Asus W3V display problem

I just got an Asus W3V and I have a problem with the display.
It shows a lot of small pink artifacts when displaying text. When I scroll down a page of text they disappear. But after a while they are back.
Does a display driver update solve this problem?
Also when I drag a small window with text across the desktop, the text 'gathers' more small artifacts. This is really annoying, and it is certainly not something I'd expect from such an expensive machine.

Please see attachment (Zipped BMP) for the artifacts. Please help me

 

looks like a problem with the video card or video drivers. I had the same problem right before my video card died (vram went bad), but to a much greater extent. The pink dots are always moving around right (they're not always in the same place)?

Try to reinstall the video card driver first; ATi just released a standalone mobility driver that will support the X600: http://www.ati.com/online/mobilecatalyst I'm using it right now and everything seems to be working fine, I'm trying to trace a startup problem that may or may not be associated with them though (explorer.exe randomly crashes on initial window load).

 

I'm wondering how well you guys would rate your screen color on your W3v. I have my laptop sitting right next to a Sony S series right now and its very noticable that the colors on the Sony screen are much much more vivid. My darker colors such as orange, green, and blue look very washed out. This is the same when comparing it to my Del 1900 FP lcd monitor. If you look at the orange on my LCD monitor and compare the exact same picture on my W3V, the color orange seems more peach than orange. I dont think i have a faulty W3V, but maybe some of you guys have had experience tweaking the settings?

 

You could change your color profile, for one.... you could go through the expensive of truly calibrating it, but I doubt that's really needed.

 

Yeah, the colors on my w3v look a little washed out too. I thought I had set my aim font color to a navy blue but when I looked at it on my CRT monitor I realized that it was really a greenish teal color.

 

That is NOT right for a notebook that costs $1889. Asus should be more considerate the screen and heat issues. I understand nothing is perfect, but HP or Compaq 14.1" WXGA is much better than Asus W3V or W3A.

 

how do you change your color profile? Is it in the ATI color options? I saw a button that said color profiles... but there dont seem to be any other options.

 

The best way IMHO is to use something like adobe gamma...you should get this tool for free if you have a copy of photoshop....there are also a number of tools on the web which do the samething. Basically they take you step by step thru calibration of your screen so that colours look they way they should...it also enable u to create an ICC profile for you screen. You can do this thru ati as well but it is less user friendly. Otherwise you can try loading a few of the different profiles that come with windows to see which one you like the most.
Good luck
a

ps correctly setting up colour profiles and getting printouts etc to look like they do on a variety of different screens etc is not always a simple task. Be prepared for some long nites and confusing help documents....at least thats what happend for me ...if your not a professional designer/photographer/artist etc I would say dont bother its not worth the hassel.
a

 

Thanks for the help, it turned out that just a reboot was enough. I'll keep this thread bookmarked in case the problem returns.

Sorry for making Asus look bad In fact the W3V is a great notebook and offers good value for money.

There is something else with the display however. When I'm in my room at night with no background light, the black (for example when starting Windows) of the TFT is not really black. There is a lot of light 'leakage' in the top and bottom of the screen. When I adjust the brightness to the level that the black is black, the screen is really dark.

I know there is another thread on this, so I'll check that out as well. But if you have any thoughts on this, please post.

 

With regard to the color. I found it looks great so did everyone who checked it out at the store. I had atleast a couple dozen people sit down and use this thing for a while before a few friendly thieves in our rapidly declining neighborhood decided to run away with it. Now we got a buzz lock. Anyways I think this is a similar issue with the z71v. This is a glossy type display and i expect it to look not like the rest. With that said i have to say the display looks great to me and every one of my coworkers. We are all hi end users, gamers, movie watchers and regular everyday users. When you rate the screen with all that in mind.......... I dont have a sony s5 to compare it to but again i have to say the display here is top notch. It seems alot of forum readers have differently high expectations of most products. No offence. Asus does target the hi end consumers and most of those consumers agree that they make top notch product. You cant please everyone. If you guys think the screen is not something you like many dealers offer an exchange policy i know we do.

 

i had the the z63a for one day and found the screen to be below par. it compares to hps dv1000 screen and the v2000 from compaq. I think the rest of the laptop was great but the color range contrast really isnt all that great compared to alot of notebooks. and the viewing angle no matter how much some people defend it is horrible try watching a dark move at any backlight level just horrible. U can litteraly move your lead up two inches and the screen looks like crap. But in asuses defence i havent seen even one 14.1 in wxga with a screen that had a good viewing angle i think its a flaw in that size for some reason. because as soon as you jump to the 15.4 inches the screens are far better im typing on a compaq 15.4 in right now and the colors and viewing angle blow the w3v out of the water. jusy my two cents. the w3v screen might be acceptable for some people but when the laptop cost almost 2 grand it really is a big factor to me. i would rather take some flaws in other areas of a notebook the screen is the most important part.

 

I wont defend the w3v. My oppinion is that its overpriced. But the z63a is a great value notebook. I recomend it to anyone in the market for a laptop in the range of 1200$. Again i think most people would like the screen on it alot. You have to weigh all the factors. Granted what you said is true.

 

You are right if it cost around 1200 its damn good laptop. i paid over 1700 for mine because of all the options i put in it. i hated to part with it because it was great build quality great size. i think maybe they should have put a good matte screen on it instead and maybe it would have avoided all the issues all together.

 

Agree 100%. That glossy screen was a bad move. If they put a matte screen on it like it should have got to begin with like they have on all their other whitebooks it would have got alot more recognicion. The m3np with 14" sxga+ had a superb screen for the short time it was out.

 

I, too, completely agree. Though my experiences are based on the W3V, the same thing goes that asus should have stayed off the glossy screens. It wasn't the reason I parted with it (that was heat) but I would have liked it a lot better with a normal, matte screen. But lol, do you guys remember all the hype about the glossy screens prior to the W3V's release? "More vibrant colors" etc. Whew!

P.S. Anyone still thinks I'm the French dude?

 

I have a similar problem - My colors are totally off. My greens look grey, etc. I tried playing around with the icc profiles but i dont know which one i should be setting it to. Any Suggestions? This is really irritating. i like the laptop alot but i use it mostly for web and graphics design, and if the colors are off I get messed up.
I'd appreciate any advice!

 

I wouldn't recommend using a glossy screen or a glossy, low res screen for Graphics. Because with glossies, you're going to get a different color and brightness whenever you move your head (especially when you're in the print industry, like I am). 1 inch up, 1 inch to the right, or whatever- if you're working on a piece, you straighten up your back to scratch it, boom- you've got a difference in color at that angle. Whatever you do on that screen, I guarantee your output will be totally off. It'll take you a bazillion hours to get used to your "handicap" in order for you to produce correct work.

 

If you can actualy sit there and suggest a matte type display to anyone in graphics, you're doing them a huge disservice. Anyone longer for proper color reproduction better picked a glaretype screen. The main reason graphics professionals stuck with CRT's as long as they did was that LCD's couldn't produce true blacks. If you can't produce true black, you can't produce any color as deep as it should be. Whether you've used a Sony or even and Asus, don't make it seem as though they *want* a matte display if they are in graphics. They may not prefer a glaretype display, but they certainly shouldn't be put off by one when the whole technology was designed specifically for graphics professionals.

 

Seriously, he's not. Glaretype screens are way to inaccurate for professional graphics use. In fact I have yet to see a single monitor targeted at this market with a glossy finish.

I'd rather say the whole technology was designed to suit the lowest common denominator. Make screen for cheap that prioritize what initially looks good for what in fact look right.

 

Not even even close. Graphics professionals were exactly what Asus' ACE view was designed for. Plain and simple. That was the first "glaretype" screen on the market and it was specifically designed to produce true blacks, just like the glaretypes today. "True Black" is precisely the reason to choose CRT over LCD.

Now - When we talk about other screen makers - I will totally agree they are selling "glossy screens" because that's what's going to sell. Sony has a huge problem with reflection becasue their screens don't have enough brightness, others are horrible because they don't have enough brightness and their coatings are horrible.

There are two things I know very well. Specific Asus stuff; like that of Asus and Fujitsu's ACE view partnership a couple years ago.......... and professional graphics. You have to calibrate any screen you're working on (CRT or LCD) but your comment is very inaccurate. a 14" widescreen like like both of us use on a W3 is too small for "graphics professionals" who are going to use the system all day long. However for production type work, most people aren't going to use something that small. For Architects and Photographers, the W1 has been the biggest seller in the last year as it's got the *best* matte type display around. Close to everyone of them that we had the chance to show the new W1 demo to, wanted that screen. In fairness we're talking about maybe 40-50 people who saw that screen, but they were all people with the current W1's who really loved those screens. If given nothing else, I have to agree that the W1's screen is perfect. The only problem is the 15.4" glaretype they were using in the demo was better. You've got to compare screens at the same size and res to get a good feel for them though.

 

Wouldn't know about the ACE view specifically (Where did they go, btw? I remember reading somewhere that those were s-ips panels which, if accurate, would likely account more for the good viewing angles and colour than the coating), and granted: For notebook applications many of the usual ways of improving a LCD monitor aren't applicable. I'm sure there are research going on with regards to coatings and polarizer films to make a better 'professional' screen for demanding customers and when working within the power, weight and space constraints that apply for a notebook there are obviously some tradeoffs that will have to be made. I'd still take the WSXGA+ of the M6V over any glossy screen I have personally seen to date, though. Some of them do, however, undoubtadly look good.

But in general (for a desktop monitor) glare, gloss, and reflections is exactly what those looking for true colour reproduction will *not* want, and they'll pay good money to be rid of it.

 

Yeah, bottom line the the ACE view panels destroyed my Sony professional series flat crt.......... they were only in the L5's and the SXGA+ was only in a special order of the L5Ga which only we had and only had for like a month and a half.... 100 panels are all that ever came to NA. Basically the only thing they had on the colorshine display is greater vertical viewing angles. We're talking 160 degrees instead of what I see on the W3 as about 60-65....... I'm told that has more to do with the widescreen format and the smaller 14" screen........ but regardless there was a difference.

The ACE view SXGA+ actually physically had almost a real glass covering on the front. That's something that I heard adding considerably to the price and the weight of the screen. Made it impractical to use on the lighter, cheaper systems.

The SXGA+ screen on the M6v is the screen that was on the W1..... it's the best matte type display, period. If I were to work all day on a notebook, I'd prefer a bigger screen and the W1 is great if you're sitting at a desk. I use a 23" widescreen that is just as good if not better than that W1 screen ----- it's a sony screen but the panel is a samsung just like the W1. But for absolute black (when set up correctly) - the glare type is still better. The ACE view just had a few things that were nicer but they were also a ton more expensive ($600 our cost to replace ...... compared to 300-400 for a normal screen of that size and res) ...

But we're not talking about the actual reflection and if you're getting a reflection even on your W3a, you're not using it correctly and I'll direct you to that demo that I did about the backlight levels. I hate when people talk about them that way because Sony gave them a bad name and dell, hp, etc makes it worse. It's all about balancing the ambient light. If it's balanced, ZERO reflection and perfect colors. If the screen is too dim for conditions, you'll see yourself. If it's too bright for conditions, you'll get the backlight bouncing (reflecting) off the front of the screen and unevenly lighting up the face of the screen.

You really have the same issues with CRT monitors now that I go back and check on my dying sony crt..... ACE view was the best thing I've ever laid eyes on, but today..... without the option for ACE view, if I place the W1 with the current screen next to the demo we had with the color shine in 15.4" ...... next to a crt monitor..... the color shine will win every time *side by side*. You'd have to have both and have them sit next to your crt to see the difference. I think I might try to find my L5 and bring my sony crt out from the grave yard and try to do another comparison.

 

I read somewhere that the z70v has the same screen as the W1 is that true and how does the z70v screen compare to the W1 cause i get my z70v tommorow

 

.... Yeah, you just read it above when I mentioned it.


Z70v = M6v

 

Yes it's the same. How does it compare? It's the same. The screen on my Z70v very good.

 

Thanks for giving the extra bit of info there Mike... Let me go as far as to say the exact screen that used to be used in the W1 is now being installed full time into the M6v/Z70v. All the great reviews about the W1's screen over the last year can be read when considering the Z70v as it is THE same screen.

 

One word - TAKE IT BACK!

It's a hardware problem, most likely video ram. I have exactly the same problem on my Toshiba Tecra S1, but much worse... that is, it started small, like yours, and only happened now and then. Also had strange 3D artifacts in games like UT2004 (weird texture corruptions and stuff).

Recently it's become heaps worse, and changes as I press down on the chassis. The only way I can make it go away is to give the laptop some selective physiotherapy and then try not to breathe on it once it's ok again!

See the attached GIF for an example of that you'll be up against if you leave it too long. Unfortunately I left mine until it was out of warrantly, because I just assumed it was a driver problem. It's NOT - it's hardware and you deserve to get your purchase replaced or fixed.

Good luck!

 

Wow.. that was a screen shot? Never seen a problem like that.... it's not the screen obviously... it's the graphics card.

 

Yup... vram problem I suspect. Here's another one taken just then for ya, after I tapped the chassis to wake the gremlins up again... Then a gentle massage and they go back to sleep for a bit...

By the way, do you know if I can get a Z71V in Australia? *hopes*

 

That's great news! I'll be getting the M6V I think. The screen issue is the clincher. Thanks!

 

Ok --- so you're getting a new system......... the system you're having problems with is a W3v? You said if you tap the chassis that goes away? If so, I'd bet you have a loose cable. I'm being very serious. After reading that and looking at the pictures, I've seen all of our systems do that at one point during production and it's always a loose wire going to the screen. Something easy to fix.

 

No it's a Toshiba. I thought you said you'd never seen a problem like that, and it must be the graphics card?

I'll check the screen cable anyway just in case, thanks.

 

No, I never saw a "problem" like that...... but I started visualizing the issue and realized those weird pixels on your screen are probably moving, correct? It sort of looks like interference? If so, it's just something I could see if I semi unplug my lcd cable from the motherboard...... so I thought maybe that could be your issue.

Also, thanks for clarifying that it was a toshiba..... since this was a w3 thread, it's very important to make that clear. If you did, I must not have picked up on it.

 

There is only one simple way test if its a hardware issue. Get a screen shot and see if the anomaly is still there. As far as i remember in a screen shot any anomalies will still be there. From what you described i ve seen the same exact thing many times mostly on desktops. It always did turn out to be a bad vga. I ve seen it on a z80k probably half a doszen times which eventually was narrowed down to a driver conflict. Solution was not to install the dx9 driver from the bundled asus disk if you installed from a windows disk what was prior to sp2. That was a weird one glad it did not resurface. I will test the screen shot theory in a few min. Have plenty of fried video cards here. Damn gamers always overclocking verheat:

 

Yep
If you take a screen shot with the anomalies present and save the file as a jpeg and open it on any other computer you will see the same anomalies. Speaking of that i just found a thread on our forums. Its long but who knows maybee this guys experience may help...... http://ynot2k.com/phpbb/nfphpbb/viewtopic.php?t=93&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=20
This person had artifacts and found a strange solution. When he told me i had my doubts but it seemed to work. I doubt you will be so lucky. Actually dont even try it. If you open it that voids the warranty for sure. If the anomalies are present on the screen shot i would say do a fresh install of windows on a separate partition. If the anomalies are there after you install the base driver send it back there is no other option. Contact asus support 510-739-3777 ext 5110
Ask for Albert he speaks "english". There is a toll free number also.....somewhere i have seen it! Anyone know it?