Matrix type mva or ips which is better. IPS matrix in modern LCD monitors: varieties, choice

When choosing a monitor, TV or phone, the buyer is often faced with choosing the type of screen. Which one should you prefer: IPS or TFT? The reason for this confusion is the constant improvement of display technology.

All monitors with TFT technology can be divided into three main types:

1. TN+Film.
2. PVA/MVA.

That is, TFT technology is active matrix liquid crystal display, and IPS is one of the varieties of this matrix. And a comparison of these two categories is not possible, since practically they are the same thing. But if you still understand in more detail what a display with a TFT matrix is, then a comparison can be made, but not between screens, but between their manufacturing technologies: IPS and TFT-TN.

General concept of TFT

TFT (Thin Film Transistor) translates as thin film transistor. The LCD display with TFT technology is based on an active matrix. This technology involves a spiral arrangement of crystals, which, under conditions of high voltage, rotate in such a way that the screen turns black. And in the absence of high power voltage, we see a white screen. Displays with this technology produce only a dark gray color instead of perfect black. Therefore, TFT displays are popular mainly in the manufacture of cheaper models.

Description of IPS

IPS (In-Plane Switching) LCD screen matrix technology implies parallel arrangement of crystals along the entire plane of the monitor. There are no spirals here. And therefore the crystals do not rotate under conditions of strong stress. In other words, IPS technology is nothing more than an improved TFT. It conveys black color much better, thereby improving the degree of contrast and brightness of the image. This is why this technology costs more than TFT and is used in more expensive models.

Main differences between TN-TFT and IPS

Wanting to sell as many products as possible, sales managers mislead people into thinking that TFT and IPS are completely different types of screens. Marketing specialists do not provide comprehensive information about technologies, and this allows them to pass off an existing development as something that has just appeared.

Looking at IPS and TFT, we see that it's practically the same thing. The only difference is that monitors with IPS technology are a more recent development compared to TN-TFT. But despite this, it is still possible to distinguish a number of differences between these categories:

1. Increased contrast. The way black is displayed directly affects the contrast of the image. If you tilt a screen with TFT technology without IPS, it will be almost impossible to read anything. And all because the screen becomes dark when tilted. If we consider the IPS matrix, then, due to the fact that the black color is transmitted perfectly by the crystals, the image is quite clear.
2. Color rendering and number of shades displayed. The TN-TFT matrix does not reproduce colors well. And all due to the fact that each pixel has its own shade and this leads to color distortion. A screen with IPS technology transmits images much more carefully.
3. Response delay. One of the advantages of TN-TFT screens over IPS is high-speed response. And all because it takes a lot of time to rotate many parallel IPS crystals. From this we conclude that where drawing speed is of great importance, it is better to use a screen with a TN matrix. Displays with IPS technology are slower, but this is not noticeable in everyday life. And this difference can be identified only by using technological tests specially designed for this. As a rule, it is better to give preference to displays with an IPS matrix.
4. Viewing angle. Thanks to the wide viewing angle, the IPS screen does not distort images, even when viewed from an angle of 178 degrees. Moreover, this value of the viewing angle can be both vertical and horizontal.
5. Energy intensity. Displays with IPS technology, unlike TN-TFT, require more energy. This is due to the fact that in order to rotate parallel crystals, a large voltage is needed. As a result, more load is placed on the battery than when using a TFT matrix. If you need a device with low power consumption, then TFT technology will be an ideal option.
6. Pricing policy. Most budget electronics models use displays based on TN-TFT technology, since this type of matrix is ​​the most inexpensive. Today, monitors with an IPS matrix, although they are more expensive, are used in almost all modern electronic models. This gradually leads to the fact that the IPS matrix is ​​practically replacing equipment with TN-TFT technology.

Results

Based on all of the above, we can draw the following conclusion.

Good day.

When choosing a monitor, many users do not pay attention to the matrix manufacturing technology ( matrix is ​​the main part of any LCD monitor that forms the image), and, by the way, the quality of the picture on the screen greatly depends on it (and the price of the device too!).

By the way, many may argue that this is a trifle, and any modern laptop (for example) provides an excellent picture. But these same users, if you put them on two laptops with different matrices - will notice the difference in the picture with the naked eye (see Fig. 1)!

Since quite a lot of abbreviations have appeared recently (ADS, IPS, PLS, TN, TN+film, VA), it’s easy to get confused. In this article I want to describe a little each technology, its pros and cons (it will turn out to be something in the form of a small reference article, which will be very useful when choosing: a monitor, a laptop, etc.). So…

Rice. 1. Difference in the picture when the screen is rotated: TN matrix VS IPS matrix

Matrix TN, TN+film

Descriptions of technical issues are omitted; some terms are “interpreted” in their own words so that the article is understandable and accessible to an untrained user.

The most common type of matrix. When choosing inexpensive models of monitors, laptops, TVs, if you look at the advanced characteristics of the device you choose, you will probably see this matrix.

Pros:

1. very short response time: thanks to this, you will be able to watch a good picture in any dynamic games, films (and any scenes with a rapidly changing picture). By the way, on monitors with a long response time, the picture may begin to “float” (for example, many complain about the “floating” picture in games with a response time of more than 9 ms). For games, a response time of less than 6ms is generally desirable. In general, this parameter is very important and if you are buying a monitor for gaming, the TN+film option is one of the best solutions;
2. affordable price: this type of monitor is one of the most affordable.

Cons:

1. poor color rendering: Many people complain about not bright colors (especially after switching from monitors with a different type of matrix). By the way, some color distortion is also possible (therefore, if you need to select the color very carefully, then you should not choose this type of matrix);
2. small viewing angle: Probably many have noticed that if you approach the monitor from the side, then part of the picture is no longer visible, it is distorted and its color changes. Of course, TN+film technology has somewhat improved this point, but nevertheless the problem remains (although many may object to me: for example, on a laptop this is useful - no one sitting next to you will be able to see exactly your image on the screen);
3. high probability of dead pixels: Probably even many novice users have heard this statement. When a “broken” pixel appears, there will be a dot on the monitor that will not display the picture - that is, there will just be a luminous dot. If there are a lot of them, it will be impossible to work behind the monitor...

In general, monitors with this type of matrix are quite good (despite all their shortcomings). Suitable for most users who love dynamic movies and games. It’s also quite good to work with text on such monitors. For designers and those who need to see a very colorful and accurate picture, this type should not be recommended.

Matrix VA/MVA/PVA

(Analogues: Super PVA, Super MVA, ASV)

This technology (VA - vertical alignment in English) was developed and implemented by Fujitsu. Today, this type of matrix is ​​not very common, but nevertheless, it is in demand among some users.

Pros:

1. one of the best black color renditions: when looking at the monitor surface perpendicularly;
2. more quality colors(in general) compared to TN matrix;
3. enough good response time(quite comparable to a TN matrix, although inferior to it);

Cons:

1. higher price;
2. color distortion at a wide viewing angle (professional photographers and designers especially notice this);
3. it is possible that small details may “disappear” in the shadows (at a certain viewing angle).

Monitors with this matrix are a good solution (compromise) for those who are not satisfied with the color rendition of a TN monitor and who need a short response time. Those who need colors and picture quality choose an IPS matrix (more on that later in the article...).

IPS matrix

Varieties: S-IPS, H-IPS, UH-IPS, P-IPS, AH-IPS, IPS-ADS, etc.

This technology was developed by Hitachi. Monitors with this type of matrix are most often the most expensive on the market. I think there is no point in considering each type of matrix, but it is worth highlighting the main advantages.

Pros:

1. better color rendition compared to other types of matrices. The picture turns out “juicy” and bright. Many users say that when working on such a monitor, their eyes practically do not get tired (the statement is very controversial...);
2. largest viewing angle: even if you stand at an angle of 160-170 degrees. - the picture on the monitor will be just as bright, colorful and clear;
3. good contrast;
4. excellent black color.

Cons:

1. high price;
2. long response time (may not suit some fans of games and dynamic films).

Monitors with this matrix are ideal for all those who need a high-quality and bright picture. If you take a monitor with a short response time (less than 6-5 ms), then it will be quite comfortable to play on it. The main drawback is the high price...

Matrix PLS

This type of matrix was developed by Samsung (planned as an alternative to the ISP matrix). It has both its pros and cons...

Pros: Higher pixel density, high brightness, lower power consumption.

Cons: Low color gamut, lower contrast compared to IPS.

By the way, one last piece of advice. When choosing a monitor, pay attention not only to the technical specifications, but also to the manufacturer. I can’t name the best of them, but I recommend choosing a well-known brand: Samsung, Hitachi, LG, Proview, Sony, Dell, Philips, Acer.

On this note I end the article, good luck to everyone :)

Monitors with different types of matrices

Now has come the era of liquid crystal models, which (according to the manufacturers) are “completely safe.” However, this is not entirely true. It all depends on the type of matrix used in the display. Some of them really provide high-quality color rendition and have almost no effect on the user’s eyes. But there are others. Choosing a monitor with the right matrix can have a positive impact not only on overall comfort, but also on human health. This means that this cannot be neglected. It's better to overpay a little but get a quality product.

What types of matrices are there?

Read also: Monitors with sound: TOP 15 models of 2017

Matrix monitor

During the years of dominance of CRT boxes there were no such “problems” about matrices and other things. This is because in those days the concept did not even exist "matrix". But now everything has changed. And manufacturers produce a variety of models with different fillings.

• TN+Film. The most popular type, used in the vast majority of modern budget displays
• IPS and its derivatives. Higher quality matrices that are widely used by professionals.
• V.A. The type of matrices used in mid-price segment displays. Doesn’t differ in any outstanding features
• PLS. Something similar to IPS, but using more advanced technologies. Also successfully used by designers and graphic artists
• OLED. The coolest (but slightly underdeveloped) guy. It features excellent color rendition and wide viewing angles. However, there are also serious disadvantages (more on them later)

All of the above options are basic. There are also modifications of existing matrices on sale, but they do not deserve special attention, since they do not differ much from the originals in terms of characteristics. And now more about each type.

TN+Film

Read also: AOC G2460PF monitor for real gamers. Review 2017 + Reviews

TN monitor

These matrices appeared first. They replaced outdated CRT technologies (CRT). At the moment, they are inexpensive, since the production process of such matrices is very simple (compared to others).

Distinctive features of TN are the short response time of the matrix and good horizontal viewing angles. It's a problem with vertical ones. If you rotate the monitor incorrectly, the colors may even be inverted.

Also, the color gamut in such models is not very attractive. In cheap matrices it is not even 70% sRGB. And this is already quite serious. With such color rendering it will not be possible to work normally with images.

The maximum backlight brightness is also not enough. Monitors with such a matrix can be successfully used only indoors. They cannot withstand direct sunlight. And this is another minus.

TN advantages:

• low cost
• fast response time
• Possibility of use in difficult conditions
• ideal for gaming
• good horizontal viewing angles
• durability
• excellent contrast

Disadvantages of TN:

• no color rendition
• insufficient brightness
• poor vertical viewing angles
• outdated technology
• insufficient black color saturation

These matrices have approximately the same number of pros and cons. However, no one will refute the fact that this technology is already outdated. But such monitors have firmly established themselves in the segment of products for gamers.

These professionals have no use for outdated matrices, but average users and professional eSports players still use them. But the latter have modified versions. And their prices start at $500.

IPS

Read also: IPS matrix: what is it? Technology Review + Reviews

IPS monitor

At the moment, IPS monitors are widespread even in the budget segment. But at the dawn of this technology, only very wealthy users could afford such devices. However, times have changed.

VA monitor

VA matrices appeared after IPS. In them, manufacturers tried to correct the shortcomings of previous generations, but not everything went smoothly. Currently, VA monitors make up a negligible percentage of the market and are not very popular.

T However, these matrices boast amazing contrast(black looks as it should), excellent viewing angles, good color rendering and the absence of harmful radiation.

However, the response time of the matrix leaves much to be desired. Moreover, it is also dynamic: it increases depending on the initial and final state of the pixel. This makes such displays completely unsuitable for games and dynamic scenes in films.

However, professionals working with graphics are quite happy with this state of affairs. They are the main buyers of monitors on VA matrices. The main thing for them is adequate black color. And he is here.

VA benefits:

• full color rendition
• very high contrast
• realistic black color
• no eye strain
• Possibility of application in professional fields
• excellent viewing angles (both horizontal and vertical)
• high brightness
• good pixel density per inch

PLS monitor

PLS type matrices are practically no different from IPS, although much more have been invented. This technology was taken as the basis. Therefore, the characteristics of both matrices are approximately equal.

The main difference between PLS and IPS is the black color. In PLS it is much richer. This is all due to the high contrast. But otherwise, this is an exact copy of a product ten years ago. Even examination of the matrices under a microscope did not reveal any differences.

PLS monitors are actively purchased by designers, video processing professionals and similar users. They are great for image processing as they have excellent color rendition.

To be fair, these displays are better suited for dynamic gaming than IPS. They easily produce high-quality images even at 120 frames per second. And this says a lot.

Advantages of PLS:

• excellent color rendition
• high contrast
• realistic black
• wide viewing angles
• normal operation when displaying dynamic scenes
• bright backlight
• decent number of pixels per inch (PPI density)

Disadvantages of PLS:

• high price
• very difficult to find in retail
• fragility

It's hard to say what the future holds for PLS monitors. On the one hand, they are slightly better than the same IPS. But they cost significantly more. Therefore, they are unlikely to gain high popularity. Especially when you consider the fact that recently IPS displays have become noticeably cheaper.

If you have a choice between PLS and IPS, then it is better to choose the latter. This technology has a future. But what will happen in the future with PLS matrices is unknown. Perhaps the project will be completely abandoned. How not profitable.

01. 07.2018

Blog of Dmitry Vassiyarov.

IPS or VA - weighing all the pros and cons

Good day to my subscribers and new readers of this interesting blog. The topic of LCD monitors requires mandatory coverage of another competitive confrontation, and today I will present you with information that will help you determine which is better: IPS or VA matrix.

Although this task is not easy, because you will not find such a significant difference as in the case here. But let's talk about everything in order, which we have already worked out and begins with history and continues with technological nuances.

The idea of ​​using the property of liquid nematic crystals to change the polarization of the light flux under the influence of electricity was first commercially implemented in screens with a TN matrix. In it, each beam coming from the backlight to the RGB filters of the pixel passed through a module that consisted of two polarizing gratings (oriented perpendicularly to block light), electrodes, and a twisted nematic (TN) crystal located inside the crystal.

Of course, the emergence of a competitor in the late 80s in the form of a thin, flat screen with high resolution, flicker-free and low power consumption was, in fact, a technological revolution. But, unfortunately, according to the most important criterion (image quality), LCD panels were significantly inferior to CRT displays. This is what forced leading companies to improve the technology of active TFT matrices.

Modern technologies with 20 years of history

1996 was a turning point, when several companies presented their developments at once:

• Hitachi placed both electrodes on the side of the first polarizing filter and changed the orientation of the molecules in the crystal, connecting them in the plane (In-Plane Switching). The technology received the appropriate name.
• Specialists from NEC came up with something similar; they didn’t bother with the name, denoting their innovation simply SFT - super fine TFT (perhaps that’s why Hitachi’s formulation turned out to be more tenacious, and later became the designation of a whole class of matrices).
• Fujitsu took a different route, minimizing the size of the electrodes and changing the direction of their force field. This was necessary in order to effectively control the vertically oriented (Vertical Alignment -) crystal molecules, which had to be deployed much more strongly in order to completely transmit (or block as much as possible) the light beam.

New technologies differed from TN in that in the inactive position the light beam remained blocked. Visually, this manifested itself in the fact that the dead pixel now looked dark rather than light. But to move on to other dramatic changes in technology, it's worth noting that innovation wasn't perfect. IPS and VA matrices were finalized and improved with the participation of leading electronic corporations.

The most active in this are Sony, Panasonic, LG, Samsung and, of course, the development companies themselves. Thanks to them, we have many variations of IPS (S-IPS, H-IPS, P-IPS IPS-Pro) and two main modifications of VA technology (MVA and PVA), each of which has its own characteristics.

Advantages that are more important than disadvantages

It was necessary to write about the history of technology development so that you understand: we will consider IPS and VA matrices in their improved version. I will determine the difference between them based on the main criteria for image quality and operating features:

• The increasing complexity of the process of changing the orientation of liquid crystal molecules in an IPS and, to an even greater extent, in a VA matrix has resulted in an increase in response time and an increase in energy consumption. Compared to TN technology, they both began to “slow down” in dynamic scenes, which resulted in the appearance of a trail or blur. This is a significant disadvantage for VA monitors, but, in fairness, it is worth noting that IPS is not much better in terms of response time;
• In principle, the same can be said about the energy consumption of the matrix. But if we consider an LCD monitor in general, in which 95% of the electricity is consumed by the backlight, then there is no difference at all in this indicator between VA and IPS;
• Now let's move on to the parameters that were significantly improved after changes were made to the active LCD matrix technology. And let's start with the viewing angle, which has become a significant advantage, especially in IPS screens (at 175º). In VA monitors, even after significant improvements, it was possible to achieve a value of 170º, and even then, when viewing from the side, the image quality drops: the picture dims and detail in the shadows disappears;

• Contrast is one of the criteria used to choose for use in a lit room, and if you are not going to lead an exclusively nocturnal lifestyle, then it is worth paying attention to. Have you forgotten that liquid crystal molecules in a VA matrix are able to absorb light more closely? Together with the specific shape of the pixel grid, this provides them with the deepest blacks, and with it the best contrast of all LCD monitors. In IPS screens this indicator is slightly worse, but they still show excellent results compared to TN technology;

• The situation is similar with brightness. Both matrices are much better than TN by this criterion, but in personal competition the clear leader is VA monitors. Again, due to the crystal's ability to provide maximum throughput to the light beam;
• And to end the comparison on a nice neutral note, I'll talk about color rendering. She is absolutely amazing at both VA and IPS. This is because, along with excellent contrast, a red, green and blue pixel is used to obtain the hue, the brightness of which can be determined by 8 (and in new models, 10) bit coding. As a result, this allows both technologies to obtain more than 1 billion shades and comparison is inappropriate here.

If you have noticed, I try not to use the price criterion when determining the best matrix. This is because the difference is insignificant, and it is impossible to purchase the required function. Moreover, you yourself know: there are different brands whose name clearly affects the price tag.

Now let's move on to practice, because I hope that many of you read this article with a specific goal: to find out what is better IPS or VA matrix and which screen to buy? Considering the above advantages and disadvantages of these technologies, the following conclusions can be drawn:

• Both types of matrices produce excellent images and are used in top models of monitors and televisions;
• Those who like to play shooters and racing games should give preference to IPS technology;
• If the screen works outdoors or in a lit room, take VA;
• If the screen is viewed from different angles, choose IPS;
• You need a clear display of details (office documents, drawings, dispatch diagrams) - take a VA monitor.

In reality, several factors have to be taken into account, so everyone makes their own choice of screen based on the type of matrix.

This concludes my long story.

I will be glad if the information I provided was useful to you. I will end here.

Goodbye, good luck everyone!

For a long time I was tormented by the question: how do the images of modern monitors with TN, S-IPS, S-PVA, P-MVA matrices differ? My friend ne0 and I decided to compare.

For tests we took two 24"" monitors (unfortunately we didn't find anything on S-IPS:():
- on a cheap TN matrix Benq V2400W
- on a medium category P-MVA matrix Benq FP241W.

Candidate characteristics:

Benq V2400W

Benq FP241W

Trends in recent years

How far has the progress been?

But there are still differences.

Brightness

In Benq FP241W (*VA), due to the brightness of the backlight, black is also bright. For TN, black remained completely black when we compared the on and off states of the monitors. This may be missing on other *VA models and present on the TN. (I'm waiting for comments verifying this statement :))

Black color *VA does not interfere with work at all and is associated with black (thanks to our adjusting eyes :) and a good contrast ratio of 1000:1 monitor). And the difference in black brightness is visible only in comparison (when one monitor is placed next to another).
Due to the high brightness, colors on *VA seem a little richer, and whites on *VA are whiter - on TN, it appears gray in comparison.
You yourself noticed this effect when, for example, you switched the color temperature on the monitor from 6500 to 9300, when your eyes were already accustomed to a different color temperature (probably most of the people here started changing the temperature :)). But when the eyes get used to it again, on TN the white becomes white again :), and the other temperature is either bluer or yellower.

Colors

On TN monitors, bright and dark colors close to each other are worse distinguished (for example, bright blue and white, on clouds, close to black (4-5%) and white (3-5%)). The differences in these colors also change depending on the viewing angle, turning negative or disappearing. But it seems that due to this, on TN monitors, black is truly black.

*VA shows the full spectrum of colors - with a good video card and settings, all color gradients from 1 to 254 are visible, regardless of the viewing angle.

Photos looked good on both monitors and had fairly rich colors.

Both monitors have 16.7 million colors (not 16.2, like some TNs) - gradients looked identical without color “misses”.

Viewing Angles

If you look at the TN monitor directly in the center, then from the top and bottom the screen begins to slightly distort (darken) the colors. This is noticeable on bright colors and dark colors - dark colors become black, and bright colors turn gray. On the left and right, the darkening from the corner is noticeably much less - which most likely pushes manufacturers to make monitors with large diagonals wide :). Plus, because of this effect, some colors begin to fade into others and merge.
It is difficult to look at a TN monitor from above and especially from below - low-contrast colors are distorted, become faded, inverted and merge very much.

On *VA monitors, color distortions (or rather brightness) are also present. If you look at the monitor in the center at a distance of less than 40 cm, then the white color shows slight fading at the corners of the monitor (see picture), which covers about 2-3% of the corners. Colors are not distorted. That is, if you look at the monitor from the widest angle, the picture will not lose its colors, it will just be a little brightened.
Due to the lack of distortion, *VA monitors are made to rotate 90 degrees.

Watching video on TN from the sofa is possible, but it must be directed exactly at the viewers (vertically). With *VA there are no problems with turning the screen towards the viewer; the film can be viewed from almost any angle. Distortions are not significant.

Response time

TN monitors are leaders in this area and are considered the best for gamers. The trails on them have not been seen for quite some time. In the photographs, the square flying into the corner doubled.

*VA monitors look at the TN heels. Having played Team Fortress 2, W3 Dota, Fallout 3, no distortions or blurry trails (blur effect) were noticed. Watching the video was also a success. In the photographs, the square flying into the corner tripled in size.

Visually, in the test, if you look closely, the running square on the *VA matrix had only a 1.1 times larger train.

What would I choose?

For gaming, office/Internet work, viewing photos, simple editing of pictures, photos and videos, and watching movies alone - TN is perfect. Even with the necessary skill + specific SuperBright (Video) modes, you can watch movies on TN on the couch with minor, unnoticeable color distortions (oh, why do they need a movie :)).

For processing photographs, working with color in videos (you can edit them in the right places on TN, right?), drawing on a tablet, *VA is better suited. As a bonus, you can watch movies on it while lounging in a chair (high brightness helps). And playing and doing Internet/office work on it is just as convenient as on TN.

P.s. After purchasing *VA, I immediately noticed a purple gradient on the “Welcome screen” in Windows XP at the bottom left :), which I didn’t notice on old TNs.