Monitors

S

Seagull

Spy
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
924
Reaction score
0
I have this old CRT I run at a low desktop resolution so my eyes don't bleed from a low refresh rate, but I'm thinking about finally picking up an LCD. Anyone know of any decent (mid-range, $200-300 budget, preferably 16:9/widescreen) LCDs?
 
i feel iffy when it comes to webcams. i hear horror stories of peepers looking at what your doing. and i'd probably put a cloth on that thing late at night :naughty:
 
What is your current video card? If you have an older card and don't plan on upgrading anytime soon, you don't want get a monitor at too high of a native resolution.
 
Samsung ToC T240.

Have it myself, it's excellent.
 
Seagull said:
9800GT with a e8400 - I'm searching around now and found a couple decent ones, will try to research them more. Here they are:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001317
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236053

They're both 5ms (which I hope I won't really notice when gaming), but somewhat worried by the contrast ratios. I figure it won't matter much as I tend to white-wash my CRT so I can see better/easier in dark areas of games though ;)
Click to expand...

It's really hard to find a nice compromise between quick response and detailed darks. Mostly all monitors $300 or less are TN panels. While they have the fastest response time, they are the worst when it comes to contrast. There are a few exceptions, such as the Dell 2209WA. It's an E-IPS panel, and is the best compromise between speed and contrast. It's very hard to find one now though, and it is 16:10 rather than 16:9 as you preferred. If you're going to be using it for PC stuff though, 16:10 is superior in my eyes. I use the BenQ V2400W, which is one of the best TN panels on the market. Extremely fast, very nice contrast, and it's also the thinnest LCD available. The only con I've found are touch sensitive buttons, which can really hamper precise menu interaction. It can be had from the BenQ store for $300 plus shipping after the promo code "V2400W" (currently on backorder though). If you really want a nice monitor without waiting for availability, the Samsung T240 rates very highly.
 
The reason why I'm currently preferring 16:9 over 16:10 is because in Source Games, you get a higher FoV from 16:9. For example:

4:3: http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/Evil8324/cp_badlands0044.jpg
16:10: http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/Evil8324/cp_badlands0045.jpg
16:9: http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/Evil8324/cp_badlands0043.jpg

(all taken on my 4:3 CRT which is why they probably look weird). Even 16:10 is a big upgrade from 4:3 though.

I'll look into those, thanks :)

Edit: Also looking into the Samsung T220. Seems to be the 16:9 version of the T240 you linked above.
 
Seagull said:
The reason why I'm currently preferring 16:9 over 16:10 is because in Source Games, you get a higher FoV from 16:9. For example:

4:3: http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/Evil8324/cp_badlands0044.jpg
16:10: http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/Evil8324/cp_badlands0045.jpg
16:9: http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t193/Evil8324/cp_badlands0043.jpg

(all taken on my 4:3 CRT which is why they probably look weird). Even 16:10 is a big upgrade from 4:3 though.

I'll look into those, thanks :)
Click to expand...

It's up to you honestly. 16:10 is much better than 16:9 for general PC use, especially for web browsing. As far as total pixel count goes, it's also superior. While the horizontal field of view may be smaller, you will be able to more total picture at 1920x1200 vs 1920x1080. I cheat though, and use my rotated 20" for web browsing. Best 2 monitor setup I could think of, though I would love to get my hands on that Dell for web browsing, with the V2400W on the right:

P1010129.jpg
 
Sedako said:
If you really want a nice monitor without waiting for availability, the Samsung T240 rates very highly.
Click to expand...

I would recommend against it. I have one and, while it is pretty nice, I dont think I would pay that much money for it again. The blacks are pretty awful, my viewsonic vx924 has darker blacks, while only half the contrast. I've tried calibrating the thing, but whatever I do I cant get it to actually look right in all areas. Plus the touch buttons blow ass. To turn it on or off, you have to hold your entire thumb over the touch sensitive area and rub around for a couple seconds before it registers. And the buttons on the side are so deeply set in that I actually have to stick something in there to push them.
 
Krynn72 said:
I would recommend against it. I have one and, while it is pretty nice, I dont think I would pay that much money for it again. The blacks are pretty awful, my viewsonic vx924 has darker blacks, while only half the contrast. I've tried calibrating the thing, but whatever I do I cant get it to actually look right in all areas.
Click to expand...

Odd, I've heard it has pretty exceptional blacks. I really need to see one in person then. Maybe they'll have one at the mall when I go this weekend.

Krynn72 said:
Plus the touch buttons blow ass. To turn it on or off, you have to hold your entire thumb over the touch sensitive area and rub around for a couple seconds before it registers. And the buttons on the side are so deeply set in that I actually have to stick something in there to push them.
Click to expand...

This is a trend that I wish would go away. I see no reason to cripple great devices with touch functionality when it doesn't even work as well. Like I said, this is the only real downside to the V2400W. Tactile feedback is much better for a lot of things anyways.
 
Get Acer. I have a 20" (x203wbd) and a 22" (x223wbd) Acer monitor. Got the 22" last December from Office Depot and the 20" last September from Newegg, and they've worked flawlessly since. You can get the 22" for $150 now on newegg.
 
Go with 16:10 for sure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WUXGA
The 16:10 aspect ratio (as opposed to the 16:9 used in widescreen televisions) was chosen because this aspect ratio is appropriate for displaying two full pages of text side by side.[1] It also allows viewing of 16:9 video on a computer with player controls visible. The 16:10 screen (and display device profile) also comes very close to what is considered an aesthetically pleasing, golden rectangle.
Click to expand...
 
I just upgraded from a 7 year old, 17" viewsonic LCD to a 21.5", 1900x1080 2ms asus...and it's amazing how much more crisp the picture is. I'm still working with the colors because it feels too bright, but who knows...7 years does a lot to LCD technology.
 
I have a Samsung 2333SW and it works well and fits quite nicely into that price range.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Irksome
My first LCD.
Replies
10
Views
745
fido139
fido139
VirusType2
x1900xt -> 4850
Replies
19
Views
1K
xcellerate
xcellerate
S
LCD woes
Replies
2
Views
960
skose
S
WhiteZero
Choosing an LCD - Help
Replies
11
Views
1K
Garfield_
Garfield_
The Terminator
Monitor buying guide
Replies
0
Views
586
The Terminator
The Terminator
Back
Top