Why differ notebook LCDs from desktop LCDs in quality

There is a noticable difference in quality between notebook LCDs and desktop LCDs. All notebooks I had had flaws in image quality, these flaws are often brightness, color reproduction and grainyness.

The desktop LCDs I've encountered have been very good. The brightness is good, color reporudction very vibrant. Notebook LCDs often seem to have problem to reproduce the color red correctly. While desktop LCDs and CRTs get a deep vibrant red, notebooks often suffers from having an orange tint in the maximum red color thus no deep red color. Green also often gets too bright and as deep. The general opinion is that the colors appears more washed out on a notebook while the desktop LCD can handle this.

Wouldn't the technology used in desktops be applicable for notebooks as well?

 

You might be on to something. Notebooks would be lower power consumption for obvious reasons. Also because of weight or size limitations could affect materials/construction and therefor quality. Can't even compare CRT's.

 

It's just the technology behind them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_LCD_matrices

Plus IPS draws more power making it not practical for laptops.

 

Weight and reliability are some factors. Laptop parts have to be more robust, unlike a desktop monitor which may never move from its initial spot after it is setup.

 

Well for one it seems its hard to find a non-glossy laptop screen these days but its still common for desktop displays to be matte so thats one big difference.

The next big difference is pixel pitch. My 15" screen on my laptop has a 1680x1050 resolution on it, while a 15" desktop will probably be much lower. There are laptop screens with lower resolutions also, so its not always this way but the higher resolution and smaller pixel pitch goes with the idea that your so close to the screen.

Notebooks screens have no direct connections like hdmi/vga/dvi ports so you cant use them for incoming video directly without first going threw other hardware and software like a video capture card.

Those are the main things I can think of, and its all on a sliding scale, there are very high quality desktop monitors and very low quality. The technology can vary between them, same goes for laptops.

So final answer is the quality may not vary at all from desktop to laptop, at some point they will meet and overlap due to that sliding scale of quality.

 

ViciousXUSMC, I agree it is a sliding scale. But I think the desktop always wins for the reasons said? Yes/no?

 

first of all, desktop monitors use much more powerful backlight lamps.
secondly, specifications vary.

 

I dunno hard to say, I have read allot more issues with dead pixels and backlight bleed in desktop monitors than I have laptops. However that can simply be due to the fact there are more of them in use.

I mean when I was working on the wiki at widescreen hunting for reviews the amount of bad feedback on desktop monitors was outstanding with banding issues, bleed issues, bad component inputs. However as far as laptops I have only had a few that really seem to have issues.

Large part due to the fact that laptops use a much smaller spectrum of panels/parts vs desktops, and when it comes to desktops for the most part you get what you pay for.

Just be sure to do your research, as much as possible on a product and similar products to make sure your not paying too much, or not getting a cheap product.

I prefer IPS over TN's for the color quality and I prefer big to small thus why I use a 37" monitor at home.

I am also tempted to get a HD projector one of these days, once you get a big screen it becomes an addiction and I cant wait to play my Wii on a 130" screen.

 

I would agree. Power and volume are what limit every piece of hardware in a laptop compared to a desktop. For now a desktop LCD will certainly be capable of displaying a wider range and more accurate representation of colour. The glossy display found on so many laptops now is there to compensate for the limited contrast and brightness you get on a laptop screen. It's a bit of a smoke and mirrors show (no pun intended) but it seems to work.

I don't know of any laptop that has an IPS panel in it. Not saying it doesn't exist, just that I never heard of one. And since IPS is the shizzle when it comes to LCDs, I'd say desktop wins

 

Some Thinkpad models featured IPS panels from ID-Tech (went bankrupt and was taken over by another panel manufacturer from what I know), all other I've seen are 6-bit TN panels (eg. they do NOT reproduce 16M colors), probably because it is much harder to fabricate high brightness/contrast pixels so small... Also I think the heavy competition in the notebook sector has caused a shift to (cheap) TN panels (most people buy their stuff based on specs & advice, instead of actually testing it anyway)...

 

I'll be honest this panel in the c90s is amazing, and I hear great things about the other high end Asus panels I cant tell the difference from this and my S-IPS at home. This screen has great colors and great brighness so much so that even using it at work like I always do it makes all the other desktop monitors at work look like total crap when I have to use them.

I have information on the panel name and model but I cant find what "type" of panel it is from that information. Anybody think they can help?

 

Chi Mei optoelectronics, a pretty large player in laptop panels.
Your panel specs: http://www.cmo.com.tw/opencms/cmo/products/notebook/products_notebook_N154Z1.html?__locale=en
TN / 6-bit per color

You can use the test images in this blog:
http://www.leppik.net/david/blog/?p=58

(to my surprise my IDTech panel actually seems to be 8 bit (per color), I allways thought Lenovo only had 6-bit TN WUXGA panels...)