Corsair M65 RGB Ultra mouse review
Asus ROG STRIX XG43UQ monitor review
Netduma R2 router review
TerraMaster F5-422 NAS Review
Radeon RX 6600 (Sapphire Pulse) review
Radeon RX 6600 (Gigabyte Eagle 8G) review
PowerColor Radeon RX 6900 XT Red Devil review
Corsair Sabre RGB Pro Wireless mouse review
Far Cry 6: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Colorful GeForce RTX 3060 Bilibili 12G review
BenQ Releases BL2700HT 27" with AMVA Screen
BenQ recently launched a new 27" monitor in their BL range. The BL2700HT is designed with user comfort and adjustability in mind. Spec wise the 27" panel offers a 1920 x 1080 resolution, 4ms G2G response time, 3000:1 contrast ratio, 300 cd/m2 brightness, 178/178 viewing angles and an 8-bit colour depth.
It uses an AMVA panel and a W-LED backlight offering a standard sRGB gamut. The screen is part of BenQ's flicker-free range and also features a low blue light mode setting. The stand offers a full range of tilt, height, swivel and rotate adjustments. There are DVI, D-sub and HDMI connections offered along with a headphone and audio connection. There are also 1W stereo speakers integrated into the display.
Rexob
Member
Posts: 73
Joined: 2014-05-07
Member
Posts: 73
Joined: 2014-05-07
#4880618 Posted on: 07/24/2014 03:49 PM
Huge Pixels ^^
I wonder why they even bother with such products. Anything above 24 Inch needs higher than 1080p/1200p
Probably b/c it's cheaper to make and plenty of users wouldn't care and/or appreciate/want the difference. I know plenty of people who do not know how to adjust all of their applications for size and dislike 1080p. My business uses some applications lacking scaling options and we purposely bought large monitors with a 1080p resolution to make it easier to see.
Huge Pixels ^^
I wonder why they even bother with such products. Anything above 24 Inch needs higher than 1080p/1200p
Probably b/c it's cheaper to make and plenty of users wouldn't care and/or appreciate/want the difference. I know plenty of people who do not know how to adjust all of their applications for size and dislike 1080p. My business uses some applications lacking scaling options and we purposely bought large monitors with a 1080p resolution to make it easier to see.
AbjectBlitz
Senior Member
Posts: 3462
Joined: 2004-09-30
Senior Member
Posts: 3462
Joined: 2004-09-30
#4880699 Posted on: 07/24/2014 05:53 PM
I personally prefer 1080p and 27" as I find it the ideal size in the 16:9 aspect. 24" 16:9 screens suck after being used to 16:10.
I also find 1080p less strain on the eyes as the size of the desktop is ideal. I even found 1920x1200 to be too high. I know WQHD is all the rage around here, but not for me. I think it is the first time since the early 90's I have given up on upgrading my resolution. Also running sli/crossfire for decent frame rates.. no thanks. Not going back to dual cards if I can help it.
In the future when screens can change res without quality loss, maintain 144hz at all resolutions and faster single cards it might be something I would look into again. But a higher resolution for my desktop, I will pass as my eye sight cant take any more abuse.
I personally prefer 1080p and 27" as I find it the ideal size in the 16:9 aspect. 24" 16:9 screens suck after being used to 16:10.
I also find 1080p less strain on the eyes as the size of the desktop is ideal. I even found 1920x1200 to be too high. I know WQHD is all the rage around here, but not for me. I think it is the first time since the early 90's I have given up on upgrading my resolution. Also running sli/crossfire for decent frame rates.. no thanks. Not going back to dual cards if I can help it.
In the future when screens can change res without quality loss, maintain 144hz at all resolutions and faster single cards it might be something I would look into again. But a higher resolution for my desktop, I will pass as my eye sight cant take any more abuse.
thatguy91
Senior Member
Posts: 6643
Joined: 2010-08-27
Senior Member
Posts: 6643
Joined: 2010-08-27
#4880739 Posted on: 07/24/2014 06:50 PM
I agree. Also, as I have said several times before, those cheap 1440P's are all about resolution and can lack in the quality department. Even some of the people on here saying they are brilliant are on their second or third to get one they consider acceptable. Unless you're sitting stupidly close to the monitor 1920x1080 at 27 inches is fine, especially for gaming. The flicker-free (it's a LED backlight thing), AMVA high static contrast, good colour, even backlight, low bleed, fast response monitor to me is more beneficial than wanting those extra pixels alone.
I agree. Also, as I have said several times before, those cheap 1440P's are all about resolution and can lack in the quality department. Even some of the people on here saying they are brilliant are on their second or third to get one they consider acceptable. Unless you're sitting stupidly close to the monitor 1920x1080 at 27 inches is fine, especially for gaming. The flicker-free (it's a LED backlight thing), AMVA high static contrast, good colour, even backlight, low bleed, fast response monitor to me is more beneficial than wanting those extra pixels alone.
RealNC
Senior Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: 2011-11-24
Senior Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: 2011-11-24
#4881347 Posted on: 07/25/2014 03:18 PM
Huge Pixels ^^
I wonder why they even bother with such products. Anything above 24 Inch needs higher than 1080p/1200p
People are playing/watching 720p content on 55" TVs, you know.
Huge Pixels ^^
I wonder why they even bother with such products. Anything above 24 Inch needs higher than 1080p/1200p
People are playing/watching 720p content on 55" TVs, you know.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 7415
Joined: 2010-08-28
Huge Pixels ^^
I wonder why they even bother with such products. Anything above 24 Inch needs higher than 1080p/1200p