is BIG the resolution is TOO LOW.

[bebobsa]

:rockout:

I was just thing the same thing, 1680 x 1050 is way to low and will stretch your games out.

I have the Dell 2005fpw and look gorgeous in that resolution. Believe me, 1680 x 1050 is perfect because is not to high to play games. 1920 x 1080 will require a killer gaming rig. And it's perfect for photoshop cause you can see all the details on the picture. I dont say this because
I have the monitor, I say this because I have 1 1/2 year of experience with this monitor and I've seen many monitors.

[lemonadesoda]

Try a cinema 30" display for photoshop and you will quickly correct those words...

[bebobsa]

Try a cinema 30" display for photoshop and you will quickly correct those words...

Jajajaja I am saving for one of those and a SLR camera. I can't even imagine how it looks.

[DRDNA]

Whats the deal monitor resolutions and 1080P. Do you get any? This has a max of 1680x1050 yet 1080p is 1920x1080.

You are 100% correct that monitor may be able to display (not sure how) 1080 but no way its the true resolution!!!!

And over the air HD is already running alot of shows at 1920x1080 !!!!!! I know I watch them and my ati HD tunner tells me what resolution the program is using!!!!


My Westinghouse 37 does indeed show 1920x1080 !!!;)

[Scavar]

I barely use photoshop, or read pdfs, or program......1680x1050 does perfectly fine for my uses in that. I've never had a problem in games, and it looks good to me. I personally perfer it over 1600x1200....Until monitors of larger sizes with better resolutions, actually make sense money wise, because they sure as hell don't right now, I don't see the point in getting something larger then 22" with 1680x1050 unless you work full time with something were more real estate helps.

[Wile E]

I think the 1680x1050 res is fine for a 20-22" monitor. SOme of us don't want/need/have the room for a monitor larger than that, and trying to cram any more pixels in a 20-22" monitor will have you squinting just to read text.

[niko084]

The SMALLEST TRUE/FULL 1080 is 37"... And only a FEW companies actually make a TRUE/FULL 1080 display, although they get away with claiming it on too many...

Most True 1080s are around 70+ inches.

[kakazza]

As for the gaming part: You usually get additional width in the game, rather then losing anything in x/y.

As for PDFs: Pivot bitches

[Teh Gimp]

The SMALLEST TRUE/FULL 1080 is 37"... And only a FEW companies actually make a TRUE/FULL 1080 display, although they get away with claiming it on too many...

Most True 1080s are around 70+ inches.

WTF are you talking about?

They make 1920x1200 displays for PCs as small as 23"...

Please define your reasoning of "TRUEEE/FULLLL/ILUVCAPS"

[niko084]

WTF are you talking about?

They make 1920x1200 displays for PCs as small as 23"...

Please define your reasoning of "TRUEEE/FULLLL/ILUVCAPS"

Sorry did some more looking... The main reason why I was saying that is for the last few years I keep hearing about people and their 1080i/p screens that don't do it... They get away with calling them 1080i/p because they accept the input but their native resolution is not that high. It does look like some have been made since after about an hour of looking I found a few that were found to be full and true 1080. Now the only problem is getting a 1080p vs a 1080i... But they are also made smaller these days..

Key is DLP and CRT still haven't gotten smaller than 37" as far as I have found.

But also at 1920x1200, you best not full screen it... Otherwise you are going to destroy your 1080... Unless of course your software will cut its edges off at the right points.

[Teh Gimp]

Sorry did some more looking... The main reason why I was saying that is for the last few years I keep hearing about people and their 1080i/p screens that don't do it... They get away with calling them 1080i/p because they accept the input but their native resolution is not that high. It does look like some have been made since after about an hour of looking I found a few that were found to be full and true 1080. Now the only problem is getting a 1080p vs a 1080i... But they are also made smaller these days..

Key is DLP and CRT still haven't gotten smaller than 37" as far as I have found.

But also at 1920x1200, you best not full screen it... Otherwise you are going to destroy your 1080... Unless of course your software will cut its edges off at the right points.

Yeah, if your 1920 x 1200 does not have 1:1 pixel mapping then the 1920 x 1080 feed gets stretched...

[niko084]

Yeah, if your 1920 x 1200 does not have 1:1 pixel mapping then the 1920 x 1080 feed gets stretched...

Heh now I even know what thats called. Aw I learn so much useless information everyday..:laugh:

[RickDStik]

Would have been nice to see that 22" get 1920x1200 ... Asus is supposed to be top end gear, not just some copy of whats already out there. As far as a killer gaming rig, GeForce 7900 series and a rig with modern processor/2 gig of RAM is set to run 1920x1200. I can run NFSMW at a pretty decent framerate with my rig and its a long ways from killer.

[C.Ash]

Why is it that 22" monitors cost 300$, wheras 24" monitors cost 600$? Those better be the best damn 2 inches ive ever seen, since the next time the price doubles is at 30" with costs 1200$ but u can find one for 1100$. Maybe its the resolution - paying a lot for 1080p support.

[niko084]

Why is it that 22" monitors cost 300$, wheras 24" monitors cost 600$? Those better be the best damn 2 inches ive ever seen, since the next time the price doubles is at 30" with costs 1200$ but u can find one for 1100$. Maybe its the resolution - paying a lot for 1080p support.

Well 1080p is generally more expensive then 1080i also...

1080p is far superior, although there is argument as to if you can see the difference under like 34-36" I think it is.

[Zero Cool]

stop comparing this monitor with bigger ones, this monitor is a 22" for a fair price and I think overwall it is a good monitor, my opinion

[C.Ash]

stop comparing this monitor with bigger ones, this monitor is a 22" for a fair price and I think overwall it is a good monitor, my opinion

If ur going to spend that much money, u might aswell spring for the 24", is my opinion.

[newtekie1]

If ur going to spend that much money, u might aswell spring for the 24", is my opinion.

Show me a 24" that isn't nearly double the price of these monitors and is at least remotely the same quality that is 8ms or less.

[Zero Cool]

Show me a 24" that isn't nearly double the price of these monitors and is at least remotely the same quality that is 8ms or less.

my point