Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Terribly Disappointed With LCD's
So I thought I should upgrade my pc, by buying a new monitor, my old one was a second hand dating back from 1998.
Boy, was I eager in anticipation waiting for my 19 inch display Samsung LCD 4:3 format (square screen)
Fianlly, it arrived on Wednesday, only to realize that LCD's have a rather poor image quality compared to the old CRT monitors.
My model is Sync Master 943. The most annoying factor is the fact that you may not optimally view image from any angle, the top is rather dark and the bottom rather bright and the grid aspect which doesn't enable smoothness. And it's a 2010 model. After so many years you would expect they've made some improvements to the technology.
Comments
Then don't by crappy monitors. My 22" widescreen has a 170 degree viewing angle, far better color brilliance, albeit it can't produce the natural colors of a CRT, making it a bit less favorable than CRT's when it comes to photo editing.
But seriously... 19" 4:3? swallow the extra $50 and get a damn wide screen that has some viewing angle to it.
Played - EQ 1/2, WoW, SWG, SWTOR, GW 1/2 UO, STO, CO, DCUO, AO, Rift.
I specifically wanted a 4:3 format, as I was under the impression they are better for games. I wanted a games monitor. Money were no issue. I was going to pay more if needed, as I told the guy at the local shop.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
Where did you get the impression 4:3 is better for games? I couldn't imagine gaming on anything less than 16:9 or 16:10, much less not using the widescreen for non-gaming stuff on the PC.
If money is no object, then do a more thorough research on the available LCD displays on the market today. There are different panel technologies, Twisted Nematic being the fastest and cheapest, but also producing the worst color and limited viewing angles. IPS and S-IPS have matured very well and produce fantastic true color displays with wide viewing angles and response times have gotten much lower, enough for gaming on a good display.
There are some real quality LCDs on the market though if you know what you are looking for. Look for an LED backlit S-IPS display with a fast response time 7-5ms and under, high contrast, and 1:1 processing. Be sure to consider your input options as well; many of the newer video cards are moving to hdmi or displayport.
Better for games? Thanks insane. I'm actually the manager over an IT company, and one of my early moves was replacing all the 4:3 screen with widescreen, because I simply cant stand anything otherwise (in fact every TV in my house is now HD/widescreen, lol).
If I were you, I'd send that back and get a real monitor. I run all my games and whatnot on 2 22" screen and when I am ready for a long gaming session I will fire it through my 65". Widescreen FTW!
Well, mine has a 5 ms response and a dynamic contrast of 50000:1. It's not so much the monitor himself, but being my first LCD and comparing it to the image quality of a 1998 CRT, I'm not impressed at all. I expected the same picture quality in terms of details and smoothness. Nothing to complain about it overall.
I was mislead about the format, it seems. Well, now I know, but as it turns out, I'll be stuck with this one for now, as I'm not willing to invest any more in a monitor, I'm looking to upgrade my pc.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
... seriously flat screens are the way to go, but, make sure the one your buying is really suitable for gaming, the closer to 4 ms you can get the better, and widescreen is a must have item really.. couldnt live without it myself, i only have a 19' but its 1440x900 not exactly awesome but at 75hz its not bad and only cost 100 quid, i think monitors are going to improve in quality even more soon, and the price is probably going to drop for the bigger screens, so its worth shopping around... but.. crt.. man, do they even make those things any more?
The optimal setting for mine is 1280x1024 @60 Mhz.
It cost me about 130 E.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
The optimal setting for mine is 1280x1024 @60 Mhz.
It cost me about 130 E.
thats quite a low refresh rate.. does it really only have a max of 60? although 60 is good enough, and your unlikely to notice flicker, but for less eyestrain.. imo, 70+ is kind of optimal...
It has 60 and 75.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
It has 60 and 75.
for games, i'd keep it set at 75 then, especially if your playing games with rapid movements etc..
Speaking of that, not much to play atm
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
Btw almost all LCD monitors 'support' 60Hz and 75Hz but the 75Hz is not native. What happens if you set it to 75Hz is it can slow down the actual response time by screwing up the LCD overdrive logic in the controller, and beyond that it drops every 5th frame to resync back to 60Hz since it's actually running the panel at 60Hz while converting your 75Hz input.
LCD's do not flicker because they have a constant light source behind the pixels, 60Hz and 75Hz don't have the same effect they do on CRT's.
If you have an LCD that supports 76Hz like the Dell 2209WA e-IPS panel it probably does true 76Hz refresh (updating the screen every 13.3ms instead of 16.6ms).
I think the Dell 2209WA and the NEC EA231WMi are probably 2 of the best nearly affordable monitors right now.
I think you definitely want widescreen for gaming, there's nothing technically different between the panels that would give you a better picture, but widescreen offers a wider field of view because of the 16:9 or 16:10 aspect ratio. This is why Eyefinity rocks, you can get up to a 48:9 field of view using 3 monitors which is totally immersive.
Bah, paltry 19inch screens. Try pc gaming on a 46" sony z5100.....then you'll know gaming nirvana, unless you get an hd projector ( ' ;
Welcome to the world of marketing and shitty TN-panels.
mm first when you buy a screen always check two thing
1 :buy an HD SCREEN(23 inch is native hd ,1920x1080 or such is HD!
2:buy widescreen
3:stay with big brand!
4:dont buy acer even if its given to you !why?because they dont support their product with new driver ,software like other brand do
want something from them ?send a check and they ll send you the stuff in a juffy(about 3 years!oups no need the warranty is finish lol!)
Thank you for the info, everyone. I wish I knew that in advance. Oh, well, better late than never
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
those seem to be fairly contradictory details... as the response times are hideous.. 13.3 ms.. is ok for a tv maybe.. but for a computer monitor.. its just no good.. anything over 6ms is really bad imo, the closer to 4ms you can get the better.. though most arent over 5ms anyway.... can't help but think those timings are inaccurate on the dell monitor...i dont think they would really make a monitor with such a long response time..
If you can get a refund on your monitor I highly recommend a Samsung 22" or 23" monitor. I have a 22" and it runs at 1680x1050, which is good enough for me.
I'm not sure where you got the impression that wider screens would be bad for games, it's simply not true. When I first got my monitor I noticed my field of view in all my online games was about a third bigger counting both sides of the screen.
If you're stuck with it consider getting a bigger widescreen monitor and using a 2 monitor setup, if money isn't an issue. Check amazon for Samsung monitors, they usually have some competitive prices and their marketplace vendors are trustworthy as long as they have a 95% positive lifetime rating or higher.
-Cym
I have to agree with the above. Those two monitors are just really good in terms of both viewing angle and colour accuracy (due to having IPS panels).
The TN panels on standard LCD monitors are just bad at providing a wide viewing angle and a solid accuracy. You'll notice the colours change even when you sit a bit more uptight. On some monitors, colours even change according to where they're displayed on the panel - so that straight red on the sides will look different from straight reds at the top or in the dead center. It's especially a dealbreaker when you're doing design because you'll never get the colours right. Ditto if you're just a gamer who's fussy about colour accuracy. So if you have the cash, the IPS panels are best for accurate visuals. The old Apple Cinema Display monitors use these panels, too.
The thing with IPS panels are, the response time is usually not as good as the TN panels. Worse, some have really noticable input lag (that's the time that passes from the moment you input a command to the moment it is displayed on the screen). There are tests on this all over the net, check Youtube for "input lag" while you're at it. When the lag is more than a frame, it's going to start hurting your gameplay if your reflexes are really sharp. CRTs have about zero input lag. Most TNs have very very little.
I have a LED-backlit LCD monitor myself. Really crisp picture with uniform lighting thanks to LED backlighting (so no bleeds on the edges)... I could even say it's a joy to look at. Still, the colour accuracy throughout all angles really does not cut it.
So I'd say: If you want colour accuracy, a wide viewing angle and an image that's really smooth and easy on the eyes, you'll have to cough it up and go IPS.
If you want crisp picture with solid uniform lighting, go LED-backlit.
Of course, now we're seeing some panels LED-backlit IPS panels, too - which would be the best. Apple's new cinema displays, for example have such panels. Also, HP has one. Though at nearly 2 grand (it's a pro monitor), it's really really heavy on the wallet.
CRTs don't have these problems, but I'd personally still go with LCD. The image can be crisper, and for me they're much much easier on the eyes. Also, I do like big, widescreen monitors.
I specifically wanted a 4:3 format, as I was under the impression they are better for games. I wanted a games monitor. Money were no issue. I was going to pay more if needed, as I told the guy at the local shop.
take that screen back and get a refund. tell them you dont want it. have you looked around and seen all the shiny new hdtvs in that store?? they are all widescreen! u know, those same tv's that people get just to play their ps3/xbox360s on.
if money isnt an issue, get yourself a 24" lcd 5ms(minimum, works fine for games) 1920x1080res screen. or something like it.
Jesus, this thread has so much bullshit information and false beliefs, could you people please make some research and think about it before posting.
IPS variants are the best choice atm.
those seem to be fairly contradictory details... as the response times are hideous.. 13.3 ms.. is ok for a tv maybe.. but for a computer monitor.. its just no good.. anything over 6ms is really bad imo, the closer to 4ms you can get the better.. though most arent over 5ms anyway.... can't help but think those timings are inaccurate on the dell monitor...i dont think they would really make a monitor with such a long response time..
below 85 ms it is not humanly possible to notice the difference
so 1.3 vs 5 ms lol your computer memory themsleves run probably at 7.8 ms so as long as its lower then 85 ms its no biggy since we need to factor in everything alse lets say 42 ms speed ,the screen is at 13.3 lol this will never be an issue!
you ll notice nework issue way before lol!
I have 2 LCDs at work, 1 at home and 1 new laptop. All of them have terrific viewing angles, I lose nothing on my laptop from any angel at all.
You just got a terrible monitor, when you go cheap on a monitor you get what you pay for. There's a reason why you see 1 monitor cheap and another monitor of the same size much more expensive. On eactually is much better then the other.
As for widescreen vs square. I was resistant at first too, since I always had a square tv with my consoles on it and a square monitor for my pc gaming. But I am doing great with the widescreen in both cases now. It's just a matter of getting more used to it. Size matters too, if you get a widescreen that is shorter then your square was then it might bug you, but if it's at least the same height then you now get to see more then before.
I specifically wanted a 4:3 format, as I was under the impression they are better for games. I wanted a games monitor. Money were no issue. I was going to pay more if needed, as I told the guy at the local shop.
take that screen back and get a refund. tell them you dont want it. have you looked around and seen all the shiny new hdtvs in that store?? they are all widescreen! u know, those same tv's that people get just to play their ps3/xbox360s on.
if money isnt an issue, get yourself a 24" lcd 5ms(minimum, works fine for games) 1920x1080res screen. or something like it.
nha op 4.3 is there because its the old format you can even select it in the screen menu of a widescreen HD IF YOU SO CHOSE
just make sure you have the standard sized hd widescreen !on that part i cant help you since there are too many you ll have to
use google and check what the standard HD RES,ratio ,is because there are a lot of different ratio but i bet there is only one STANDARD ratio for widescreen HD!
op probably was sold an old design !since lot of company buy thiose screen so that the next guy or gal beside the guy doesnt check his or her screen ,completly useless for gamer tho!