1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

XA7-19i or XA7-192i

Discussion in 'Monitors' started by dsswoosh, 7 Mar 2006.

  1. dsswoosh

    Associate

    Joined: 19 Feb 2006

    Posts: 51

    Hi guys, i was wondering if some one can help (someone in the know :))

    I recetnly purchased the Xerox 19inch xa7 model from overclockers. Overclockers clearly states its the xa7-19i model. Now when i installed the drivers they say i have the xa7-19i model. However my nvidia graphics drivers say i have the xa7-192i model.

    I proceeded to install powerstrip and clicked on options, monitor information, which stated i had the xa7-19i model, however i then changed the options from reading data from registry to read data directly from monitor (presumably the most accurate check) and it says i have the xa7-192i model.

    Looking on the internet the xa7-19i is quoted as 16ms and the xa7-192i as 8ms. However the overclockers advert states xa7-19i as 8ms.

    My box says xa7-19i 8ms which i where i presume overclockers ahve got there product info from.

    Can someone please enlighten me on what is what ith this monitor as i dont want to feel like ive been conned.

    Thanks

    Dan
     
  2. Baddass

    Don

    Joined: 12 Jan 2003

    Posts: 20,095

    Location: UK

    you're fine, don't worry. Basically Xerox has an older version of the screen rated at 16ms and 20ms (depending on panel source). Unfortunately they have done what many other manufacturers have done and not really updated the model number / packaging etc with an update to the screen itself. They have started using a new 8ms panel in the model and to mark those models leaving the production line with this new panel, they use the "8ms XA7-192i" sticker. OcUK only stock the '2' model anyway, and i doubt many places would have the '1' model anymore anyway. You're fine, it's the 8ms edition :)
     
  3. ajgoodfellow

    Capodecina

    Joined: 24 Dec 2004

    Posts: 11,343

    Location: Shirley, Solihull, UK

    Hi!

    There is some ambiguity about the naming conventions for this monitor

    It was originally sold as the XA7-192i to distinguish it from the XA7-19i 16ms model.

    For some reason Xerox decided to call it the XA7-19i 8ms version. When I bought mine (in August just after they appeared on the site) it was sold as the XA7-192i but the box said XA7-19i with the 8ms sticker on it. If you peel off the XA7-19i stickers on my box it says XA7-192i underneath

    Xerox have now decided to refer to it as the XA7-192i again.

    Basically it's really confusing and goodness knows what Xerox's is up to but you definitely have the 8ms panel
     
  4. dsswoosh

    Associate

    Joined: 19 Feb 2006

    Posts: 51

    blimey you guys posted quick, i popped up to the loo after writing and cmae back down and wham, 2 replies :D

    Cheers for the info, i feel a whole lot better now. Im going to multiplays i-event in april and 2 other guys i know have this monitor so we can all compare and have the usual arguments as to whose got the best system :)

    If anyones monitor isnt as good as the others im sure xerox will be getting a telephone call.

    One other thing, can anyone recommend a good tft refresh rate tester as me and my mate would like to compare results.

    Thanks again. :)
     
  5. ajgoodfellow

    Capodecina

    Joined: 24 Dec 2004

    Posts: 11,343

    Location: Shirley, Solihull, UK

  6. Baddass

    Don

    Joined: 12 Jan 2003

    Posts: 20,095

    Location: UK

    but it is only a crude test of the ISO black > white transition and may have no bearing on real responsiveness. What model has your friend got? we can hopefully tell you how they compare :)

    you could set the screens up side by side and run pixperan on both which is a good way of comparing perceived responsiveness :)
     
  7. dsswoosh

    Associate

    Joined: 19 Feb 2006

    Posts: 51

    yeah i know that most advertised times are not comparitive to real gaming, but just something to compare would be cool, ill post the results when weve stopped playing cod 2 :)

    His monitor is the same as mine, his syas xa7-19i 8ms through and through, even when read from the monitor in powerstrip, which is really the reason why i posted as we are confused too.

    I have a feeling we will get the same results (well im hoping anyway)
     
  8. Messiah Khan

    Capodecina

    Joined: 1 Sep 2005

    Posts: 10,000

    Location: Scottish Highlands

    Ive now had two XA7-192i monitors. In the Nvidia drivers, the first monitor appeared as 'XA7-19i' whereas the second monitor appeared as 'XA7-192i'. I think the one that includes the '2' is a sligthly newer revision.
     
  9. dsswoosh

    Associate

    Joined: 19 Feb 2006

    Posts: 51

    Ok i ran that program and the 2 images were exactly the same at 15ms.

    Now im slightly worried that i ahve a 16ms model.

    Can some1 else please run the test to see what results they get on the XA7-192i.

    Many thanks :)
     
  10. ajgoodfellow

    Capodecina

    Joined: 24 Dec 2004

    Posts: 11,343

    Location: Shirley, Solihull, UK

    I got 14ms and I've got the 8ms version so that's about right :)
     
  11. dsswoosh

    Associate

    Joined: 19 Feb 2006

    Posts: 51

    blimey, on that pixie program i couldnt even do the first flag test, now i dont know what to do with this monitor. I might ring xerox and see what they have to say.
     
  12. Baddass

    Don

    Joined: 12 Jan 2003

    Posts: 20,095

    Location: UK

    you're panicing! you've GOT the 8ms edition. That first pixel program (flashing boxes) is a VERY crude way of testing on transition, the black > white transition and should not be relied on very heavily. The pixperan program you dont need to DO anything, all i meant was run the thing on both screens and look for trailing of images behind the moving picture. it's a way to test for motion blur and is a simple way of making sure the same image is showing on both monitors at the same time.....that's all
     
  13. dsswoosh

    Associate

    Joined: 19 Feb 2006

    Posts: 51

    well i must admit i do actually love the monitor :)

    im only guna ring xerox if any1 i see with this monitor has an amazingly better picture quality. But after upgrading from a 17 inch tst 16ms (which was actually pretty good) this monitor is extremely sexy.

    Games and films are outstanding, cheers for help all.
     
  14. Messiah Khan

    Capodecina

    Joined: 1 Sep 2005

    Posts: 10,000

    Location: Scottish Highlands


    Well your not going to get any better picture quality unless you get hold of one of the fabled XA7-192i based on the MVA panel, which im doubting ever existed. The TN panel based one is still a damn nice screen though, although the glass screen is a dust magnet in my room, lol.
     
  15. Pipe & Slippers

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 4 Jan 2004

    Posts: 1,098

    Location: Finally, Swindon

    ^^^ yeah, but sooo easy to clean (very useful with screen prodding children)
     
  16. SolarB

    Associate

    Joined: 9 Mar 2006

    Posts: 2

    Location: At a keyboard in Surrey

    Hi.

    I'm thinking about getting an X7A next week but can't find one in the shops to look at. I play FPS, surf and a do little photo editing (what else are computers for?).
    If you were buying again would you go for the Xerox or something else? This things going to sit downstairs so I'd like something that looks good.

    Any comments would be appreciated.
     
  17. ajgoodfellow

    Capodecina

    Joined: 24 Dec 2004

    Posts: 11,343

    Location: Shirley, Solihull, UK

    Hi!

    Welcome to the forums! :)

    If you had asked me that question a few months ago I would have recommended the monitor without question.

    Unfortunately I'm currently experiencing some problems with the screen - the colours just don't seem quite as vibrant as when I first bought it and I have a small problem with image persistance.

    Having said that though it's still a good monitor and it certainly looks the part - it impresses everyone who sees it. Check out my review here
     
  18. Messiah Khan

    Capodecina

    Joined: 1 Sep 2005

    Posts: 10,000

    Location: Scottish Highlands

    For most people I would probably reccomend this screen. Although you are paying a slight premium for the glass front and its styling, considering most of the screens are TN panel based. Personally I would not go for this screen now, simply due to me wanting a VESA compatible screen, so that I can eventually get a multi monitor stand.
     
  19. SolarB

    Associate

    Joined: 9 Mar 2006

    Posts: 2

    Location: At a keyboard in Surrey

    Thanks for the advice, going to have a hard think about it. I do like the look of it but don't know if that's enough to persuade me to buy it.

    Cheers.
     
  20. Pipe & Slippers

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 4 Jan 2004

    Posts: 1,098

    Location: Finally, Swindon

    When I bought, the zero dead pixel warranty and the glass front were major considerations. If I was buying again the same criteria would apply.

    The only downside I have seen is the restricted vertical viewing angle - by restricted, I don't mean that you lose the image....just that the colours wash out fairly quickly. In games you'll never notice it, but if you were doing a lot of still image work where colour reproduction/authenticity was important, either get a head clamp to keep it at the optimum angle or get a different monitor