| Starts 9am |
|---|
| AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT 4.5GHz 6 Cores 12 Threads AM4 CPU - $339 |
| Starts 11am |
|---|
| Lenovo ThinkPad L13 13.3" 1080p IPS i5-10210U 8GB 256GB SSD W10P Laptop - $899 Free Shipping |
| Starts 12pm |
|---|
| Intel Core i5-10400F 4.3GHz 6 Cores 12 Threads LGA 1200 CPU - $199 |
| Crucial P1 1TB 2000MB/s 3D NAND NVMe M.2 SSD - $129 |
Those sizes are measurements (diagonal) taken on the viewable portion of the screen only. This graphics shows how exactly
yeah i know that is the diagonal measurements..
But that is not my question I was asking though..
Read my question again..
Are all these measurements exactly 23.6, 23.8, 24 etc?
Or they actually are all the same size but some manufacturers decided to round up to 24, or listed it as 23.6, or list as 23.8 etc..
So we can safely assume all the monitors will have the same exact size, or will there be a slightly smaller size difference?
The reason I ask is because few years ago, manufacturers were selling 24" monitors, listed as 24" monitors
but now they are listing it as 23.8 or 23.6 etc.. ie they were rounding these measurements up, and just listed it as 24"
but now decided to list the actual measurement (without rounding up).
So if we already have an existing 24", can we assume a 23.6" or 23.8" will both be exactly the same size or should we be aware that the 23.6" will actually be exactly 23.6 and a 23.8 will be exactly 23.8 and therefore the windows will be slightly smaller when we stretch a window across those screen sizes (and therefore it will not look as good).
And if we were to buy this 23.6, and a 23.8
we should expect that they will have a slight size difference and not look as good, if we stretch an image across the 2 screens..
This question is important for things like
racing simulator games, flight simulator games etc..
Hope you get the gist of what I am asking here.
it was historically because
the image device / glass / drawing panel was manufactured in sets 15" 17" 19" 21" 24" etc
However due to the physics of making that panel stay still in the frame portions are covered by the border frame.
Only a small number of manufacturers are capable to produce the viewing device and all the tier brands Lenovo, Dell, etc purchase those and then put their own touch onto making the monitor frames/bases.
This means all the raw materials are set ie 24" then the brands put their own touches on
but due to ethics in marketing sellers must declare Viewable Area! in most cases 23.x" is viewable area with the frame covering a stagnant sized panel preventing a full 24" viewable display.
Some tier 1 brands typically the manufacturers offer frameless near 100% viewable areas, but to prevent tier 2 brands offering near 100% 24" viewable they continue to limit raw materials to the 24" and the producers therefore must accept the 23.x" abnormality.
@cski: so are you saying 24" monitors sold as 24" years ago, are exactly 24"
and the ones sold nowadays are exactly 23.6 or 23.8
and I should not expect these to align or these would be be slightly smaller than 24" bought years ago?
should 23.6 be considered grade 3
and 23.8 grade 2
and exactly 24" are no longer selling nowadays?
I see big brands like samsung also selling 23.8" with very small bezels nowadays and don't see any 24" listed monitors anymore
so if I got a older 24" samsung, I should expect it to be slightly bigger than the 23.8" samsung (which means it would cause a slight size mismatch in racing sims etc?
so are you saying 24" monitors sold as 24" years ago, are exactly 24"
I don't think this was always the case. It depends on the manufacturer and how close the tolerances were when it came to declaring how big the actual viewable area was at the time of writing the marketing materials.
An old-ish Dell 24 inch monitor (decade old) I measured recently didn't have exactly 24inches of viewable area — they were allowed to sell at as a 24inch class device despite that shortchanging, because back then laws might've been more lax or perhaps it was just overlooked.
@scrimshaw: I'm with you though my first monitor was an amstrad 17 Inch and it was 17 inches with the ruler, but when i got a replacement IBM Think 17 Inch monitor it was only 16 Inches by ruler
the CRT though as you got closer to the edges the variances caused by the ray tube would cause unbalanced curvatures and wavy images around the last 1 inches. LCD marketing promised this would not occur,
unsurprisingly this marketing was based on the fact the last inch was hidden lol :)
@pinkybrain: not really forgive the history lesson, but 24" monitor used to be curved glass in front of a Cathode Ray Tube.
The glass usually was 24 inches but the plastic covered up at least 1/2 Inch on all sides.
The old ones were taller and not as wide (ratio 4:3 16:12) vs todays current ratio 16:9 but you would recognise diagonal size is used to accommodate this variation adapts regardless of ratio.
LED LCD still has this dilemma 24 Inch Liquid Panel, to prevent panel just flopping out to the floor at least 0.1" on all sides is hidden adding up to the approximate common 23.768" remainder
https://www.omnicalculator.com/math/diagonal-of-rectangle?c=…
Crucial P1 1TB 2000MB/s 3D NAND NVMe M.2 SSD - $129
I think that's good price
60hz on the Philips B Line 288B9RN
Philips 23.6" out of stock now
Why are different monitors listed as 23.6", 23.8" and 24"?
Are those monitors actually those sizes
or we can assume that they are all the same size but some manufacturers just listed them differently?
If we already got 24" monitor, does it mean we will see a slightly smaller and misalign image if we stretch it across the screens
due to the 23.6" or 23.8" size difference?