external monitor PPI - is 86 vs 81 noticable?

I have a newly acquired (muhahahaha, jk ) thinkpad T500 15.4
1680x1050 resolution for a PPI of 128

PPI calculator
DPI Calculator / PPI Calculator


http://www.tvcalculator.com/
site shows sizes and resolutions of monitors next to each other

Next to it I have a Dell 1905FP 19" (1280x1024) with 86 PPI.

The difference between the two is noticable. I was accustomed to the 86 PPI for many years, so the 128 PPI is just really comfortable on the eyes.


Looking at getting a new external monitor (because 15.4" on a desktop replacement is a bit small)

I like ViewSonic's pixel policy, so I've decided on them
...you are guaranteed high-quality screen performance with no more than four (4) improperly operating pixels total and no more than three (3) bright or three (3) dark pixels.
Viewsonic Limited Warranty

(btw, anyone know a company with similar or better pix.pol. ?)


I'm looking at 2 monitors... one with a 88 PPI and one with 81 PPI.

My question is how noticable is a given % difference in PPI?
If I'm used to 86 PPI after about 10 years of using it exclusively, would corrected 20/20 vision notice a 10% decrease?
I can notice the 50% difference from the 86 to the 128 at a quick glance.

 

The pixel policy from ViewSonic is no better than from any other manufacturer. You might not notice a large difference between 88 and 81, but seriously, those are both super low resolution monitors, you'll probably want something better. Anything less than 96 is just way too poor.

 

Kay, thanks.. I was thinking high PPI would be more relevant to gaming than the other forums.

As for the pixel policy, they do differ.

Samsung was widely mentioned to be one of the very best quality monitors, so I checked their pix.pol. also.
They allow from 5 to 10 defective pixels depending on monitor size
http://www.samsung.com/se/support/repairpolicy/Samsung_Monitor_Pixel_Policy.pdf

ViewSonic's 3 pixel policy is for all size monitors. That's why I'm only looking among viewsonics now, but I'd like to know if there's anyone else who's 4 or less.


Yep, I'd prefer to have the quality of a higher res, or rather a higher PPI... for a low price.
Those monitors are a 27" 1920x1080 81 PPI for $280,
and a 25.5" 1920x1200 88 PPI for $280,
or
a 23.6" 1920x1080 with 93 PPI for $200

 

I think you are over-thinking the PPI.

When you buy a monitor, you want to look at things like screen size (inches), resolution, contrast ratios, brightness, color accuracy, connectivity and number of inputs. I would never select one monitor over another because of higher PPI. If your new Thinkpad T500 has a better monitor than your old Dell 1905FP, then it is likely because of contrast ratios and brightness, and not PPI.

You didn't list the actual model numbers of the 27", 25.5", and 23.6" monitors that you are considering. My recommendation to you is to read reviews of those three monitors that you are considering, and buy the one with the best image quality. That will give you the best picture, not a PPI measurement.

 

Dell makes some of the best monitors avaiable, though they're probably a bit more expensive than ViewSonics. Dell's policy is:


A display with 1 to 5 Dead or Stuck pixels is within the industry standards, and is therefore considered an acceptable display.

* 1 to 5 Dead or Stuck pixels spread out are within current standards and do NOT warrant a replacement
* 6 or more Dead or Stuck pixels anywhere warrants a replacement monitor
* 2 adjacent Dead or Stuck pixels warrants a replacement monitor with manager approval
* 1 Dead or Stuck pixel directly in the center warrants a replacement monitor with manager approval

Also, the Dell UltraSharps (way above the $200 level) have a zero defect policy.

Also, I didn't know you were looking at such large displays. PPI becomes less important as the monitors get larger, as people tend to sit further away from a large monitor. How far will you be sitting away from the monitor? Honestly, you may be better off buying a 22-23" 1080p unless you're sitting more than 3 feet (desk length) away from the monitor. The 23.6" 1080p may be your best choice. If you're looking for something in the 27" range, 2650x1440 may be more appropriate (though much more expensive).

Check this one out, Dell SP2309W, 23" Full HD Widescreen Flat Panel Monitor with Webcam On a great sale for the next 2 days for $200.

Panel Size:
23"
Optimal Resolution:
Higher than Full HD 2048 x 1152 at 60 Hz
Dynamic Contrast Ratio:
80,000:1 (max)
Brightness:
300 cd/m2 (typical)
Response Time:
2 ms (typical)
Viewing Angle:
160° / 170° (typical)
Color Support:
16.7 million colors
Pixel Pitch:
0.249mm

 

That's good to learn about Dells pixel policy. Until now, every monitor I've used has been a Dell. I remembered that I never had any defective pixels on them and checked their site... and saw the prices are a bit higher than those viewsonics. At least I can keep a look-out for good priced refurbs and specials.

That 23 higher than full HD Dell.. nice resolution and PPI, especially for the price. I'm looking for something that's at least some higher than the 19" 4:3. The 25.5" 16:10 monitors are 2 inches taller and 6.5 inches wider. The 27" 16:9 actually is surprisingly hardly much larger than the 25.5" 16:10.

I sit about 3-4 feet away from the monitors, and am mostly interested in usable screen space from a relaxed distance. I mean I can use my 19" now from 3' away fine, so at the same resolution I'm looking to just have more usable screen.

For the res and PPI issue.. the subjectivity of what is correct color perception... diluted across the range of adjusted-images and colors online and in captured or created by any device.. hit home. When I optimize the settings for one test image, I find another image looks better with different settings.
As for the laptop and the 19" 's idisplay quality though.. no matter any settings I make, the laptop's images are more crisp, more fine. I guess that would be the PPI.