1. Yeah, I decided to grab the U2412M, try it out and compare with the BenQ and see what I prefer. Better image quality would be nice, but if gaming becomes too much worse I'll just return it. If I find it better I'll just sell the BenQ and the Dell will basically cost me nothing.

2. Today I've imported a total of ~1000 1920x1080 frames to Photoshop, ~600 of which I also resized. Yet it took some two hours and a completely random Ctrl+Shift+Esc for me to even start thinking about the possibility that I had eaten up quite a bit of RAM.

Restarting Photoshop, ie emptying .temp, also freed up some 35 GB on my hard drive.

Fun fact: I don't know how many of you have heard about Cartesian Product, but the reason that x is used to describe resolutions (for example: 1920x1080) is the following: A*B would simply be the multiplication that results in the number AB; 2,073,600, in the case of 1920*1080.

AxB, on the other hand, is the set of all points (a,b), where a ∈ A & b ∈ B. I suppose that you're all familiar with coordinate-systems using the (a,b) "format" for describing coordinates on the (two-dimensional) plane* and this is no exception. The planes most commonly used for coordinate-systems, R^2 and R^3, are actually the cartesian products RxR and RxRxR. Every plane is a cartesian product and every cartesian product is a plane. Thus, 1920x1080 is also a plane, the plane containing the set of all points (coordinates, if you will) ranging from (0,0) to (1920,1080).

The point I'm trying to make is that by writing 1920x1080, 1024x768 and so on, you are not just writing down multiplications that you let represent planes with height and width; you're actually defining and describing said planes mathematically, without the need for additional context to explain that it's a two-dimensional area.

*Plane is usually the word you use when working with two dimensions, but I used it throughout, because I don't know whether or not the English language uses the same word for cartesian products in n dimensions.

3. Originally Posted by Naididae
Yeah, I decided to grab the U2412M, try it out and compare with the BenQ and see what I prefer. Better image quality would be nice, but if gaming becomes too much worse I'll just return it. If I find it better I'll just sell the BenQ and the Dell will basically cost me nothing.
That's a bit of the difference between the U2412M and the newer models. The newer models (2312HM and 2713HM among them) should be better suited for gaming overall.

I suggest having a look at flatpanelshd.com; they've got reviews (with calibration of the monitor included).

4. Originally Posted by Xuvial
But we are talking TN vs IPS and there is a difference for sure. You'll need to do a bit of tweaking to get the most out of it
On the other hand, the U2312HM and the U2412M are both 6bit e-IPS, meaning they are effectively high TN-panels with good viewing angles. Their colour reproduction may still be at the same levels, but with less distortion.

5. Originally Posted by tetrisGOAT
On the other hand, the U2312HM and the U2412M are both 6bit e-IPS, meaning they are effectively high TN-panels with good viewing angles.
o_O

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/p...n&sku=320-2807
"Panel Type, Surface:
IPS (In-Plane Switching), anti glare with hard coat 3H"

THOSE LYING MOTHERFU-

6. Originally Posted by tetrisGOAT
On the other hand, the U2312HM and the U2412M are both 6bit e-IPS, meaning they are effectively high TN-panels with good viewing angles. Their colour reproduction may still be at the same levels, but with less distortion.
Hmm. Just to make absolute sure: this doesn't apply to (my) U2410, right?

7. Originally Posted by Xuvial
THOSE LYING MOTHERFU-
http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.p...&id=1317112577 Seems it is 8bit at least; The U2412M is 6bit however and e-IPS.

---------- Post added 2012-12-06 at 01:24 AM ----------

Originally Posted by Cusco
Hmm. Just to make absolute sure: this doesn't apply to (my) U2410, right?
The U2410 is a very good monitor; Industry standard at an unbelievable pricelevel. It is 8bit H-IPS with a 12 bit LUT.
Its true successor is newly announced U2413.

8. After all that said and some reviews stating the 2312HM seems better for gaming, I guess I'll go with the 23.
In all honesty part of me keeps telling me: fuck it and get the U2713 heh, but not today, but sometime.

9. http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/153587

It is a greasemonkey script for Firefox, centres the new youtube layout and directs you to your subscription feed instead of the "what to watch" feed.

10. Find something that does this for Chrome? D: Very cool workaround though.

11. Originally Posted by Butler Log
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/153587

It is a greasemonkey script for Firefox, centres the new youtube layout and directs you to your subscription feed instead of the "what to watch" feed.
This.. This is genius! Thanks for that butler, really awesome.

12. Originally Posted by tetrisGOAT
So Haswell will consume more power than Ivy?

13. Originally Posted by Nab
So Haswell will consume more power than Ivy?
Few knows yet. It is rated higher in TDP though.
And these are rumoured leaks, not facts and nothing confirmed.

14. The lightbulb in my room blew this evening (stupid energy saving things) and caused the circuit-breaker to trip. Maybe I should ask for a UPS for Christmas :/

15. So my project over Christmas is going to be to acquire one of these.

And then modify my desk so that I can actually fit it on it.

Here's current set up:

Should be interesting trying to get a 29 inch wide monitor onto that desk (Both current monitors are only 17 inches wide.)

The plan is to keep the one on the right, but get rid of the primary one in favour of the 29 inch wide monitor. It probably shouldn't be hard to take off the little cd rack thing on the left.

Oh, current monitors:
Primary monitor currently
This one is my current secondary monitor and the one I'd use with the 29 inch wide monitor

16. Is that a 1:1 monitor o_O

17. Originally Posted by Xuvial
Is that a 1:1 monitor o_O
By 1:1 you mean this right? I've never seen my monitors have windowboxing (That's what the page called the black borders) in effect, unless I'm in full screen on my primary monitor in Combat Arms, which causes the second monitor to severely windowbox.

18. Originally Posted by Hastings95
By 1:1 you mean this right? I've never seen my monitors have windowboxing (That's what the page called the black borders) in effect, unless I'm in full screen on my primary monitor in Combat Arms, which causes the second monitor to severely windowbox.
Err no, I meant 1:1 aspect ratio :P
It looks perfectly square.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•