Sager 90% NTSC vs IPS Monitor??

I am shopping for a new laptop with the following specs
I7 3630
16gb Ram
256 gb SSD
17.3 inch monitor

Total price will be around $1550.

But recently i was at Micro Center and saw their 2550 x 1440 27" monitor for $399. It was really nice. I've never seen the Sager monitor in person. I believe that the Asus G75, some Dell, Acer, Sony and HP laptop models are IPS screens.

Are these IPS screens of lower quality than the 90% NTSC Sager screen? Or is the Sager screen of worse quality?

On another note, is it worth it to buy a Sager now? I know that it seem to provide a lot of bang for the buck, but actually some consumer models when on sale actually run about $200 or so cheaper for similar specs to the Sager.

I would assume that build quality would be a little higher and that upgradablility counts for something.

I just feel that laptops switching to all IPS screens is right around the corner and don't want to be stuck with a lower quality TN screen.

For Sager owners, how does the 90% NTSC compare with other desktop IPS screens and 2550 X 1440 screens. I would imagine that the 2550 x 1440 screens would be a lot nicer, but how big is the difference with a desktop IPS screen. And are the Sony, HP, Dell ones of low quality (laptops around $1000 to $1500, not the super expensive models.

Thanks for your help.

 

Hello billhouseman and welcome to NBR!
Asus G75, some Dell, Acer, Sony and HP typically dont use IPS monitors unless they specifically say, you'll want to check into that but most of the time they are TN panels. The only computers i know for sure that use a IPS monitor are the Asus Zenbooks.

When it comes to IPS that doesn't necessarily mean they are better then a TN 90% NTSC gamut screen. You'll want to check what gamut range they cover and if they're talking about sRGB, aRGB (most common) or NTSC (highest gamut). A 90% aRGB coverage screen is not as much colors as a 90% NTSC color gamut. IPS monitors tend to have better viewing angles and better color accuracy but tend to be slower in response time. So if you're looking for graphic work like Photo Editing go with IPS, but for gamers TN panels are usually better since they tend to have a lower reponse time.

There really isnt a good time to buy a computer. Technology changes so often that if you wait for something you'll always be waiting for the next thing. With Intel rumored to be releasing new CPU's this summer it wouldnt hurt to wait a few months for those.

 

I agree with Hutsady but would like to emphasize a few things.

IPS screens in laptops are very rare and I dare say you won't realistically find any IPS screen in a gaming laptop. The reason for this is two-fold. Firstly, as Hutsady said, IPS screens typically have bad response time making them unsuitable for gaming. In fact, some screens have problems playing movies due to "blur". Secondly, the IPS screens are mostly in the format "ultra-thin" which means the panel itself is thinner than the standard. This is why you commonly see IPS screens in <15" laptops. The gaming laptops use the standard thickness so they are incompatible.

As for Clevo the only laptops using IPS (as far as I know) are the ones in the W55X-series. Between a regulat TN ultra-thin and an IPS ultra-thin screen the choice is simple - the IPS is far superior. There is no ultra-thin 95% NTSC TN panel. However, some may choose W55X just to get the IPS screen. Would this make sense when there are 95% NTSC screens out there? Personally I think the IPS screen is slightly better than the 95% NTSC TN panel. However, it has one major weakness, the response time is not good so if you intend to use the laptop for gaming it is a complete NO GO. On the other hand, I am certain one does not want to play games in FHD solution with Intel HD 4000 anyway.

To sum it up, IMO, IPS screens today should be seen as a way to considerably boost screen performance of low-end laptops. There is still some time until the technology can establish itself as a substitute to TN-panels.

 

Agreed (and then some, per the rest of Konsulten's post). The technology is definitely a boon by comparison to TN panels, but the technology is indeed twofold and expensive.

 

The IPS monitor will be technically superior in every way, except that it can't travel with you. In a perfect world, you could get both.

 

Even high-quality laptop screen will never beat quality stationary monitor.
Even best laptop IPS screens are using slightly different tech, due to the need to squeeze them into less space and reduce power consumption. This leads to reduced contrast, brightness & viewing angles (at least comparing to standalone monitors). IPS is very power intensive, even with these reductions, mobile IPS screens still draw much more power than TN (judging from high-quality panels HP uses in EliteBooks).
I did hunt for ultimate laptop display for many years, went through 18.4", 17 inchers, RGB LED, etc. But eventually I concluded that is a lot less hassle-free and cost-effective do demand *mobility* from laptop, and use proper standalone monitor for best ever picture on the desk.