News
Buyer's Guide: The Best Monitors 
AOC 416V
| Caractéristiques | |||
| Screen size | 24 inches | ||
| Panel type | TN | ||
| Resolution | 1920 x 1200 pixels | ||
| Response time | 5 ms | ||
| Inputs (HDMI / DVI / VGA / Component) | 0 / 1 / 1 / 0 | ||
 Show all specifications
|
|||
| Other details | NA |
| Viewing angles (H/V) | 160°/160° |
| 3D | no |
 Hide specifications | |
Pierre-Jean Alzieu
Test date: March 3, 2008
Test date: March 3, 2008
Very high energy consumption
As you may have learned, we are now systematically measuring the energy consumption of monitors on two distinct settings: with white set at 100 cd/m² (pro photo editing) then at 200 cd/m² (classic use).
As for this 416V, we normally measure a respective average of 35 and 48 Watts on 24 inch models. Here, we have roughly 48 and 78 Watts or 33% more.
This screen is offered for a good price but frankly we cannot recommend it for the following reasons:
- It has almost twice the average power consumption (78 watts while the BenQ G2400W with similar components and price is at 40 watts).
- Its blacks are very washed out meaning half the contrast compared to more standard values.
- Reactivity is in the low average.
- It leans towards blue in the darkest tones, green in intermediates while whites are accurate (this lack of homogeneity in dominances means a good manual adjustment is impossible).
- Ergonomics and finishing touches aren't exceptional, actually quite the opposite.
A harsh but realistic evaluation: a product without interest.
There is much better and for less expensive. For example, the Benq W2400W mentioned above.
Pluses
-
Price
-
If there is a problem you can exchange it for a new one (for 3 years)
Minuses
-
Colors
-
Washed out blacks
-
No card reader or USB hub
-
Energy consumption
-
No zero dead pixel policy
It's better to look to its competition: BenQ, Belinea or Iiyama, for example. They offer superior reactivity and much more accurate colors by default for a low or even equivalent price.
