What type of monitor matrix is ​​better? Monitor matrix type AH-IPS. Types of LCD matrices

For a long time I was tormented by the question: what is the difference between the image of modern monitors with matrices TN, S-IPS, S-PVA, P-MVA. My friend ne0 and I decided to compare.

For tests, we took two 24 "" monitors (unfortunately, nothing was found on S-IPS: ():
- on a cheap TN matrix Benq V2400W
- on the P-MVA medium category matrix Benq FP241W.

Candidate characteristics:

Benq V2400W

Matrix type: TN+Film
inches: 24"
Permission: 1920x1200
Brightness: 250 cd/m2
Contrast: 1000:1
Response time: 5ms / 2ms GTG

Benq FP241W

Matrix type: P-MVA (AU Optronics)
inches: 24"
Permission: 1920x1200
Brightness: 500 cd/m2
Contrast: 1000:1
Response time: 16ms / 6ms GTG

Trends in recent years

Matrices TN (TN + film) improve in color reproduction, brightness and viewing angles.
*VA matrices (S-PVA/P-MVA) improve response time.

What progress has been made?

Even now you can watch movies on TN(TN+Film) matrices, work with color in editors.
On *VA, play games without motion blur.

But there are still differences.

Brightness

The Benq V2400W (TN) has its default color settings (RGB) set almost to the maximum. At the same time, in terms of brightness (at maximum settings), it does not reach * VA (at medium settings). In comparison with other TN monitors, the brightness of the V2400W is lower than that of the competitors (alas, we couldn't compare :)), but I can say with confidence that the brightness of *VA monitors will be higher than that of TN monitors.

In Benq FP241W (*VA), due to the brightness of the backlight, black is also bright. At TN - black remained completely black when we compared the on and off states of the monitors. This may not be available on other *VA models and is present on the TN. (waiting for comments with verification of this statement :))

Black color *VA does not interfere with work at all and is associated with black (thanks to our accustomed eyes :) and a good contrast ratio of 1000: 1 monitor). And the difference in black brightness is visible only in comparison (when one monitor is placed next to another).
Due to the high brightness, the colors on *VA seem a bit more saturated, and the white color is whiter on *VA - on TN, in comparison, it seems gray.
You yourself noticed this effect when, for example, you switched the color temperature on the monitor from 6500 to 9300, when your eyes were already accustomed to a different color temperature (probably here, most of the habra people got to change the temperature :)). But when the eyes get used again, on TN the white becomes white again :), and the other temperature is either bluer or yellower.

Colors

Colors on TN and *VA monitors can be well calibrated (so that the grass is green, the sky is blue, and the colors of the skin in the photographs do not turn yellow).

On TN monitors, close to each other bright and dark colors are worse distinguished (for example, bright blue with white, on clouds, close to black (4-5%) and white (3-5%)). The differences in these colors also change depending on the viewing angle, turning into a negative, or disappearing. But it seems that due to this, on TN monitors, black is really black.

*VA has a full range of colors - on a good video card and settings, all color gradients from 1 to 254 are visible, regardless of the viewing angle.

Photos on both monitors looked good and had reasonably saturated colors.

Both monitors have 16.7M colors (not 16.2 like some TNs) - the gradients looked identical with no color "misses".

Viewing angles

The first major difference between TN and *VA is the viewing angles of the monitors.

If you look at the TN monitor directly in the center, then the top and bottom of the screen starts to slightly distort (darken) the colors. This is noticeable on bright colors and dark colors - dark colors turn black and bright colors turn gray. To the left and right, the dimming from the corner is noticeably much less - which is most likely what pushes manufacturers to make monitors with a large diagonal wide (wide) :). Plus, because of this effect, some colors begin to move into others and merge.
From above and especially from below it is difficult to look at a TN monitor - low-contrast colors are distorted, faded, inverted and merge very strongly.

On *VA monitors, color distortion (or rather brightness) is also present. If you look at the monitor in the center at a distance of less than 40 cm, then on the white color you can see slight blanching at the corners of the monitor (see picture), which cover about 2-3% of the corners. Colors are not distorted. That is, if you look at the monitor from the largest angle of inclination, then the picture will not lose its colors, it will simply be slightly lightened.
Due to the lack of distortion *VA monitors are made to rotate 90 degrees.

Viewing video on TN from the sofa is possible, but it must be directed exactly at the viewers (vertically). With *VA, there are no problems with turning the screen towards the viewer, the film can be watched from almost any angle. The distortions are not significant.

Response time

The second main difference is the response time. Former.
Already, overdrive systems are marching at full speed - and if earlier it played a major role, now it has faded into the background.

TN monitors lead the way in this direction and are considered the best for gamers. The plumes on them are not visible for a long time. In the photographs, the square flying into the corner doubled.

*VA monitors look at TN heels. After playing Team Fortress 2, W3 Dota, Fallout 3, no distortions and blurry trails (blur-effect) were noticed. Watching the video was also a success. In the photographs, the square flying into the corner tripled.

Visually, in the test, if you look closely, the running square on the *VA matrix had only 1.1 times the tail.

What would I choose?

If you're trying to decide between S-IPS or *VA and don't know which to choose, then I recommend *VA, which you'll be very happy with. *VA is great for working with color - overpaying 2 times more for the name of the matrix and large viewing angles S-IPS, compared to *VA is not worth it - the difference in quality is not worth the money.

For gaming, office/internet work, photo browsing, basic picture, photo and video editing, and watching movies alone, the TN is great. Even with the necessary skill + specific SuperBright (Video) modes, you can watch movies on TN on the couch with slight, imperceptible color distortions (and why do they need a movie :)).

For processing photos, working with color in videos (you can mount it on TN in the right places, right?), Drawing on a tablet, * VA is better. As a bonus - you can watch movies perfectly on it, lounging in an armchair (high brightness to help). And it is just as convenient to play and do Internet / office affairs on it as on TN.

P.s. After buying *VA, I immediately noticed a purple gradient on the "Welcome screen" in Windows XP at the bottom left :), which I did not notice on the old TN.

Good day.

When choosing a monitor, many users do not pay attention to the matrix manufacturing technology ( matrix - the main part of any LCD monitor, which forms the image), and, by the way, the quality of the picture on the screen very much depends on it (and the price of the device too!).

By the way, many may argue that this is a trifle, and any modern laptop (for example) provides an excellent picture. But these same users, if they are put on two laptops with different matrices - notice the difference in the picture with the naked eye (see Fig. 1)!

Since quite a lot of abbreviations have appeared recently (ADS, IPS, PLS, TN, TN + film, VA) - it's easy to get confused in this. In this article, I want to briefly describe each technology, its pros and cons (it will turn out to be something in the form of a small reference article that will be very useful when choosing: monitor, laptop, etc.). So…

Rice. 1. The difference in the picture when the screen is rotated: TN-matrix VS IPS-matrix

Matrix TN, TN+film

The description of technical issues is omitted, some terms are "interpreted" in their own words so that the article is understandable and accessible to an unprepared user.

The most common type of matrix. When choosing inexpensive models of monitors, laptops, TVs - if you look into the extended characteristics of the device you choose, you will surely see this matrix.

Pros:

1. very short response time: Thanks to this, you will be able to observe a good picture in any dynamic games, films (and any scenes with a rapidly changing picture). By the way, for monitors with a long response time, the picture may start to "float" (for example, many complain about the "floating" picture in games with a response time of more than 9ms). For gaming, a response time of less than 6ms is generally desirable. In general, this parameter is very important and if you are buying a monitor for games - the TN + film option is one of the best solutions;
2. Affordable Price: This type of monitor is one of the most affordable.

Minuses:

1. poor color reproduction: many people complain about not bright colors (especially after switching from monitors with a different type of matrix). By the way, some distortion of colors is also possible (therefore, if you need to choose a color very carefully, then this type of matrix should not be chosen);
2. small viewing angle: Probably, many have noticed that if you approach the monitor from the side, then part of the picture is no longer visible, it is distorted and its color changes. Of course, TN + film technology improved this moment somewhat, but nevertheless the problem remained (although many may object to me: for example, it is useful on a laptop at the moment - no one sitting next to you can see exactly your image on the screen);
3. high probability of dead pixels: Probably, even many novice users have heard this statement. When a “broken” pixel appears, there will be a dot on the monitor that will not display the picture - that is, there will simply be a luminous dot. If there are a lot of them, then it will be impossible to work behind the monitor ...

In general, monitors with this type of matrix are quite good (despite all their shortcomings). Suitable for most users who love dynamic movies and games. It is also very good to work with text on such monitors. Designers and those who need to see a very colorful and accurate picture - this type should not be recommended.

Matrix VA/MVA/PVA

(Analogues: Super PVA, Super MVA, ASV)

This technology (VA - vertical alignment in English) was developed and implemented by Fujitsu. To date, this type of matrix is ​​not very common, but nevertheless, it is in demand among some users.

Pros:

1. one of the best black colors: when looking at the monitor surface perpendicularly;
2. more quality colors(overall) compared to TN matrix;
3. enough good response time(quite comparable to the TN matrix, although inferior to it);

Minuses:

1. higher price;
2. color distortion at a large viewing angle (this is especially noticed by professional photographers and designers);
3. possible “loss” of small details in the shadows (at a certain viewing angle).

Monitors with this matrix are a good solution (compromise) for those who are not satisfied with the color reproduction of a TN monitor and who need a fast response time. For those who need colors and picture quality, choose an IPS matrix (more on that later in the article ...).

IPS matrix

Varieties: S-IPS, H-IPS, UH-IPS, P-IPS, AH-IPS, IPS-ADS, etc.

This technology was developed by Hitachi. Monitors with this type of matrix are often the most expensive on the market. I think it makes no sense to consider each type of matrix, but it’s worth highlighting the main advantages.

Pros:

1. best color rendering compared to other types of matrices. The picture turns out "juicy" and bright. Many users say that when working on such a monitor, their eyes practically do not get tired (the statement is very controversial ...);
2. largest viewing angle: even if you stand at an angle of 160-170 gr. - the picture on the monitor will be just as bright, colorful and clear;
3. good contrast;
4. great black color.

Minuses:

1. high price;
2. long response time (may not suit some fans of games and dynamic films).

Monitors with this matrix are ideal for all those who need a high-quality and bright picture. If you take a monitor with a short response time (less than 6-5 ms), then it will be quite comfortable to play on it. The biggest downside is the high price...

Matrix PLS

This type of matrix was developed by Samsung (planned as an alternative to the ISP matrix). It has both its pros and cons...

pros: Higher pixel density, high brightness, lower power consumption.

Minuses: Low color gamut, lower contrast than IPS.

By the way, one last piece of advice. When choosing a monitor, pay attention not only to the technical specifications, but also to the manufacturer. I can’t name the best of them, but I recommend choosing a well-known brand: Samsung, Hitachi, LG, Proview, Sony, Dell, Philips, Acer.

On this note, I conclude the article, everyone has a good choice 🙂

Abbreviations are usually used to denote characteristics or specifics. In this case, there is a terrible confusion regarding the comparison of IPS and TFT screens, because IPS technology (matrix) is a type of TFT matrix and nothing more. It is impossible to compare these 2 technologies with each other.

BUT! There is TN-TFT technology - here you can make a choice and compare between it and IPS. Therefore, when we talk about which screen is better: IPS or TFT, we mean TFT screens in any case, but made on the basis of different technologies: TN and IPS.

Briefly about TN-TFT and IPS

TN-TFT is the technology behind the LCD matrix. Here, the crystals, when no voltage is applied to their cells, "look" at each other at an angle of 90 degrees. They are arranged in a spiral, and when voltage is applied to them, they turn in such a way as to form the desired color.

IPS - this technology is different in that here the crystals are arranged parallel to each other in a single plane of the screen (in the first case, spirally). It's all complicated... in practice, the difference between TN and IPS screens is that IPS displays blacks perfectly, resulting in a sharper and more saturated picture.

As for TN-TFT, the color reproduction quality of this matrix does not inspire confidence. Here, each pixel can have its own hue, hence the colors are distorted. IPS-matrices show the picture much better, and also handle colors more carefully. IPS also allow you to observe what is happening on the screen from a large angle. If you look at a TN-TFT screen at the same angle, the colors will be so distorted that it will be difficult to make out the picture.

Benefits of TN

However, TN-TFT matrices have their own advantages. The main one is the lower pixel response speed. IPS needs more time to rotate the entire array of parallel crystals to the desired angle. Therefore, when it comes to choosing a monitor for games or for displaying dynamic scenes, when drawing speed is very important, then it is best to choose screens based on TN-TFT technology.

On the other hand, during normal PC operation, the difference in pixel response time cannot be noticed. It is only visible when viewing dynamic scenes, which is often the case in action movies and video games.

Another plus is low power consumption. IPS-matrices are energy-intensive, because. to rotate the array of crystals, they need a lot of voltage. Therefore, TFT-based screens are better suited for mobile gadgets, where the issue of saving battery power is acute.

And yet - TN-TFT matrices are cheap. You won't find a monitor today (other than a used or CRT model) that is cheaper than a model based on TN technology. Any budget electronics device with a screen will definitely use a TN-TFT matrix.

So, which screen is better:TFT orIPS:

1. IPS are less responsive due to longer response times (bad for games and action scenes);
2. IPS guarantee almost perfect color reproduction and contrast;
3. IPS has a wider viewing angle;
4. IPS are energy intensive and consume more electricity;
5. They are also more expensive, while TN-TFTs are cheap.

That, in principle, is the whole difference between these matrices. Given all the advantages and disadvantages, then, of course, it is easy to come to a specific conclusion: IPS screens are much better.

Submit a reply

Before the mass adoption of smartphones, when buying phones, we evaluated them mainly by design and only occasionally paid attention to functionality. Times have changed: now all smartphones have approximately the same capabilities, and when looking only at the front panel, one gadget can hardly be distinguished from another. The technical characteristics of devices have come to the fore, and the most important among them for many is the screen. We will tell you what lies behind the terms TFT, TN, IPS, PLS, and help you choose a smartphone with the desired screen characteristics.

Matrix types

Three technologies for the production of matrices are mainly used in modern smartphones: two are based on liquid crystals - TN + film and IPS, and the third - AMOLED - on organic light emitting diodes. But before we start, it is worth talking about the acronym TFT, which is the source of many misconceptions. TFT (thin-film transistor) are thin-film transistors that are used to control the operation of each sub-pixel of modern screens. TFT technology is used in all the types of screens listed above, including AMOLED, so if somewhere it is said about comparing TFT and IPS, then this is a fundamentally wrong question.

Most TFT matrices use amorphous silicon, but TFT on polycrystalline silicon (LTPS-TFT) has recently been introduced into production. The main advantages of the new technology are the reduction of power consumption and the size of transistors, which makes it possible to achieve high pixel densities (more than 500 ppi). OnePlus One became one of the first smartphones with an IPS display and a LTPS-TFT matrix.

Smartphone OnePlus One

Now that we have dealt with TFT, let's go directly to the types of matrices. Despite the wide variety of LCD varieties, they all have the same basic principle of operation: the current applied to the molecules of liquid crystals sets the angle of light polarization (it affects the brightness of the subpixel). The polarized light then passes through a light filter and is colored in the color of the corresponding subpixel. The first to appear in smartphones were the simplest and cheapest TN + film matrices, the name of which is often abbreviated to TN. They have small viewing angles (no more than 60 degrees when deviated from the vertical), and even with small inclinations, the image on screens with such matrices is inverted. Among other disadvantages of TN-matrices are low contrast and low color accuracy. To date, such screens are used only in the cheapest smartphones, and the vast majority of new gadgets have more advanced displays.

The most common technology in mobile gadgets now is IPS technology, sometimes referred to as SFT. IPS-matrices appeared 20 years ago and since then have been produced in various modifications, the number of which is close to two dozen. Nevertheless, it is worth highlighting among them those that are the most technologically advanced and are actively used at the moment: AH-IPS from LG and PLS from Samsung, which are very similar in their properties, which even was the reason for litigation between manufacturers . Modern IPS modifications have wide viewing angles that are close to 180 degrees, realistic color reproduction and provide the ability to create displays with a high pixel density. Unfortunately, gadget manufacturers almost never report the exact type of IPS matrices, although when using a smartphone, the differences will be visible to the naked eye. Cheaper IPS matrices are characterized by fading of the picture when the screen is tilted, as well as low color accuracy: the image can be either too “acidic” or, on the contrary, “faded”.

As for power consumption, in liquid crystal displays it is mostly determined by the power of the backlight elements (smartphones use LEDs for this purpose), so the consumption of TN + film and IPS matrices can be considered approximately the same at the same brightness level.

Matrices created on the basis of organic light-emitting diodes (OLED) are completely different from LCDs. In them, the subpixels themselves, which are subminiature organic light-emitting diodes, serve as a light source. Since there is no need for external illumination, such screens can be made thinner than liquid crystal. Smartphones use a variation of OLED technology, AMOLED, which uses an active TFT matrix to drive sub-pixels. This is what allows AMOLEDs to display colors, while conventional OLED panels can only be monochrome. AMOLED matrices provide the deepest blacks, since it only requires completely turning off the LEDs to “display” it. Compared to LCDs, these matrices have lower power consumption, especially when using dark themes, in which the black areas of the screen do not consume power at all. Another characteristic feature of AMOLED is too saturated colors. At the dawn of their appearance, such matrices really had incredible color reproduction, and although such “childish sores” are long gone, most smartphones with such screens still have a built-in saturation setting that allows you to bring the image on AMOLED closer in perception to IPS screens.

Another limitation of AMOLED screens used to be the unequal lifetime of LEDs of different colors. After a couple of years of using a smartphone, this could lead to sub-pixel burnout and afterimage of some interface elements, primarily on the notification panel. But, as in the case of color reproduction, this problem is long gone, and modern organic LEDs are designed for at least three years of continuous operation.

Let's summarize briefly. The most high-quality and brightest image at the moment is provided by AMOLED matrices: even Apple is rumored to use such displays in one of the next iPhones. But, it should be borne in mind that Samsung, as the main manufacturer of such panels, keeps all the latest developments for itself, and sells “last year's” matrices to other manufacturers. Therefore, when choosing a smartphone not from Samsung, you should look towards high-quality IPS screens. But in no case should you choose gadgets with TN + film displays - today this technology is already considered obsolete.

The perception of the image on the screen can be influenced not only by the technology of the matrix, but also by the pattern of subpixels. However, with LCDs, everything is quite simple: in them, each RGB pixel consists of three elongated subpixels, which, depending on the modification of the technology, can be in the form of a rectangle or a “tick”.

Everything is more interesting in AMOLED screens. Since in such matrices the subpixels themselves are the light sources, and the human eye is more sensitive to pure green light than to pure red or blue, using the same pattern in AMOLED as in IPS would degrade color reproduction and make the picture unrealistic. An attempt to solve this problem was the first version of the PenTile technology, which used two types of pixels: RG (red-green) and BG (blue-green), consisting of two subpixels of the corresponding colors. Moreover, if the red and blue subpixels had a shape close to squares, then the green ones looked more like strongly elongated rectangles. The disadvantages of this pattern were "dirty" white color, jagged edges at the junction of different colors, and at low ppi - a clearly visible grid of the subpixel substrate, which appears due to too much distance between them. In addition, the resolution indicated in the characteristics of such devices was “dishonest”: if an IPS HD matrix has 2764800 subpixels, then an AMOLED HD matrix has only 1843200, which led to a visible difference in the clarity of IPS and AMOLED matrices with the naked eye, seemingly the same pixel density. The latest flagship smartphone with such an AMOLED matrix was the Samsung Galaxy S III.

In the Galaxy Note II smartpad, the South Korean company made an attempt to abandon PenTile: the device's screen had full-fledged RBG pixels, albeit with an unusual arrangement of subpixels. However, for unclear reasons, Samsung subsequently abandoned such a pattern - perhaps the manufacturer faced the problem of further increasing ppi.

Samsung has returned to RG-BG pixels in its modern screens with a new type of pattern called Diamond PenTile. The new technology made it possible to make the white color more natural, and as for the jagged edges (for example, individual red sub-pixels were clearly visible around a white object on a black background), this problem was solved even easier - by increasing the ppi to such an extent that the bumps were no longer noticeable . Diamond PenTile has been used in all Samsung flagships since the Galaxy S4.

At the end of this section, it is worth mentioning another picture of AMOLED matrices - PenTile RGBW, which is obtained by adding a fourth, white, to the three main subpixels. Before the advent of Diamond PenTile, such a pattern was the only recipe for pure white, but it never became widespread - one of the latest mobile gadgets with PenTile RGBW was the Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 tablet. Now AMOLED matrices with RGBW pixels are used in TVs, because they do not require a high ppi. To be fair, we also mention that RGBW pixels can also be used in LCDs, but we are not aware of examples of the use of such matrices in smartphones.

Unlike AMOLED, high-quality IPS matrices have never experienced quality problems associated with sub-pixel patterns. However, Diamond PenTile technology, together with high pixel density, allowed AMOLED to catch up and overtake IPS. Therefore, if you are picky about gadgets, you should not buy a smartphone with an AMOLED screen, which has a pixel density of less than 300 ppi. At a higher density, no defects will be noticeable.

Design features

The variety of displays of modern mobile gadgets does not end with imaging technologies alone. One of the first things that manufacturers took up was the air gap between the projection-capacitive sensor and the display itself. This is how the OGS technology appeared, combining the sensor and the matrix in one glass package in the form of a sandwich. This gave a significant breakthrough in image quality: the maximum brightness and viewing angles increased, color reproduction was improved. Of course, the thickness of the entire package has also been reduced, allowing for thinner smartphones. Alas, the technology also has drawbacks: now, if you break the glass, it is almost impossible to change it separately from the display. But the quality advantages still turned out to be more important, and now non-OGS screens can only be found in the cheapest devices.

Recently, experiments with the shape of glass have also become popular. And they began not recently, but at least in 2011: HTC Sensation had a glass concave in the center, which, according to the manufacturer, was supposed to protect the screen from scratches. But such glasses reached a qualitatively new level with the advent of “2.5D screens” with glass curved at the edges, which creates the feeling of an “infinite” screen and makes the edges of smartphones smoother. Such glasses are actively used by Apple in their gadgets, and recently they have become more and more popular.

A logical step in the same direction was the bending of not only the glass, but also the display itself, which was made possible by using polymer substrates instead of glass ones. Here the palm, of course, belongs to Samsung with its Galaxy Note Edge smartphone, in which one of the side edges of the screen was curved.

Another way was proposed by LG, which managed to bend not only the display, but the entire smartphone along its short side. However, LG G Flex and its successor did not gain popularity, after which the manufacturer abandoned the further production of such devices.

Also, some companies are trying to improve human interaction with the screen, working on its touch part. For example, some devices are equipped with sensors with increased sensitivity that allow you to work with them even with gloves, while other screens receive an inductive substrate to support styluses. The first technology is actively used by Samsung and Microsoft (formerly Nokia), and the second by Samsung, Microsoft and Apple.

The future of screens

Do not think that modern displays in smartphones have reached the highest point of their development: technology still has room to grow. One of the most promising are quantum dot displays (QLED). A quantum dot is a microscopic piece of a semiconductor in which quantum effects begin to play a significant role. Simplified, the process of radiation looks like this: the impact of a weak electric current causes the electrons of quantum dots to change energy, while emitting light. The frequency of the emitted light depends on the size and material of the dots, so that almost any color in the visible range can be achieved. Scientists promise that QLED matrices will have better color reproduction, contrast, higher brightness and lower power consumption. Partially, quantum dot screen technology is used in Sony TV screens, and prototypes are available from LG and Philips, but there is no talk about the mass use of such displays in TVs or smartphones.

It is also highly likely that in the near future we will see in smartphones not just curved, but also fully flexible displays. Moreover, almost ready for mass production prototypes of such AMOLED matrices have been around for a couple of years. The limitation is the electronics of the smartphone, which is still impossible to make flexible. On the other hand, large companies can change the very concept of a smartphone by releasing something like the gadget shown in the photo below - we just have to wait, because the development of technology is happening right before our eyes.

With the development of display technologies, users have more and more questions when choosing a suitable monitor. In addition to its physical dimensions, in particular the diagonal of the visible zone, it is necessary to select the type of matrix and related parameters - contrast, color reproduction, response time, and so on. Choosing a monitor, understanding all these subtleties, will not be difficult if you first study the principles of its operation and the main characteristics of its main component - the matrix, which will be discussed below.

Comparison of matrix types at different viewing angles

General information about displays and their components

A computer monitor, for all its apparent simplicity, is a very technically complex component, which, like the rest of the hardware, has many different parameters, manufacturing technologies, and characteristics. Almost all PC displays consist of the following parts:

• case, which contains all the electronic stuffing. The case also has mounts for mounting the display on vertical or horizontal surfaces;
• matrix or screen - the main component of the monitor, on which the output of graphic information depends. In modern devices, various matrices for monitors are used, which differ in many parameters, among which resolution, response time, brightness, color reproduction and contrast are of paramount importance;
• power supply - part of the electronic circuit responsible for converting current and powering all other electronics;
• electronic components on special boards responsible for converting the signals received on the monitor and their subsequent output to the display for display;
• other components, which may include a low-power speaker system, USB hubs, and so on.

The totality of the main parameters of the display, on the basis of which it is made, predetermines the scope of its use. Inexpensive consumer monitors can be equipped with screens with not the most impressive characteristics, since such devices are often inexpensive and are not required for professional graphics applications. Displays for professional gamers must first of all have a minimum delay in displaying information, since this is critical in modern games. Displays for graphics editors used by designers are distinguished by the highest levels of brightness, color reproduction and contrast, because the exact reproduction of the picture plays the most important role here.
Currently, the displays found on the market, as a rule, use several types of matrices. You can find a large number of monitors in datasheets, but this variety can be based on the same basic technologies, improved or slightly modified to improve their performance. These main types of screens include the following.

1. "Twisted Nematic" or TN matrix. Previously, the prefix "Film" was added to the name of this technology, meaning an additional film on its surface, which increases the viewing angle. But this designation is less and less common in descriptions, since most matrices produced today are already equipped with it.
2. "In-Plane Switching" or IPS matrix type, as the more common name in the abbreviated form.
3. "Multidomain Vertical Alignment" or MVA matrix. A more modern incarnation of this technology is referred to as the VA matrix. This technology also has its advantages and disadvantages and is something in between those presented above.
4. "Patterned Vertical Alignment". A variation of MVA technology that was developed as a competitive answer to its creators, Fujitsu.
5. Plane-to-Line Switching. This is one of the newest types of display matrices, which was developed relatively recently - in 2010. The only downside to this type of sensor, while otherwise outperforming competing technologies, is the relatively long response time. Also, the PLS matrix has a very high cost.

Matrix TN, TN+film

The TN matrix type is one of the most common and at the same time it is a very outdated technology for their manufacture by modern standards. It was with this type of matrices that the victorious march of liquid crystals began to replace cathode ray tubes. It is worth noting that their only indisputable advantage is their extremely short response time, and in this parameter they surpass even more modern counterparts. Alas, this type of matrices does not differ in other critical parameters for a monitor - image contrast, its brightness and permissible viewing angles. In addition, the cost of monitors based on this development is low and we can say that this is another plus of the Twisted Nematic technology.
The reason for the main shortcomings of "Twisted Nematic" lies in the very technology of their production and the structure of optical elements. In TN matrices, the crystals between the electrodes (each of which is a separate pixel of the visible zone) are arranged in a spiral when voltage is applied to them. The amount of light passing through it depends on the degree of its rounding, and a picture on the screen is formed from a multitude of such elements. But due to the uneven formation of the spiral in each element of the matrix, the level of contrast of the image displayed on it drops very much (Fig. 1). And given that the refraction of light when passing through the formed spiral is very different from the direction of view, the viewing angle of such a matrix is ​​very small.

Rice. 1. Comparison of IPS and TN matrices

VA/MVA/PVA displays

The VA matrix was developed as an alternative to the popular TN technologies at the time and already won the loyalty of users, although not yet as widespread in the IPS market. The developers positioned its main competitive advantage as the response time, which at the time of introduction to the market was about 25 ms. Another important advantage of the new technology was the high level of contrast, which was ahead of similar indicators in the manufacturing technologies of TN and IPS matrices.
This technology, which was originally called "Vertical Alignment", also had a very significant drawback in the form of relatively small viewing angles. The problem was hidden in the structure of the optical elements of the matrix. The crystals of each matrix element were oriented along the voltage lines or parallel to them. This led to the fact that the viewing angle of the matrix was not only small, but also the image could differ depending on which side the user was looking at the screen from. In practice, this led to the fact that the slightest deviation of the viewing angle led to a strong gradient filling of the image on the screen (Fig. 2).

Rice. 2. Viewing angles of an MVA monitor

It was possible to get rid of this shortcoming with the development of technology in the “Multidomain Vertical Alignment”, when groups of crystals inside the electrodes were organized into a kind of “domain”, as it is shown in the title. Now they began to be placed differently within each domain that makes up a whole pixel, so the user could look at the monitor from different angles and the image did not change much.
Today, displays with MVA screens are used for working with text and are practically unsuitable for dynamic images, which are typical for any modern game or movie. High contrast, as well as viewing angles, allow those who work, for example, with drawings, print and read a lot, to work confidently with them.

Do not confuse the contrast of the matrix and such a thing as the dynamic contrast of the monitor. The latter is a technology for adaptively changing the screen brightness depending on the displayed image and uses the built-in backlight for this. The latest LED-backlit monitors have excellent dynamic contrast ratios because the turn-on time of the LED is very short.

IPS screen

The TFT IPS matrix was developed taking into account the elimination of the main shortcomings of the previous technology - "Twisted Nematic", namely small viewing angles and poor color reproduction. Due to the peculiar arrangement of the crystals in the TN matrix, the color of each pixel varied depending on the direction of view, so the user could observe an "iridescent" image on the monitor. The TFT IPS matrix consists of crystals that are located in a parallel plane to its surface, and when voltage is applied to the electrodes of each element, they turn at a right angle.
The subsequent development of technology has led to the appearance of such types of matrices as Super IPS, Dual Domain IPS and Advanced Coplanar Electrode IPS. All of them, one way or another, are based on the same principle with the difference only in the arrangement of liquid crystals. At the dawn of its appearance, the technology was distinguished by a significant minus - a long response time of up to 65 ms. Its main advantage is amazing color reproduction and wide viewing angles (Fig. 1), at which the picture on the screen was not distorted, inverted, and an unwanted gradient did not appear.
Monitors with an IPS matrix are in great demand today and are used not only in PC displays, but also in portable devices - tablets and smartphones. They are also used mainly where the color of the picture and its most accurate transmission are important - when working with graphic software, in design, photography, and so on.

Often, many users confuse the abbreviations IPS or TFT, although in fact, these are fundamentally different concepts. "Thin Film Transistor" is a general technology for creating liquid crystal arrays, which can have various implementations. "In-Plane Switching" is a specific implementation of this technology, based on the peculiar construction of individual elements of the matrix and the arrangement of liquid crystals in it. The TFT matrix can be based on TN, VA, IPS or other technology.

Matrix PLS

The PLS matrix type is the cutting edge of the development of technologies for their creation. Samsung, the developer of this unique technology, set itself the goal of producing matrices that are significantly superior in parameters to the competing technology - IPS, and in many respects it succeeded. The undoubted advantages of this technology include:

• one of the lowest current consumption rates;
• high level of color reproduction, fully covering the sRGB range;
• wide viewing angles;
• high density of individual elements - pixels.

Among the shortcomings, it is worth highlighting the response time, which does not exceed similar indicators in the Twisted Nematic technology (Fig. 3).

Rice. 3. Comparison of PLS ​​(right) and TN (left)

Important! When choosing which type of monitor matrix is ​​better, you should first of all decide on the tasks, since in many cases the purchase of the most modern display may not be economically justified. The latest developments with high response time will be useful for professional games or watching dynamic scenes in videos.

WATCH VIDEO

Monitors with a high level of color reproduction are suitable for designers and artists. And if you need an inexpensive monitor for surfing the net and working with text, then options based on old, but time-tested technologies are suitable.