Which panel does the LG 27EA53VQ use?

[Tesseract83233]

Hi there! ;)

 

My local computer store has an almost unresistable offer... 

It's about 25% off an LG 27EA53VQ http://www.lg.com/hk_en/monitors/lg-27EA53VQ 27"-monitor with AH-IPS.

 

Since I'm currently using an 6 year old 22" TN monitor, I think it could really be an improvement for my rig.

Unfortunately, a few weeks ago, I read about LG using panels from different manufacturers (i.e. Chi Mei) for their monitors and I have no idea how to figure out which panel is used in the 27EA53VQ unless I take it apart and most likely break some kind of warranty seal :/

I remember that the article I read said something about a different letter in the serial number, but I can't find it anymore and I'm also not sure if that's the case for LG's monitors.

 

So, if someone would have a general opinion on this monitor or could give me some advice, I'd really appreciate it ;)

[joelthezombie15]

a monitor being that big and being TN would be ridiculous (not good) i would imagine it is ips but you never know

[Tesseract83233]

a monitor being that big and being TN would be ridiculous (not good) i would imagine it is ips but you never know

it is IPS, that's for sure...

I was talking about the manufacturer of the panel, not the panel type.

As far as I can remember, Chi Mei's panels had way too much blue and more dead pixels after a short period of time. The problem is how to figure out which manufacturers panel was used in exact the monitor I'm about to buy...

 

anyway thanks for the answer :)

[GoodBytes]

LG is the largest IPS panel manufacture in the world.

I think they use their own panels :)

[Tesseract83233]

well then, thanks for the answers!

i just bought the monitor...

 

in comparison with my old TN screen, the picture quality and color vibrance are almost unbelievable! :D

i just wanted to calibrate the screen with a colormunki, but there wasn't that much to do - it seems to be pretty good set up by default.

from my first impressions, I can definately recommend it! only the stand seems a bit cheap, but that's not the main feature of a screen ;)

[Tesseract83233]

...and i almost forgot:

for some reason, the image didn't fill the entire screen and was a bit blurry in the beginning, even when i chose the right resolution. i simply fixed that by adjusting the overscan in catalyst control center .

[Taipeek]

You use HDMI am I right? With DVI you won't have any problems with overscan ;) I used HDMI with AMD card in past and some games like Just Cause 2 cause the overscan to apear even if I have that turned off in catalyst...so if you run in this trouble the DVI will save you a tons of time diagnosing the problem ;)

[Tesseract83233]

Yep, works fine with DVI, thanks!

[GoodBytes]

Yea don't use HDMI. HDMI not designed for PC's. While it works, you usually have issues. It was deigned since day 1 for home entertainment system.

Basically, and briefly, the story is that Sony wanted a digital connector, but with encryption system to "eliminate once and for all privacy for 1080p content, for it's Blu-ray players" So that people don't rip Blu-ray movies. They initially wanted DVI to support this security feature, but the supporters of DVI just brushed off Sony as saying how stupid it was, and how it will block nothing and be easily by-passed within weeks, and it adds costs for nothing. Well, Sony started HDMI, which was based off alpha version of DisplayPort with a group of supporters and today we have HDMI, and we can see how Sony was successfully in eliminating piracy for 1080p content. Waste of money?

Issues with HDMI with PC:

-> No clip system. (You usually don't move your TV, but a monitor you do, especially if you have those fully adjustable monitors), and you pull out your computer, open it, etc.. so you move that too often.

-> Support less plug-in and out before breakage than DVI (not that this is an issue, but for business laptop, it is, as projectors are usually connected to it.)

-> No error correction system ensuring image perfect at every frame (this is not something we really care. I don't think professional cares... but maybe it has a purpose, as DisplayPort and DVI does support it).

-> Cable length limited (yes you have extended HDMI cable, but those have chips in them, and needs to be connected a special way, and of course pricey)

-> Limited resolution and color depth. While HDMI 1.4 does support 4K, it's only at 24fps, and at 8bit per channel colors. While that is far higher than DVI, DisplayPort 1.2 support 4K resolution, at 60Hz, and at 10-bit colors per channel, and possibly more colors.