Acer AL2216W: a worthwhile compromise?
by Jarred Walton on March 10, 2007 3:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Displays
Subjective Evaluation
Given that most users do not have access to hardware display calibration tools, we like to spend some time using displays before properly calibrating them in order to gain an impression of how most users would react. We will start with our subjective evaluation before getting to the actual quantitative results.
Our initial impression of the AL2216W was pretty good. We definitely like the option of getting a 22" LCD without having to spend a lot of money (relatively speaking). This is definitely a bare-bones model, as there really are no extras to speak of, but given the price we don't have a problem with that. We do have to say that in side-by-side comparisons (and even just in normal use), the difference between the TN panel on the Acer display and the PVA panels used on the 24" Gateway and Dell LCDs was definitely noticeable. Based purely on appearances, we would definitely take one of the 24" LCDs we've looked at over the AL2216W, but at roughly half the price we can forgive a lot.
Brightness and contrast are pretty good, and it's nice to see that Acer has not chosen to use eye searing levels of brightness in order to improve their contrast ratios. Viewing angles on the other hand are one of the well-known faults of TN panels, and the Acer display doesn't break any new ground here. When viewed straight on, the display looks fine, but off-angle viewing - particular from above or below - results in a poor image.
Subjectively, there is no doubt that out of the five displays we've looked at so far, we would rank the Acer AL2216W at the bottom of the list in terms of overall quality. That's not to say it's a bad display; rather, it just doesn't compete in the same league as LCDs that cost over twice as much. That's hardly unexpected, but we also have to say that the TN panel is definitely not helping.
Except where noted, the remaining tests were run after calibrating the displays using Monaco Optix XR, both the professional version of the software as well as the XR (DTP-94) colorimeter. In some of the tests calibration can have a dramatic impact on the result, but certain aspects like viewing angles and response times remain largely unchanged.
Given that most users do not have access to hardware display calibration tools, we like to spend some time using displays before properly calibrating them in order to gain an impression of how most users would react. We will start with our subjective evaluation before getting to the actual quantitative results.
Our initial impression of the AL2216W was pretty good. We definitely like the option of getting a 22" LCD without having to spend a lot of money (relatively speaking). This is definitely a bare-bones model, as there really are no extras to speak of, but given the price we don't have a problem with that. We do have to say that in side-by-side comparisons (and even just in normal use), the difference between the TN panel on the Acer display and the PVA panels used on the 24" Gateway and Dell LCDs was definitely noticeable. Based purely on appearances, we would definitely take one of the 24" LCDs we've looked at over the AL2216W, but at roughly half the price we can forgive a lot.
Brightness and contrast are pretty good, and it's nice to see that Acer has not chosen to use eye searing levels of brightness in order to improve their contrast ratios. Viewing angles on the other hand are one of the well-known faults of TN panels, and the Acer display doesn't break any new ground here. When viewed straight on, the display looks fine, but off-angle viewing - particular from above or below - results in a poor image.
Subjectively, there is no doubt that out of the five displays we've looked at so far, we would rank the Acer AL2216W at the bottom of the list in terms of overall quality. That's not to say it's a bad display; rather, it just doesn't compete in the same league as LCDs that cost over twice as much. That's hardly unexpected, but we also have to say that the TN panel is definitely not helping.
Except where noted, the remaining tests were run after calibrating the displays using Monaco Optix XR, both the professional version of the software as well as the XR (DTP-94) colorimeter. In some of the tests calibration can have a dramatic impact on the result, but certain aspects like viewing angles and response times remain largely unchanged.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
32 Comments
View All Comments
anandtech02148 - Sunday, March 11, 2007 - link
That viewing angle thing makes me proud of my 2yr old investment on the dell 2405fpw.Jarred when are they gonna give you a Dell 27inc 2707wfp to play?
27inc seems to be the right viewing angle for my future upgrade when price drop to 700usd or so.
BigDDesign - Saturday, March 10, 2007 - link
Great LCD reviews. Could you test some of the monitors that cater to graphic pros or photo pros like the Lacie 321 or NEC monitors. I currently am using a Lacie Electron Blue 22" and a Viewsonic 2050 LCDTV 20" for my workstation area. Every day I pray that my CRT will last forever. I know that someday that I'm going to have to replace my CRT with a LCD. Perfect color is top priority for some of us, over response times. With digital photography so mainstream, good color is very important to many. Perfect color is what I need.kmmatney - Saturday, March 10, 2007 - link
NewEgg has a new interesting monitor for sale, which I believe is an IPS panel, for $350. The link is here. Would be nice to review a monitor in the same price range which ay perform a lot better (with a slightly smaller screen and 4:3 aspect ratio).http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82...
Bana - Saturday, March 10, 2007 - link
I'm glad to see that you tested the input lag (buffering) of the monitors this time around. I am unfortunate enough to be able to see and feel the difference on my mom's 2405fwp (hence why I haven't bought an LCD for myself). It would have been nice to see the monitors compared to a better baseline ie: a CRT monitor to get a more repeatable measurement. It'd also be nice to see get an actual response lag range like http://www.behardware.com/articles/647-4/which-22-...">BeHardware does.Thanks again Anandtech. :)
Chadder007 - Saturday, March 10, 2007 - link
On the color gradients....I don't understand how its supposed to look. It is supposed to look smooth throughout the colors going from dark to lighter? Or is it supposed to have a blocked look to the colors in sections?...or is that what is called banding?JarredWalton - Sunday, March 11, 2007 - link
It should be smooth, so the blocks are indeed banding. Without calibration, the banding tends to be a lot worse on some of the displays (particularly the Gateway FPD2485W).Den - Saturday, March 10, 2007 - link
What is interesting to me is that if you are not willing to spend an extra $200 on a color calibration device, the cheap Acer has FAR better colors than any of the more expensive panels that have been reviewed here so far. Indeed, since 99% plus of people don't have a calibration device, I think this should be weighed far more heavily than the calibrated values. (Obviously, professionals who do have a device will reverse this weighting, but for the rest of us...) Also, could AnandTech make their calibrated color profiles available for the rest of us to download? I realize there is some panel to panel variation so it would not be perfect for every owner of the same display, but for most I think it would be far better than the factory default.JarredWalton - Saturday, March 10, 2007 - link
I agree that the uncalibrated results are important, but at the same time I think most people will be okay with even Delta E of 6.0 if they don't know any better. Your eyes and brain are generally happy with what they see, whether or not it's 100% accurate. I've used a Dell 2405FPW for a long time without proper calibration and it never bothered me; now that I have a colorimeter, I suppose I'm seeing more "true" colors, but if I were to just walk up to a display and try to judge it it would be hard to say how it performs. For image professionals, a colorimeter should be standard equipment; for everyone else... unless the display is *really* bad, other aspects probably carry at least as much weight. The viewing angles, for example, normally don't bother us much, but the Acer panel clearly has a much narrower viewing arc.And since you asked, here's a link to the <a href="http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/monitor/2007/a...">http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/mon...ndtechCo... profiles</a> for all of the monitors, including both the print and standard profiles. The settings used for calibration are listed in the file names. Obviously, these are targeted at the panels we have, but as a baseline others may find them somewhat helpful. Cheers.
JarredWalton - Saturday, March 10, 2007 - link
Let me try that link again. :)http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/monitor/2007/a...">Downloadable Color Profiles
anandtech02148 - Wednesday, April 4, 2007 - link
This is very helpful Jarred, these files save us some time if we plan to invest in these monitors, it's already obnoxious to spend 600buxs on a monitor and another 1-2hr calibrating, such little details is mind boggling, and manufacture reset is not that great. Maybe they should hire a professional calibrator like yourself.