Ok well.. my birthday is coming up in a few months from now, and I'm planning on buying a new monitor because this 19'' full screen isn't really cutting it for all the things I do, and I'd rather have it as a secondary screen.
So my question is, does anyone know what I should look out for? What aspect ratios and things like that.. I plan to buy a 22 inch wide screen, what brands are the best to seek after?
Thanks for your suggestions!
PS: I'd like to keep the price range in 200-250$ USD if possible.
Also some other things to note, it has to have a DVI jack in the back of it, I don't use VGA now. Another plus if it comes with a DVI cable.
Questions: About Monitors.
Brianna
lord_shar
I would suggest going for something with 1920x1200 resolution (1200p) just to maintain compatibility with HD screens, but then you'd better make sure you run a decent video card. Other things to look for include < 8ms pixel response times, 1000:1 or better contrast ratio, etc...
Brianna
I'm running an 320mb 8800GTS, but all the monitors with 1900 are 24inch or so, I can't afford that, and most 22 inch has the 1680x blah blah, which seems more suitable.
Quaker
1680x1050 usually.
Various manufacturers have different ways to specify response time, but generally speaking, all new LCDs have low enough response time. Same with contrast ratio, but it's not so true that they all have good contrast ratios.
Try to stay away from obscure "off-brands".
There's no sense trying to recommend particular monitors because, by the time your birthday comes "in a few months" it would all be different anyhow.
Various manufacturers have different ways to specify response time, but generally speaking, all new LCDs have low enough response time. Same with contrast ratio, but it's not so true that they all have good contrast ratios.
Try to stay away from obscure "off-brands".
There's no sense trying to recommend particular monitors because, by the time your birthday comes "in a few months" it would all be different anyhow.
awmiscool
i have this : http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/p...9&sku=320-6095
if you can buy, it.. omg its beautiful...
if you can buy, it.. omg its beautiful...
Lord Xeshm
Samsung 226BW
22" of glory
Absolutely beautiful
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824001096
22" of glory
Absolutely beautiful
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824001096
Brianna
Really? I looked at this one http://www.newegg.com/product/produc...82E16824001262 little over my spending limit but if it doesn't go too far, like 20-30$ out then it's ok.
How much is the 226BW? It's deactivated on newegg for some reason.
How much is the 226BW? It's deactivated on newegg for some reason.
Tachyon
Don't know what it costs in the States, but this would be my choice.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...=17&subcat=949
Then again, I am biased as it's what I currently use. The 2ms response comes into it's own when watching video footage and playing games with fast action.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...=17&subcat=949
Then again, I am biased as it's what I currently use. The 2ms response comes into it's own when watching video footage and playing games with fast action.
Brianna
Hmm seems to 370$ USD converted from Pounds.
It's nice but I don't exactly fancy the style too much (just personally) I am pretty picky.
So.. basically 2ms response time is better than 5? I think mine is a 5 currently.
It's nice but I don't exactly fancy the style too much (just personally) I am pretty picky.
So.. basically 2ms response time is better than 5? I think mine is a 5 currently.
Admael
Lower response time is always better, I still have a 17" Dell with 12ms response time, I haven't found a better monitor since (I lied, my main monitor is a 30" Gateway, but it doesn't count because you shouldn't have to spend so much more just to find something a little better).
A lot of the lower end Samsung monitors (the one's you've been looking at) are utter garbage, and aren't worth the trouble. But at ~250, you get what you pay for.
I like this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824116096
A lot of the lower end Samsung monitors (the one's you've been looking at) are utter garbage, and aren't worth the trouble. But at ~250, you get what you pay for.
I like this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824116096
Pasha the Mighty
the hp w2207h is supposed to be better than the 226cw, that's the version of the 226bw without the panel lottery and with some weird extra feature. The w2207h is supposed to be really.
Snograt
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lord Xeshm
Samsung 226BW
22" of glory Absolutely beautiful http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824001096 |
22" of glorier
Nazar Razak
Found this monitor. Specs look pretty sweet
KZaske
This is what I have. I would have gotten the BW model but they were out of stock at the time.
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....1831601 37115
5ms is just too slow. Yes, it does make a difference.
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....1831601 37115
5ms is just too slow. Yes, it does make a difference.
majestikk
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pasha the Mighty
the hp w2207h is supposed to be better than the 226cw, that's the version of the 226bw without the panel lottery and with some weird extra feature. The w2207h is supposed to be really.
|
Generally speaking the top of the line models are more likely to be made with in-house panels while the mid range models are more likely to have panels from a mix of suppliers including some in house. An example of this is the Samsung 226CW which at last word was still using in-house panels while the 226BW continues to use a mix and probably always will because it is a top seller and volumes are very high. (If the 226CW became popular enough they would probably have to outsource some of the panel supply because of in-house capacity limitations. They might do that anyway though to reduce cost.)
I haven't noticed much lately on the 226BW quality problems so I suspect that Samsung has probably managed to get things back under control. It's been over 6 months since the problem blew up.
Also, HD will still look good on a 1680x1050. But who watches HD DVD's on their computer?
Brianna
How is 5ms too slow then? It's looking like my options may be limited to that if I can't find a 250$ 'Ish Monitor.
The one I have now is 5Ms and I don't notice much of it.. I get 60 frames in most games so how exactly does it affect things?
The one I have now is 5Ms and I don't notice much of it.. I get 60 frames in most games so how exactly does it affect things?
katherinetheblood
Hey, here is a good suggestion. If you are gonna ever decide to cartograph, make sure its not wide screen! You will have to change resolutions to ever be able to get your map checked or compare it. Just words from the wise...from her flat wide screen monitor... >.> I still love it though, just a minor problem. ^^"
Brianna
I don't even play Guild Wars now so I'm not worried, however I did get Legendary Cartographer so I'm not worried about that either, thanks though.
Tachyon
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by katherinetheblood
Hey, here is a good suggestion. If you are gonna ever decide to cartograph, make sure its not wide screen!
|
MaDDoG1221
Ive got a 19" ACER W/S .. Love it! Looks great with guild wars on it
Only cost me $250
Only cost me $250
Admael
5ms is not slow.
Anything 12ms or less is more than enough for a casual gamer. I use to hate widescreen on a desktop. But it's a must now.
The higher display size monitors just look weird to me if they're not widescreen.
Anything 12ms or less is more than enough for a casual gamer. I use to hate widescreen on a desktop. But it's a must now.
The higher display size monitors just look weird to me if they're not widescreen.
Lord Sojar
Ugh...
Ok...
You could go with this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009094
Don't listen to anyone... that monitor is excellent, one of my friends has it.
I own this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824001234
You could go with this if you can push budget:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009113
Ok...
You could go with this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009094
Don't listen to anyone... that monitor is excellent, one of my friends has it.
I own this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824001234
You could go with this if you can push budget:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009113
Brianna
Well, I realize a lot of people in this thread are state of the art technology fanatics, so of course stuff that is still good doesn't get the credit it deserves - I know that.
My monitor isn't what anyone would consider ''Good'' but it really is, it cost me 250$ 2 years ago though and it's just a 19" Full screen.
I've been thinking about the Samsung ones I mentioned earlier, that seems like the best deal really.. I think all ''Potential'' flaws with hardware is bloated and over-exaggerated in those reviews, because once you have it in real life it's completely different, It's like scare tactics reading those reviews on newegg.
Though the insight is helping none the less so thanks for all the comments so far, the Acer doesn't look half bad really, and it's more in the price range I'm looking for.
My monitor isn't what anyone would consider ''Good'' but it really is, it cost me 250$ 2 years ago though and it's just a 19" Full screen.
I've been thinking about the Samsung ones I mentioned earlier, that seems like the best deal really.. I think all ''Potential'' flaws with hardware is bloated and over-exaggerated in those reviews, because once you have it in real life it's completely different, It's like scare tactics reading those reviews on newegg.
Though the insight is helping none the less so thanks for all the comments so far, the Acer doesn't look half bad really, and it's more in the price range I'm looking for.
Blackhearted
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Admael
5ms is not slow.
Anything 12ms or less is more than enough for a casual gamer. I use to hate widescreen on a desktop. But it's a must now. |
Brianna
Ok I have one I'm thinking of.
LG L226WTQ-BF 22in LCD Flat Panel Monitor 1680x1050
*2Ms response time
*3000:1 Contrast Ratio
Vs:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009094
Acer AL2216Wbd Black 22" 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor with HDCP support
*5Ms response
*700:1 Contrast.
The LG one is only 30$ more, so I have to make a choice. However I'll still keep looking to see what else is out there, might be something better.
LG L226WTQ-BF 22in LCD Flat Panel Monitor 1680x1050
*2Ms response time
*3000:1 Contrast Ratio
Vs:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009094
Acer AL2216Wbd Black 22" 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor with HDCP support
*5Ms response
*700:1 Contrast.
The LG one is only 30$ more, so I have to make a choice. However I'll still keep looking to see what else is out there, might be something better.
rob0626
found this on newegg. seems to be a very good monitor, and it's incredibly cheap for the specs you are getting. If i had the money, i would buy this. It's a little over your price range tho.
ASUS VK222U Black 22"
5000:1 Contrast
2ms (GTG) response rate
$289.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824236034
ASUS VK222U Black 22"
5000:1 Contrast
2ms (GTG) response rate
$289.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824236034
Snograt
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KZaske
This is what I have. I would have gotten the BW model but they were out of stock at the time.
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....1831601 37115 5ms is just too slow. Yes, it does make a difference. |
Don't ask me to explain it
Lord Sojar
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brianna
Ok I have one I'm thinking of.
LG L226WTQ-BF 22in LCD Flat Panel Monitor 1680x1050 *2Ms response time *3000:1 Contrast Ratio Vs: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009094 Acer AL2216Wbd Black 22" 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor with HDCP support *5Ms response *700:1 Contrast. The LG one is only 30$ more, so I have to make a choice. However I'll still keep looking to see what else is out there, might be something better. |
Assuming you can login to it, here is a link to one that really caught my eye.
http://bestbuy.dtdeals.com/auction/i...m?P=5&I=166018
For those that can't see it. Here is the stats:
G L226WTQ-BF Flatron 22in Widescreen Flat Panel LCD Monitor
Experience cutting-edge graphics with this 22" widescreen flat-panel LCD monitor, featuring an ultrafast 2 ms response time and wide viewing angles for a quality multimedia experience.
Features
Ultrafast 2 ms response time
3000:1 contrast ratio 300 cd/m brightness
1680 x 1050 maximum resolution
170 degree horizontal and 160 degree vertical viewing angles
15-pin D-sub and DVI-D (VGA) inputs
Flatron F-Engine chip adjusts contrast and brightness separately to enhance color and clarity of displayed visuals
eZ-Zooming one-touch resolution adjustment for easy changes to the screen display
Tilt and swivel functionality lets you easily change the monitors position to your viewing preferences
100mm x 100mm VESA-compliant
ENERGY STAR compliance assures energy efficiency
Microsoft Windows Vista compatible
Current bid: $155.00
Bids: 4 bids
Buy it Now:
$243.53
Shipping & Handling: $19.99 (within the continental USA only)
Time Left: 17 hours
End Time: 04/16/08 1:38:05 PM Pacific Time
If you can get it for 175 + 20 shipping + tax, that would still be 110 dollars below MSRP.
GL Brianna!
Snograt
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief
Microsoft Windows Vista compatible
|
__________________
majestikk
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief
Ugh...
Ok... You could go with this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009094 Don't listen to anyone... that monitor is excellent, one of my friends has it. I own this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824001234 You could go with this if you can push budget: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009113 |
comes with a 3year warranty so that's cool
2nd one is nice if you have SLI. otherwise you'll see less performance from your gpu on such a bigger resolution. 22" widescreen is the biggest you want to go on a single gpu.
3rd one basically the same thing. You want to avoid 24" unless you have SLI or a monsterous 98 gx2 or whatever that beat of a new card is with 1mb
the rest of the monitors posted look like great choices
good luck with your search
Brianna
I can see that link Rahja, I got it all set up.
Try this one out since you can, it's the same one but in better shape: http://bestbuy.dtdeals.com/auction/i...m?P=5&I=167925 it's in better condition than the other one and it's 240$ B/O, no one has bid on it yet.
I'm thinking of dropping a bid on it though.
Also I have an 8800 GTS, I think I'll be fine at those resolutions.
Try this one out since you can, it's the same one but in better shape: http://bestbuy.dtdeals.com/auction/i...m?P=5&I=167925 it's in better condition than the other one and it's 240$ B/O, no one has bid on it yet.
I'm thinking of dropping a bid on it though.
Also I have an 8800 GTS, I think I'll be fine at those resolutions.
KZaske
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brianna
How is 5ms too slow then? It's looking like my options may be limited to that if I can't find a 250$ 'Ish Monitor.
The one I have now is 5Ms and I don't notice much of it.. I get 60 frames in most games so how exactly does it affect things? |
Yes, VSYNC is off; no need for it. So, yes the response time does make a difference.
If you want to get your socks knocked off Get a Samsung, spend the little extra money even if it means delaying the purchass a bit. You will NOT regret it.
Admael
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KZaske
I had a Samsung 19 inch WS (1440x900) with a 5ms refresh rate, I got 20 (lowest) to 140 (highest) FPS. I upgraded to my Samsung 2232GW (1680x1050) 2ms refrest rate. My FPS now range 35 (slowest) to 165 (Highest I have seen). Same video card, same system. Not bad for an AGP card if I say so myself.
Yes, VSYNC is off; no need for it. So, yes the response time does make a difference. If you want to get your socks knocked off Get a Samsung, spend the little extra money even if it means delaying the purchass a bit. You will NOT regret it. |
The ms rating is the response time it takes for one pixel to go from white (from every single color) to black. If a monitor has 2ms W2B response time, it is a good LCD. Now, if it's 2ms GTG, it means *nothing* (gray to gray? sounds like a scam to me!)
As a marketing ploy, companies like to list some monitors as 2ms GTG. That's very misleading because you want 2ms W2B.
EDIT: GTG=gray to gray, W2B=black,white,black
Nanood
Go Go Go 24 inches
Lord Sojar
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brianna
I can see that link Rahja, I got it all set up.
Try this one out since you can, it's the same one but in better shape: http://bestbuy.dtdeals.com/auction/i...m?P=5&I=167925 it's in better condition than the other one and it's 240$ B/O, no one has bid on it yet. I'm thinking of dropping a bid on it though. Also I have an 8800 GTS, I think I'll be fine at those resolutions. |
http://bestbuy.dtdeals.com/auction/i...m?P=5&I=167202
24" juicy goodness. <3 My best friend has that bad boy, and it is sure pretty.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Snograt
Lol?
__________________ |
Snograt
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Someone technical
Grey-to-grey response times can not be compared with the black/white response times previously given out by manufacturers.
When measuring b/w responsiveness, the time it takes a pixel to shift from black to white and back to black again is determined. There are two separate times within the b/w change that add up to the specified overall time: The "rise" time it takes from black to white and the "fall" time it takes back from white to black. Therefore, the response time specified represents the sum of rise and fall time. The b/w shift is defined in the standard ISO (1) 13406-2. To the contrary, the grey-to-grey response time represents the average value established over several measurements from one grey shade to another grey shade. In doing so, only the time from starting gray to end grey is being measured but not the time it takes to change back to the initial grey value. Thus, there is only one reading per measurement and nothing to be summed up. Unfortunately, no official standard as to how exactly the grey-to-grey time is to be measured has been defined by now. This way, manufacturers can basically measure and specify grey-to-grey response times as they see fit. A new, revised form of the European ISO 9241 standard, expected to be released this year, is supposed to bring about the changes needed in order for customers to be able to better form an opinion on how displays actually perform. But even today, it is fair to say yet that grey-to-grey measurements are much closer to practical reality and thereby provide more insight on how a given panel actually performs in terms of responsiveness. Since b/w shifts bear the biggest change in contrast requiring the highest amount of voltage in order to align the liquid crystals, b/w shifts create a kind of ideal condition which is usually rarely seen in practice. Everyday use rather means varying colors and lots of grey scales, where there are differences in contrast to be dealt with that are much less pronounced than it is the case in b/w shifts. This, however, asks for smaller voltages impressed for aligning the liquid crystals, as well. And less voltage means there is less energy for the crystals to align by. Therefore, low grey-to-grey response times are closer to practical reality than low black/white response times. In order to be able to further decrease response times, more and more manufacturers have recently turned to employ the novel Overdrive technology. Nevertheless, it won’t be until the new ISO 9241 standard is finished that one can truly compare the specified response times of different manufacturers among one another. |
KZaske
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Admael
Oh how wrong we can be.
The ms rating is the response time it takes for one pixel to go from white (from every single color) to black. If a monitor has 2ms W2B response time, it is a good LCD. Now, if it's 2ms GTG, it means *nothing* (gray to gray? sounds like a scam to me!) As a marketing ploy, companies like to list some monitors as 2ms GTG. That's very misleading because you want 2ms W2B. EDIT: GTG=gray to gray, W2B=black,white,black |
As for the value of W2B or G2G ratings, it really does not matter as long as you don't mix them. Technically, W2B (W2B2W) is a more accurate representation of the capabilities of the monitor; however G2G is more commonly used because it reflects, more accurately real world use of the monitor. If one is going to use the monitor where color accuracy is a huge issue; look for W2B ratings, if you are going to use it for gaming, watching DVDs and general day to day applications G2G is “good enough.”
I would also like to point out that the color capabilities of the monitor have a dramatic effect on W2B ratings as every color is represented individually.
Admael
The only reason I brought it up was because both monitors in your previous post are 5ms W2B. And you claimed one of them gave better FPS.
KZaske
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Admael
The only reason I brought it up was because both monitors in your previous post are 5ms W2B. And you claimed one of them gave better FPS.
|
Brianna
Omfg I just bought this: http://www.newegg.com/product/produc...82E16824001262
I am in love! I'm so glad I went with Samsung, it was so worth the extra 50$ that I didn't want to pay, couldn't be happier.
It has no dead pixels either, and just a slight bleed on the left which is barely ever noticeable. I'm going to buy Samsung monitors from now on, but what I'm really happy about is no dead pixels!
Oh yeah and to add my performance is just as good as it was on 1280x1024, I still get all the same FPS as I used to get.
I am in love! I'm so glad I went with Samsung, it was so worth the extra 50$ that I didn't want to pay, couldn't be happier.
It has no dead pixels either, and just a slight bleed on the left which is barely ever noticeable. I'm going to buy Samsung monitors from now on, but what I'm really happy about is no dead pixels!
Oh yeah and to add my performance is just as good as it was on 1280x1024, I still get all the same FPS as I used to get.