What is the difference between these screens

Hello ，as title ，What is the difference between these screens ? Who can give me something directly ？ etc ，the screens photos show the differences。
Thanks 。

17.3" FHD 16:9 "Matte Type" Super Clear Ultra Bright LED Anti-Glare Screen (1920x1080) (SKU - S1X506)
17.3" FHD 16:9 "Glare Type" Super Clear Ultra Bright LED Glossy Sager Screen w/ 90% NTSC Color Gamut (1920x1080) (SKU - SDI101) ( + 100 )
17.3" FHD 16:9 "Matte Type" Super Clear Ultra Bright LED Anti-Glare Screen w/ 72% NTSC Color Gamut (1920x1080) (Will add 4-7 business days to build time) (SKU - X1R552) ( + 149 )

 

the first screen is a full high-definition LED screen which is a matte-type that means it doesn't have the hard, shiny gloss coating on it that some screens do. This is nice because it reduces reflective glare on your screen from other light sources.

the second is the same except it does have that glossy shell on it and also has the 90% NTSC color gamut. This means that the screen is able to display a wider range of colors than the normal matte screen. These screens are most highly prized by professionals who work with photo (sometimes video) editing, because of the screen's ability to represent a wide color range well (if you have a screen that represents the range of colors less accurately, it's harder to guess what you're really doing when you alter a photo and how it will look in real life). Sometimes, avid gamers also insist on these screens just because they're determined to get as wide a color range as possible.

Finally, the last screen is the same as the above save for the fact that the NTSC gamut is 72% instead of 90%, so the color range is a little less. In the good 'ol days, most screens that your average consumer could get were only in the 70% area, and the 90% was more of an "extreme" specialty screen for professionals, but now they're making all of them available. Honestly? I wouldn't pay for a 90% gamut screen if I weren't a professional graphics design/editor of some kind. Not worth it, in my opinion, but I'm easy to please

 

You might want to consider where you work, will you get reflections? If not then then glossy screen will give you the clearest image and the high gamut panels have some of the better contrast and viewing angles of the panels along with their colour accuracy.

If reflections are going to be an issue then the matte type will be your best bet.

 

Thanks .
I have used one thinkpad x200 . So I like the matte . I am not professionals , but it seems the 72% is more expensive than the 90% . Maybe it is matte . I want to know how much NTSC of the first one ?

 

what is it, like 60% or thereabout? somebody confirm... you'll want that one, OP, unless you're sure you need truer color. i can almost guarantee you'll be satisfied with the non-upgrade option.

 

Stock screens are typically 60%.
As mattcheau mentioned you may be happy with the stock screen but you definitely wont be disappointed by a better one.
I do like the 72% as I do prefer a matte screen and that is the highest gamut available for 17.3".

 

yeah , thank you for your suggestion .

 

lol , the only problem is the money .
the 15 screen is 95% and free ,but someone told is a little small for 1080P .
By the way , is there some promotions for Christmas ?

 

Places will only discuss promotions as they are available anywhere, on NBR we are not allowed to discuss them at all.

15.6" 1080p is ok if your eyesight is normal or above. 17.3" is nicer if you don't mind transporting the extra size.

 

All my notebooks have been 15.6" and 1080 and i've been fine with them. 17.3" for me is too big for portability and I dont like smaller then 1080 screens.

As Meaker mentioned we're not allowed to post anything about prices, we do usually run sales for the holidays but wont know what they are until they are posted.

 

I feel like I was in the same place as you a few months back. You have 3 decisions in front of you:

1) 15" or 17"?
2) Matte or glossy?
3) Standard or High gamut?

I'll throw in my 2 cents for you to put into your final decision =)

1) I went with the 17" because a slightly larger size doesn't hurt too much. There's not huge difference in their weight and the only costs slightly extra compared to the 15". I have to move it to work and back home daily and it isn't too much of a problem.

2) This is strictly a decision based on your work environments. I personally have to deal with a lot of lighting that makes a glossy screen hard to work with. The matte screen works fantastic for me and I don't think you will find it lacking in brightness if you opt for it.

3) I went through the whole forum gathering info on this. In my opinion, get this only if you need it for photo-editing/video editing. I say this because there is a significant cost attached to getting these for benefits that are largely arguable. I have come across a variety of debates on whether games or even internet content make use of the higher gamut. Regardless, if you want to see a preview of what these screens look like, just compare the display of a recent higher end smart phone with a regular screen. Smart phones these days with their super amoled displays are said to display even a higher gamut than these high gamut screens. Regardless, even the regular 17" matte screen looks brighter and livelier than the average screen.

 

17" is a good balance if the size is not too much of an issue.

The high gamut screens do come with good contrast ratios and and viewing angles but the stock 1080p panels are very good to begin with.

 

I have the 90% gamut glossy AUO in my Clevo, and a 72% matte Chi Mei which came stock in my GT70, and I honestly prefer the matte display. Being able to sit anywhere, without having to worry about the positioning of lights and open windows is much more liberating.

The AUO screen is simply gorgeous though, that can't be understated, even if I would choose a good matte over it 7 out of 10 times.