Inside CNET Labs Podcast

Read all 'HP 2009m' posts in Inside CNET Labs Podcast
June 23, 2009 6:00 AM PDT

Two 20-inch monitors vie for my (and your) attention

by Eric Franklin
  • Post a comment

The LG Flatron W2053TQ mocks you with its aspect ratio.

(Credit: Corinne Schulze/CNET)

A couple of months back, I asked what I thought was a pretty good question about the need for a 16:9 aspect ratio on a 20-inch monitor.

While I still feel there's little need, if any, for 16:9 on such a small screen, that doesn't mean said monitors can't be useful in their own right.

This week I take a look at the HP 2009m and the LG Flatron W2053TQ. Both are 20-inchers. Both include a 16:9 aspect ratio, which translates to 1600x900 resolution. Both also transform into kid-size robots and battle it out for your entertainment.

OK, the last one was a fib ("Transformers" on the brain this week), but if you really wanna know what I think of these two check out the reviews. Also take a look at the LCD computer monitor hub, for all things, well, LCD computer monitors.

The following products mentioned are available.

On Sale Now: $139.00 - $179.00
View the latest prices for HP 2009m

On Sale Now: $149.95 - $153.97
View the latest prices for LG Flatron W2053TQ

Originally posted at Crave
April 9, 2009 11:16 AM PDT

What's the benefit of 16:9 on a 20-inch monitor?

by Eric Franklin
  • 7 comments

(Credit: CBS Interactive)

I have a question: is having a 16:9 aspect ratio monitor (as opposed to 16:10) really all that beneficial? The answer is, "It depends."

If we're talking strictly about resolution benefits, the specific size of the screen matters greatly. For example, a 16:9, 21.5-inch monitor has a native resolution of 1920x1080, whereas a 16:10, 22-incher tops out at 1680x1050. That's an extra 309,600 pixels you'd have at your disposal on the 21.5-incher. Gaming, movies, Photoshop--virtually all apps would benefit from more pixels. Yes, even porn. Or so I hear...ahem.

On the flip side, a 16:9, 24-incher's max resolution is 1920x1080; however, a 16:10, 24-inch monitor has a higher native resolution of 1920x1200. To complicate matters a bit, Dell's smaller, 16:9 SP2309W is a 23-inch display with a 2048x1152 resolution.

So, clearly, for certain screen sizes there are resolution benefits to 16:9. Also, with a monitor capable of 1080p (1920x1080) resolution, you'll get to watch 1080p, high-definition content without it getting stretched or shrunk to fit the screen.

So that long-winded setup brings me to the HP 2009m: a 20-inch, 16:9 monitor with a maximum resolution of 1600x900. As a rule, 16:10 monitors at 20 inches have a max resolution of 1680x1050. So with a monitor this small, what's the real benefit in going to 16:9? Sure, high-def content (1080 and 720p) will fit better, but will there really be a huge difference in quality and in the experience you have?

Now, I just got the HP 2009m in this week and, while it's definitely pleasing to the eye, it doesn't boast many improvements over the HP w2007 we reviewed a couple years back--unless you consider 16:9 on a 20-inch monitor an improvement, since the w2007 had a 16:10 aspect ratio and 1680x1050 resolution. On HP's site, the newer 2009m costs $20 more. Are we really expected to pay $20 more (yes, a small difference, but still) for a lower-resolution monitor?

OK. Now, to be fair, I haven't tested the monitor yet. There could be many hidden benefits I'm not yet privy to--performance and power consumption being chief among the possibilities. I'll be sure to keep an eye out for any of those boons when I review the monitor in a couple of weeks. For now, check out the slideshow.

Originally posted at Crave
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
Subscribe to the Inside CNET Labs podcast

Subscribe to this podcast using an RSS reader other than iTunes

Subscribe to this podcast using iTunes

View all Inside CNET Labs episodes
advertisement

About Inside CNET Labs Podcast

"Inside CNET Labs" has two meanings. First, this podcast takes you behind the scenes of CNET's editorial process from a performance testing perspective. It will demystify CNET's performance testing process, allowing the listener an inside look at the good, the bad, and the ugly of performance testing. The second meaning gets equal attention--and sometimes more so--as we go inside the heads of CNET's San Francisco Labs staff, Eric Franklin and Dong Ngo, who will have opinionated discussions on subjects ranging from the insecurities of people to whether the existence of time can be proven. This is the stuff they've talked about every day for several years. Unfortunately for them (and fortunately for you, we hope), it's now being recorded.

Email us at insidecnetlabs@cnet.com.


Add this feed to your online news reader

Inside CNET Labs Podcast topics

More on Inside CNET Labs
CNET Labs posts in Crave blog
Dong Ngo's posts in Crave blog
How we test
The hosts of Inside CNET Labs
Eric Franklin Eric Franklin's colleagues once had the following to say to him: "Eric, you've been doing this performance testing thing for over 10 years now. How about you try something different?" To which Eric responded, "How about you shut the #%$@! up?" This candid attitude allows him to go toe-to-toe with the most extreme of personalities, including that of Dong Ngo. This bio was written by Eric Franklin.
Dong Ngo Dong Ngo is a knowledgeable, opinionated individual who wants to convince the world that he's just a normal person; but he hasn't had much success. According to him, this is because the world itself is abnormal. Dong loves traveling and is well-versed in several languages. He, unfortunately, is not so well-versed in English. Still, it's best to ask him questions. From networking and how to optimize your system, to turning a strange place into home or what the meaning of life is…most of the time, he has the answers. The question is: Will he make himself understood? Subscribe and find out!

Most Discussed