NP8170 Stock Screen - Is it really that bad?

I just ordered a Malibal P170HM yesterday, and as there was no choice in screens, I obviously ended up with the stock screen that Clevo provides.

My question is, is the stock screen really that crappy?

I've seen many people go with XOTICPC or Mythlogic because they offer the 90% Gamut Glossy option or the 72% Gamut Matte Option screens. But I can't justify paying $200+ unless the quality was really worth it.

 

yes it's true , it's big crap, you will realize when laptop come to your house

 

It seems to be inconsistent. Some have the screen, and say it's fine, while some have major issues. I decided to not gamble, thus spent the $200.

I had a thread on the screen. Here's the post on the 17" screens.

The V.4 has a huge quality advantage.

 

Viewing angle comparisons:

Default:

http://www.mythlogiccorp.com/images/screen_compare17/Angles/LPG Angles.png

Matte:

http://www.mythlogiccorp.com/images/screen_compare17/Angles/LPM Angles.png

90% Glossy:

http://www.mythlogiccorp.com/images/screen_compare17/Angles/V4 Angles.png

 

I have the default screen. It's fine for me, but if the V.4 screen would of been available when I bought my laptop then I definitely would of payed for that. Well worth the money IMO. I don't have the bleeding problems some people claim to have but the vertical viewing angles are atrocious.

 

I have the stock screen and I don’t like it. I am looking to replace it myself as we speak. It’s not horrible but it’s far from good.

It has really bad viewing angles and the blacks look grey on parts of the screen depending on what angle you view it.

On the p170HM owners lounge page 184 you can see what it looks like.

 

Wow, thanks for the insight.. The difference in screen quality is readily apparent in just those screenshots. I'm definitely canceling my order from Malibal.

Do you know any info on the Alienware M17x screens compared to the stock NP8170 screen or the 90% Glossy one?

 

Just head over to the forums for the AW. Every single mention I see of the monitor is to say how great it is. I know by my comments it is obvious which ship I have jumped to, but I admit, since I used to come here 10 times a day for 2 months, it's still habit to come by every now and then.

I guess I shouldn't feel that bad sharing the info I have discovered, though...Maybe Sager/Clevo should take a lesson from the business they're losing.

 

Definitely must agree with you. I mean, when customers are going to be spending a hefty sum of money on buying these high-end laptops, we're obviously going to search for the laptop that gives the best bang for the buck. Definitely a different level of expectation than if we were buying netbooks or something.

IMHO, no companies should skimp out on things such as the screen quality. I can understand using generic parts on RAM and hard drive, but screen quality is a no-no.

With the bad screen quality as shown above, and the missing functions of switchable graphics + WirelessDisplay, I think Sager really dropped the ball this time around.

 

Yeah they did.. I mean they're still quality product, they're just lacking features. Glad our lovely resellers can hook us up with nice screens..

And I feel like this laptop may end up being just a place holder or stepping stone for when Clevo brings more features to the table

 

Why is it that i don't detect the same lack of quality between the stock and the 95% Colour Gamut in the comparison images here?
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/1652071 I just detect extra glossiness.

These are for the 8150 BTW. I couldn't find the name of the stock screen for the 8150. Is it the same name as that of the stock screen on the 8170? the matte screen is called AUO B156HW01 V4?

Reason for partially hijacking the thread: the stock on the 8170 looks bad. Is it the same thing on the 8150? I dont want that screen in that case.

EDIT: isn't this the stock screen on XOTICPCs NP8150 review?? if it is, i dont see any issue with it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1Kzwu_Hcqs&feature=related

 

i think in xotics review they said the stock glossy looked nice, but that the 8130's stock matte was nicer. the 95% matte upgrade is much nicer than the 8130's matte screen.. just for reference.. hard to tell in those pics because they're limited by the abilities of the camera, and your current display