EIZO Monitors - where to buy?

[Bercy]

I bought an EIZO at least 10 years ago - have gone through 3 computers in that time but the screen has not changed. I would not even dream of changing it - to gain what! However although it is a bit of lifetime purchase I tend to agreee with Rick in that there are lot of good screens out there and the law of diminishing returns is well and truly operating here. Indeed the screen itself may not be the issue but rather casings and adjustability in height and angle for viewing. Also consider many screens are brighter but that does not make them better - the Eizo is quite "matte" - there is probably a better term for it in the screen world - but you don't suffer reflections from other light sources.

[arthurking83]

..... - the Eizo is quite "matte" - there is probably a better term for it in the screen world - but you don't suffer reflections from other light sources.

LOL! I have a glossy screen sitting right here behind me, that I can't connect to the PC(as a second monitor). It's not only reflections from other light sources I worry about, it's reflections of reflected light off me that concerns me more!

I agree, matte screen finish is much better.

[Fruengalli]

My nearest & dearest at looking at higher end monitors but does the graphic card affect/effect performance of the screen?

[JM Tran]

My nearest & dearest at looking at higher end monitors but does the graphic card affect/effect performance of the screen?

Nope, only for gaming and if you are doing hardcore 3D rendering.

[arthurking83]

My nearest & dearest at looking at higher end monitors but does the graphic card affect/effect performance of the screen?

Actually it can to a very slight degree.
Calibration can be affected by the choice of your graphics cards.

Going from a Nvidia card to an onboard chip(AMD/Radeon tho) .. my calibration delta is out by a wee bit more than it used to be when I used the dedicated card.
Whether this is an nvidia/radeon difference issue, or the fact that the graphic chip is a 4xxx series (ie. lower end) chip .. or maybe a driver related thing .. I don't really know.

Which reminds me .. I keep forgetting to head out and get a proper replacement one day
But in terms of rendering your static images to any real advantage .. no! The quality of the screen is more important.

And FWIW: the difference between a $150 graphics card and the free to use onboard integrated GPU isn't a massive problem.
The calibrated delta difference between the nvidia card and the radeon GPU is 1.2 vs 1.5(I think in the blue channel).
All other channels are pretty much the same ... or close enough to not make a difference(all less than 1).

Other aspects that the graphics card type/quality/performance can affect is the ability to connect multiple monitors. Some do, other don't .. and a better quality one will do a better job of it(maintain faster refresh rates over multiple screens).
So if you wanted to connect multiple high end monitors to a lowly specced GPU, it may not have the ability too allow those additional connections, or may display some artifacts if it's a bit too under powered(and you should try to keep a monitor to at least to 60Hz).
if the card can pump out 120Hz easily(real 120Hz, not frame dropped psuedo speeds!) then it should easily run multiple versions of higher end monitors OK too.