Display quality compared to other brands?

I'm quite interested in purchasing a Asus notebook to take with me to college, but because there are no local retailers here that sell asus, so I've never actually seen one.


Because the display is half of the laptop(quite literally), I want to make sure its good before I decide anything.

How does it compare to lets say, sony's xbrite? and how lenient is the viewing angle?

I took some courses at cornell during the summer, and me and my friends watched movies every now and then on my dad's old dell.. and a lot of times, we couldn't, because there were too many of us.. and we couldn't see anything from anything past a 30 degree angle. or we could, but we'd have to glue our heads together in the center... but either way it was fun...
and I'm drifting off...
so yeah. thanks for any feedback

oh, almost forgot.. are there any retailers that let you customize a certain model? Like sony, dell, hp, etc does?

 

um

the screen on the s96j is exactly the same one in the dell e1505.

each model uses different manufacturers of lcds.

Some will be exactly like a sony. x brite doesnt mean anything special to a sony.

However sonys very best laptops are better than all but the very best asus ones. like say, asus w2j is something like a top end sony.

in short though they use the same lcds all the other companies do. only a fe w laptop makers make their own lcds...

 

I don't currently own an Asus so i can't tell you from first hand experience but from all the things I've heard, like a massive amounts of posts in my thread, the screen is said to be superb.

You're second question, I believe all Asus NBs come as Ensemble laptops, which basically they customize it for you, and if you touch anything, it will void your global warrenty from Asus, but some resellers will extend your warrenty by themselves say if you want to add a gig of ram or something.

 

You're forgetting the Built On Asus models, the S96J and Z96J come to mind.

 

Very best of sony is can be worse then the very worst of asus. All depends who is looking. Thats a biased statement. How many sonys or asus models have you owned or seen in person? I ve seen them all and see quite a few sonys locally for repair work.....I am no expert in screen comparison but the above is like saying the very best of mercedes is faster then the very best of bmw. One person just cant make that assestment unless he owned or test drove every one of those cars http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=69841

 

^^i can quite easily say the very best of mercedes is faster than the very best of BMW.

 

Don't expect mindblowing in ASUS' screens. They use average screens comparable to HP-Compaq models.

I've seen various ASUS notebooks and confident to say that Sony uses much better screens throughout their entire product line (with the exception of the FJ-series), especially models designated with XBRITE Hi-Color.

However, if you want the very best, look for Fujitsu desktop-replacement notebooks. The colour is much more saturated.

 

I ve seen sony models as old as 5 years and as new as a few months. What you just said is the equivalent of me claiming asus has the best screens. That would just bias from an asus owner. If i asked you what is your fav laptop i doubt you would say asus. If you asked one of the many asus fan boys which model has the best screen most would say asus. In reality the same screen you see in asus can be found in your xbrite sony, The average z96j screen if used in a sony model would have been labeled xbrite. Its just a bunch of great marketing. Get your self a z96j and get a sony worth double. Tell me what you see.

 

Asus screens are not the worst nor are they they best. I would say i am happy with my screen albeit i have seen better ones. Sony's XBRITE screens and the screens on the Toshiba Qosmio are the best i have ever seen and - although this is subjective - no Asus screen has matched the quality of a sony/qosmio screen. Thats after having them side by side and comparing the same image.

Thats my opinion however and Im sure someone will disagree with that.

 

You are wrong. the asus v6va has a screen that was better than any sony because it was an IPS screen only another IPS screen can match it. also the w2v had a great screen just could have been brighter and the new w2j screens are excellent very bright also. the z70v series had the best matte screen pretty much ever made. so while ill agree some models dont have as good a screen there are many that have had great screens and will have. i like sony screens but the qosmios i have seen at circuit city seemed rather dim.

 

Personaly i think IPS screen should be made standard on all laptops as they pretty much are on all LCD tvs. the viewing angles and colors representation is just far superior to any other tech out right now. i would gladly pay up to 200 more for that type of screen.

 

Jihoon,

If you are at Cornell University in NY you do have a built on Asus dealer in Binghamton, NY. Check out redbarncomputers.com. I hope this helps. BTW I am pleased with my Z70va screen.

Dave

 

Wow what a bias comment. I guess it depends on what you define as "best". If you haven't been aware, any IPS screen have very low response times compared to regular TFT panels as a tradeoff. What does this mean? More ghosting and blurring in gaming and DVD movies.

 

A screen with better saturation and responce is not always better then a screen with less in those areas. It all depends who is looking. i frankly dont care about any of that. Brightness, view angless, appearance of pictures and preferably less glare is the only thing that matters to me. I do everything that you guys do with my laptop and more. I am just not overlypicky with things that really dont affect anything but ones ego.

 

I own a sony laptop.

Ive seen quite a few.

To make this clear, more models of sony laptops have a high quality screen than models of asus laptops.
The orignal question is impossible to answer but I tried to read into it what the poster meant. "at circuit city I notice the $2000 sonys have way better screens than the $1500 hp and which one does the asus look like?" meaning in the retail they show the sony with the good screen. they also show the one with the bad screen usually too.


Obviously Asus doesnt make any lcds so you have to look up the model.
Most of the Asus models the poster is considering use the exact same screens as the hp model.

Cheap Asus use the cheap screens. the asus w2j uses a fujitsu screen. I would bet the asus v1j uses a great screen. the s96j and a8jm and w3j use auo optronics screens, same as like the dell e1505 e1405 etc.

There is absolutely nothing unique about asus lcd screens. I have to make that clear to someone who doesnt understand. They use the same ones dell does, toshiba, sony etc.
I didnt get any useful information about which models use which screens in your post.

 

Same can be said about sony or any other brand. Why does my sony desktop lcd appear the same as my acer when i paid 100$ more for the sony? Why do the sony xbrites i have seen apear no more brighter then some of the lower bto asus with colorshine? Its all hype. can you tell me how many actual lcd's have you seen that are actually manufactured by sony not just resold with a sony label and branded xbrite?. They do have a loyal following that will rave about them just like asus.

 

Some screens are better than others. That's pretty common knowledge. I think most people are able to notice differences between screens, but obviously some people can't.

I'm sitting in front of a 17" Acer LCD. I think it looks pretty good. I have no doubt, however, that a more expensive Viewsonic or Samsung screen would probably look better.

Same thing applies to laptops...I've seen a lot of Sonys, and the screens always look great. I've yet to see an Asus, in fact the W3J I ordered today will be the first Asus notebook I'll have laid eyes on when it arrives. I'm sure the screen will be fine, but I won't be surprised if it doesn't measure up to Vaio screens.

 

Do any of the Asus LCD screens have LED backlighting?

 

w7j does. I cant say it makes any difference. its a good screen i ve seen better.

 

So does sony make their own screens? Are they their own lcd manufacturer also? Oh why can't they standardize screens a bit???

 

Exactly how many Asus notebooks have you personally seen to form that opinion, Rad? Comparing a value orientated notebook like the A6 to one of Toshiba's or Sony's multimedia powerhouses isn't exactly a fair comparison... The AUO manufactured panel in the A6 is only 18bit for a start, a sacrifice made to get decent response times at a lower price point.

I've personally compared the screens of the Asus A6Ja and the Sony FE18GP (FE590 with go7400 GPU) notebooks. Yes, the Sony screen is nicer. It's also $600 AUD more expensive than the similarly specced Asus, with a slower GPU.

In the above case, I'd probably buy the Asus and spend the change on a 20-22" external LCD.

 

I don't think they do. However, it is ultimately up to the notebook manufacturer to choose which screen is best for a particular model.

In other words, Sony may choose a better array of screens implemented to their models while ASUS chooses inferior ones from the same manufacturer. Sony may hire someone to manufacture their screens based on their design specifications, while ASUS spent less investments on screens by using the same LCD panels that other notebooks use.

In conclusion, the "hype" may live up to its promises.

 

When i talk about screen quality i mean actual picture quality. viewing angles color saturation sharpness. the IPS screen are far above the rest. as for low responce times the V6va isnt a gaming pc. and dvd movies looked amazing on it it didnt blur whatsoever. nor did games. so while you play games maybe 10 percent of the time on a laptop i prefer an overall better picture. why do you think lots of graphic professionals use IPS monitors from lacie and NEC?

 

Graphics professionals use IPS monitors to work with static images (ie. graphic design for print). I don't think that IPS will be suitable for HDTV because it is incredibly expensive to manufacture and the response time is relatively low. I'm not saying that blurring fast-moving images in an IPS screen is perceptible to the human eye, but it is there. S-IPS eliminates that blurring problem.

Given two screens with same dimensions but with different screen technologies (IPS and regular TFT), regular TFT is clearly the winner, in my opinion, because of the best compromise between cost, image quality, and response time.

 

actually pretty much all LCD HDTV screens are IPS. at least all the good ones from sony and LG and so on. i do understand the blur you are talking about. but i honestly didnt notice it on the v6va but i have on some HDTVS. I have also used thinkpads with the flexview IPS screen and havent had blur problems.

 

as far as lcd screens, there is none ever to reach the market as bright as the toshiba qosmio. Ive seen it. I dont need to see anything else and I wouldnt need to have seen it but I have. Its the brightest screen. no sort of subjective judgement needed its sort of a function of light shining from a bulb to your eyeballs.
The halo sony model uses a lcd with a 8ms response time and is outstanding and the best on the market.

You dont need to have seen any asus lcd screen. You can have seen all of them. You can have seen 1000 ips screens. There are none that have these statistics...

The screen in the w2jb is quite bright when compared to most out there but its still not the brightest. Its measurable and stated in its statistics you can get from asustek.com.

Anyhow Im sorry if Im sounding grouchy Im more responding to the poster who is proud of how many he looked at or whatever. Im far less interested in opinions of how lcd screens look because they all seem to be the same worthless " it looks very bright at 80%" or whatever. Whats actually useful is the real statistics of the screen.
I mean are you reading me? What do I care what the screen looks like to you through this medium?
Users are describing a 200 nts screen as the brightest theyve seen and very clear using the same words as the 250 nts screen. How is this information useful?

one of my favorites is this picture showing viewing angle Im reading in this forum a lot, as if that is showing us the viewing angle. There are statistics stating a viewing angle and that is somewhere where a subjective opinion might be worth something I guess but this picture is just like giving me a stomach ache with its low IQ.

 

I think Eddie's videos are good for showing viewing angles, probably not IQ though. LCD specifications would be the best method for comparison but as it stands, there are way too many testing methods, too many dodgy numbers and outright lies, and deceptive marketing. That's why people are relying on subjective observations by actual owners, because even that is much more reliable than the piece of crap they call the spec sheet.