oh, so do you think i would go wrong with buying this one? 
care to elaborate, if you have access to that review? Whatâs the difference from the U2312HM?
i had it tested myself. sent it back due to the following problems (IPS-related):
- image homogeneity is quite bad, several âpatchesâ all over the screen
- bad yellowish tinges that form half circles originating from the sides of the screen (black background)
- very harsh anti-glare coating (LG panel)
- right side has a yellow tinge to it, left side a magenta tinge (white background)
- gaming: ghosting apparent
That sounds like a defective model, as I have none of them with my U2312HM. I wanted to know, if u read the review on prad.de, why they gave it a +/+ compared to the +/- of the U2312HM.
Gonna get the U2312HM tomorrow, will give my feedback during the weekend.
ati: that is because the u2212hm had a smaller frame change time / image construction time. but i still think that ips panels are not really en par with tn panels regarding frame change time, ghosting etc.
by the way, my model was not defective. those are typical problems of cheaper ips panels combined with the hard anti-glare coating of lg panels (3h). it will give you a yellow tinge and yellowish stripes or clouds on the sides. this was a major problem with browsing and text editing because of the white backgrounds.
try it at night: completely darken the room, then go to http://jasonfarrell.com/misc/deadpixeltest.php?p=1 (black) and http://jasonfarrell.com/misc/deadpixeltest.php?p=2 (white), go in full screen mode (F11). you should be able to see what i mean.
how smaller?
btw I just tried the links on my monitor and I donât see the defects you reported.
have you tried them in the dark and with the browser in full screen mode so that the colors cover the whole screen?
maybe you are not sensitive to there problems. but every LG IPS-panel has those problems.
the image construction time from there and back will be 16.5 ms on the 2312, that is how prad reaches its 9.3 ms latency (half of the image construction time + input lag).
Yes I did, and I also have a 37" LG IPS HDTV that doesnât have the problem, and it has a LG panel.
9.3ms on the 2312HM, how much is that on the 2212HM?
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2212hm.htm
Here it seems the 2212HM does not perform well at all regarding input lag. 23.8ms against 0.6 of its brother.
MLG is using benq gl2450hm monitors
Anyone have a review or experience with them?
ati7500: the tftcentral measurement was faulty. the dell was the last lcd to be reviewed with a flash-based counter which is basically useless. after the dell, the started to use smtt 2.0 which is the only viable lag measurement method besides an oscilloscope.
all three dell ips monitors have a very low input lag (which is around 1-3 ms). but that is not the only important thing. frame change time (building up luminosity of a new frame, which is influenced by the actual âpixel response timeâ) is as important. and ips panels donât do that well in this category, adding about 8-10 ms to the overall âlatencyâ (as measured by prad.de for example).
So, do you think the u2312hm is a bad monitor for gaming? Specially for fighters, SF and Tekken.
The input lag of the EVO monitor have been reported to be around 9ms, with no mention of the frame change time, which could add up to the final result.
If the U2312HM has input lag + frame change time equal to 9ms, thatâs still AT BEST on par with the EVO monitor.
Also, they tested BOTH Dellâs with the flash-based counter so even if this method is not 100% accurate it can still point out differences between 2 different monitors.
In addition:
Input lag is described as the lag between the output from a graphics card and the image which is displayed on the screen you are using. For LCD screens this should not be confused with pixel response time which describes the speed at which a pixel can change from one orientation to another. Pixel response times impact aspects such as motion blur and ghosting in moving images.
Ghosting on Dell U2312HM is not apparent, therefore the extreme low measure of the input lag makes it an excellent choice for gaming IMHO.
first of all: you donât have to explain the difference between input lag and response time to me, i did that in my post already when i talked about both of them separately, didnât i? 
the dell at tftcentral was tested with a stopwatch program + vsync enabled, it gives out random numbers and does, in fact, NOT allow comparison between the models.
again, i just want to make the argument that a input lag near zero will not guarantee you a perfect gaming experience if the panel is too slow. a low lag will not be sufficient if the movement is all blurry, broadly speaking.
(a good example would be the 120hz monitor lg w2363d which features a input lag of 0 ms while in thru-mode, but the panel is quite slow and thus, the monitor shows quite a bit of blur and ghosting. luminance needs more than 1 frame to reach the desired level. so IMHO not really good for competitive play.)
the dell monitors do show some blur and ghosting, i tested them myself. especially, they will show dark trails which will be more observable than lighter ones (see the tftcentral reviews).
i did not say, however, that they are not good for gaming. i just wouldnât use them for professional tournaments or if the monitor will be solely used for gaming. if you can cope with the deficiencies of cheap IPS panels (bleeding, glow, tints, grainy coating etc.) and also use your monitor for browsing etc., then why not buy it.
-> i would strongly recommend everyone to try a screen out. always buy from stores that give you a good return policy. if youâre happy with it, regardless of all discussion about flaws, lag and frame change time, keep it.
just my 2 ct.
Iâve always thought that response time didnât matter much (mostly just focused on the input lag tests), 2 questions about response time:
1- Is the response time given by the TV manufacturers measured by a universal method? i.e the number given is actual Useful? Because for stuff like contrast ratio you canât compare between two different brands because those companies manipulate and use different test methods to come up with a bigger number and list them in the TVâs spec sheet, but at the end of the day itâs useless to compare with other brands.
2- How much response time do you think is ideal for gaming? Do you use numbers given by the company directly through spec sheets or numbers provided in professional reviews?
0 - remember that only input lag tests that use a) an oscilloscope (i.e., prad) or b) smtt 2.0 + crt (i.e., tftcentral since december 2011) are accurate. every other method is flawed and will show random results. many reviewers still use a stopwatch + vsync enabled + crt, which is useless.
1 - no. response time given by the manufacturers is not the actual frame change time in most cases. just have a look at the reviews from prad.
1b - also remember that most panels with very low actual response times use an overdrive function which can lead to reverse ghosting and other artifacts if too aggressive.
2 - response time has to do with the time that a display needs to build up the luminance of a new frame above a certain threshold. and if that takes some time, you will experience motion blur, ghosting etc. and that is quite relevant for fast-paced games like certain shooters or fighting games, for example.
why fighting games?
because low lag does not solve a blurry picture or ghosting, and it will be a problem for some players if your characterâs movement shows blur or ghosting.
for example: viewsonic vx2336s which has some lag (but < 1 frame) and, in addition, shows some blur/ghosting: [media=youtube]LDemGrboF0c[/media]
8ms of pixel response time is not âtoo slowâ, it is still half a frame for godâs sake 
Could you point out a 60Hz monitor which has input lag+response time inferior to 8ms?
Iâd like to add that, for fighting games as SSF4 where precise timing for inputs as links is very important, blur doesnât really matter as long as itâs not distracting. Once you have a certain link or a mixture of chains/links memorized in your muscle memory, all you want to make sure is that there is the least amount of input lag as possible.
More important than the pixel response time, in my opinion, would be the stability of the input lag. If a monitor averages 16ms of input lag but varies constantly between 8ms and 24ms, that would be an absolutely horrible monitor for fighting games. If a monitor keeps 16ms constantly, although delayed by 1 frame, it is much more recommendable.
ati: good point about the stability of the input lag. sadly, most reviewers that use one of the two acceptable methods do not seem to point that out.
and indeed, frame change time is not that important for fighting games. but remember, the dell u2412m, for example, takes 2 whole frames most of the time to achieve a complete change in brightness (fall and rise). see http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2011/review-dell-u2412m-part13.html#Response
that is why i suggested that everyone interested in a specific monitor that seems to be well suited should just give it a try :-).
[media=youtube]9A3Fx4l_eP8[/media]
Comments on this?