Sharp LL-191A-B: 16ms Response Time for 19'' LCDs
by Kristopher Kubicki on May 18, 2004 12:01 AM EST- Posted in
- Displays
Construction
Our Sharp 191A looks very different from any other LCD that we have seen to date. It feels particularly refreshing, considering that the last several LCDs we have reviewed all have very similar designs. Off the bat, the first thing we noticed was a lack of DVI interface on this monitor. This is unfortunate, but perhaps Sharp can still provide good performance even with this obvious deficiency.
Click to enlarge.
Aside from the two included modest 1 watt speakers, there are not many frills on this LCD. In fact, we found the speakers for this LCD extremely poor. They are difficult to hear and do not provide any sort of DSP. Using the forward headphone jack is also not suggested; there was a severely noticeable loss in signal quality. However, we buy an LCD monitor from which to see things not to hear.
Click to enlarge.
| Sharp LL-191A-B | |
| LCD | 19" SXGA LCD (Active Matrix) pixel pitch: 0.294mm Anti-glare coating |
| Scanning Frequency | Horizontal: 31-80kHz Vertical: 56-76Hz |
| Response Time | 16ms (Typical) |
| Contrast Ratio | 500:1 (Typical) |
| Compatibility | 1280 x 1024 (Native) |
| Brightness | 220 cd/m2 |
| Power | Working: 33W Standby/Off: 5W |
| Warranty | 3 years parts and labor |
There are two items that catch our eye immediately: 16ms response time and 33W working power consumption. Power consumption is considerably lower than our Samsung 193P from last month. The 16ms response time will be the large determining factor in whether or not this LCD is game worthy. Since our sample did not have a DVI connection, the LL-191A already has one major strike against it (serious gamers need only be reminded that the majority of GeForce 6800 cards are showing up without analog 15 pin D-sub connectors, and for a reason). In previous reviews, we have shown that gray-to-gray response time is much more important for die hard gamers than TrTf response time, which is listed in the specification above.
The listed brightness of 220 nits seems low, considering most of the LCDs that we have reviewed in the last 18 months have been 250 nits (or higher). However, a quick visual inspection reveals that the brightness seems about on par with our Dell 2001FP. Our Dell 2001FP is capable of a UXGA signal, whereas the LL-191A is only capable of SXGA (1280x1024).
The quality of our 191A was very good. We found no imperfections in the panel; no dead pixels or subpixels. Again, much like our Samsung 193P, production techniques seems strong enough at this point to assure very high yield rates on a 1280x1024 panel.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
11 Comments
View All Comments
KristopherKubicki - Thursday, May 20, 2004 - link
#10:How many 19" LCDs can you buy for 699 or less, and how many 20" LCDs can you buy for 1099 or less?
Kristopher
Fishie - Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - link
In the conclusion, the author writes that oen of the nagging features is the $699 USD price tag. Why is this a nagging feature? Dell's 1901FP is $719 USD and thier 2001FP it $1,045 USD. Are Dell's prices nagging features too? Are 19", 16ms LCDs usually cheaper?AlexWade - Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - link
I just got my LG 1910S with a S-IPS panel, and its great! Even though respons times are listed at 25 ms, I notice no ghosting in Far Cry at all! Although, the text is not as sharp as I like.Basse - Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - link
Nice review,On the 2nd page, Construction, there is a typo I believe. The header for the spec table says "Samsung LL-191A-B". Should be Sharp or...?
XRaider - Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - link
Good review. Dell seems to be much better though.To watch the mpegs.. just R click and do a "Save target as" and then open them up with Media player or whatever player you like to use that can watch .mpg's
KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - link
tfranzese: Should work now.Mithan: it could be; after a few years of DVI only it becomes a strain for me to go back to d-sub. Then again, some people may not be able to tell the difference (in the same way that some people cannot tell the difference between 20FPS and 60FPS). It really depends on what your eye perceives as acceptable.
Kristopher
tfranzese - Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - link
Kris, I don't think it's a codec problem, but here's what works...When I click the image I get sent to a new window with this url:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showimage.html?u=ht...
If I just paste this part into the browser I can download it just fine and watch it with no problem:
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/monitor/sharp/...
Just seems to be linked incorrectly or sent through a script incorrectly. Hope this is of help.
tfranzese - Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - link
Only thing I ever noticed on my Dell 1801FP (or whatever the model is, I'm to lazy to look it up, but you get my point) is that the DVI appeared to have better color. Gaming however, I wouldn't be able to say - thing has always been good to me gaming on analog because I use a KVM that doesn't have DVI.Mithan - Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - link
No DVI cable? So what.I bought a Samsung 172x and put it side by side with my existing NEC LCD 1765 (great for games BTW) and guess what? The DVI cable gave me virtually no improvement that I could notice.
Maybe it had something to do with running my 9700 Pro in dual monitor config? Anyways, I doubt it.
DVI is nice to have but I think you guys make a lot more out of it than it is worth.
KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - link
I will figure out whats wrong with them. they work for me but maybe i have an odd codec that makes them work (they are straight from my Sony DSC since thats the only thing i had for mpeg capture).Kristopher