Gaming World Forums
General Category => Technology and Programming => Topic started by: goat on March 11, 2008, 03:46:37 pm
-
My Viewsonic G810 is dying, and I'll need a replacement soon. I've had this baby since '01 and its only now starting to flicker and ghost the slightest bit. I'd get a LCD but I can't stand the low refresh rates, lower color range, and blurrier image at non-native resolutions. I'd prefer something 19-21 inches that can at least do 1600x1200 at 85~90Hz. I know a few of you run higher resolution than that, so I was wondering, what monitors do you guys suggest? I haven't bought a monitor in years and have no idea what are some good models out there now. I'd just go with viewsonic again but their new models seem pretty pricey. The G810 couldn't even run 1600x1200 above 75hz, so I'd settle for something that could at least do that resolution flicker free.
-
If you get a LCD you'll get used to it and there isn't much of ghosting as in older LCDs like from laptops of 1999 (if they existed at that time)
-
Ghosting is practically an urban legend by now. It's definitely no longer a reason not to get an LCD, and it doesn't make a shred of difference if you're a "hardcore gamer" who needs his high refresh rate.
Truth is, there is absolutely no way you'll be deprived in any way by being on 60 Hz (the only refresh rate that LCD screens will let you use). You say you "can't stand the low refresh rates", but that's literally impossible to notice due to the inherently different way an LCD screen displays an image.
I don't really get it!
But if you're getting a CRT screen, you're right in getting one that does have a high refresh rate.
-
I was thinking they were still 50Hz, and the fact they eliminated ghosting is very good news indeed. I guess I'd even take an LCD now if I found the right deal. These CRTs that do the refresh/resolutions I want are very pricey indeed.
-
I was thinking they were still 50Hz, and the fact they eliminated ghosting is very good news indeed. I guess I'd even take an LCD now if I found the right deal. These CRTs that do the refresh/resolutions I want are very pricey indeed.
Yeah, you're right. They used to be 50 Hz, as the response time was still quite high back then. I'm not even sure how long ago that was, but it's been quite a few years. LCD screens have improved dramatically since their inception. Right now I'm using an Apple 23" inch Cinema Display (1920x1200) and I'm very happy with it. It's actually a bit too expensive these days (it's one of the few Apple products that hasn't either been upgraded or dropped in price for quite some time; I bought it for €900 EUR) but it's a pretty high-end screen, so I'm happy with it.
I don't really know what to suggest other than reading reviews. Just go out and read reviews or go see the screens in the store. Don't be fooled by stories of high contrast ratios. My expensive screen has a relatively low contrast ratio (only 700:1 I believe, as opposed to some ridiculous claims of today's manufacturers that run into the thousands) but it makes not one iota of difference.
-
Thanks for the tip on contrast ratios. I was just looking at ones that boasted 5000:1 and my jaw dropped. Even if that's not how high they actually perform it's still very surprising to me how much they've improved.
Quick question: With so many LCDs using widescreen pixel ratios, are there any 4:3 ones out? or should I even concern myself with that?
-
I really don't like widescreens, but with LCDs I haven't seen many 4:3 screens larger than 19 inch (1280x1024) (Well, technically that's not even 4:3...)
I've seen a few 1600x1200 ones online, but they all seemed a bit older and usually shitty response time and/or contrast too
-
Thanks for the tip on contrast ratios. I was just looking at ones that boasted 5000:1 and my jaw dropped. Even if that's not how high they actually perform it's still very surprising to me how much they've improved.
Quick question: With so many LCDs using widescreen pixel ratios, are there any 4:3 ones out? or should I even concern myself with that?
Widescreen (16:10) is the future. I don't think you'll find many very recent LCD screens that still use a 4:3 ratio.
-
How well does widescreen work with games? I'm starting to see the option to change to widescreen ratio in more games, but what happens if it doesn't support it, I just get the black bars on the sides?
-
How well does widescreen work with games? I'm starting to see the option to change to widescreen ratio in more games, but what happens if it doesn't support it, I just get the black bars on the sides?
Either that or the screen will be stretched (It's usually configurable in your video settings
-
I think that most modern games support widescreen resolutions now. It'd be kind of strange for them not to support such resolutions, since so many (LCD) monitors are widescreen these days. When I play on 1600x1200, there are black bars, but yes, this will be configurable.
-
Thanks for all the help guys.
I'm looking for LCDs that go above 1600x1200 but they all seem to be very expensive. I can't seem to find one under $300. I may have to just go with a CRT due to insufficient funds.
-
If you bought a CRT now you'd be shooting yourself in the foot. TFTs are the way man. Less power usage, brigher, more consistent and compact too.
-
Thanks for all the help guys.
I'm looking for LCDs that go above 1600x1200 but they all seem to be very expensive. I can't seem to find one under $300. I may have to just go with a CRT due to insufficient funds.
1680x1050 can be done for as low as $200ish if your lucky, but past that there is a pretty big jump in price
-
I picked up a HyVision 22" for around $220 (was on sale with a rebate) at tigerdirect.ca. I've noticed since then they've skyrocketed to like $300+!
As you've been told, LCDs have come a long way. I was concerned about getting one, as the 17" OLLLLLD LCD I used occassionally at my father's house was horrible, with a response time of like 25ms (ie tons of ghosting). Now though, the average 22-24" Widescreen has 2-5ms, and you don't notice any ghosting whatsoever.
The only cons I've come across:
-Blurry resolutions in older games that don't support widescreen resolutions, and annoying stretching which can makes characters look a little "fat"
-Some contrast issues if you've viewing the screen from an angle as opposed to sitting in front of it. Obviously really only an issue if you're trying to watch something on the screen while laying down on a couch or bed or something, and even then it's not a big issue, stuff just looks darker and blacks aren't really that black. Might just be an issue with my brand of monitor too
You CAN find Widescreens for under $300 - though you might want to just drop the extra bucks and get real quality (Mr. SLI'd 8800 GTXs!!!!!)
edit: wrote pros when i meant cons for some reason.
-
Well technically they're GTs, and I only got em for 200$ each, which is about as much as I'd like to plunk down on a monitor. I was thinking about it and I'd really like something capable of HD (1920x1080), but I seem to be in a standstill. I can't find any good CRTs that go that high, and the LCDs that do are definitely out of budget.
You guys are making a great argument for LCDs but I'm seriously dead split between the two. :fogetshrug:
-
-Some contrast issues if you've viewing the screen from an angle as opposed to sitting in front of it. Obviously really only an issue if you're trying to watch something on the screen while laying down on a couch or bed or something, and even then it's not a big issue, stuff just looks darker and blacks aren't really that black. Might just be an issue with my brand of monitor too
Yeah, this depends on the brand. My screen doesn't have this at all. I think most modern and slightly more expensive LCDs have a viewing angle of 170 degrees or more.
You won't find a 1920x1080 LCD screen (or maybe there are one or two around) because that's 16:9. LCD screens are always 16:10. So you'd have to look for 1920x1200.
-
Get a widescreen LCD man, they're so nice. My mom has this nice 22" and I have a 20.1" and both are a joy to use.
I was thinking about it and I'd really like something capable of HD (1920x1080), but I seem to be in a standstill. I can't find any good CRTs that go that high, and the LCDs that do are definitely out of budget.
This doesn't make sense as even 20" widescreen LCDs run at 1680x1050 which is far better than 720p and nearly as good as 1080p. However, 1080 content will scale down to fit all the pixels your screen can display which will look fantastic all the same. You're going to have to drop a pretty penny to get a 24" widescreen LCD which DOES run at a better resolution than 1080p. Check this little chart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Aspect_Ratios_and_Resolutions.svg) I found on wikipedia if you want to learn more about how resolutions compare.
I would recommend a 22" widescreen LCD as you can get them for $200 on TigerDirect and they really do run at a beautiful resolution. I can't honestly see the need to drop $300 more for 2 extra inches and true 1080 greatness (you know deep down you want it just for braggin rights anyway).
Make sure if you get an LCD that you get the DVI hookups for them. The quality is worlds better through DVI (DVI is just like HDMI except it cannot be encrypted and does not carry audio).
-
I never had an LCD before the on I bought a few months ago for my birthday. I will NEVER go back to a CRT now that I have my 22" widescreen LCD. I doubt it's even worth the extra money for a 1920x1200 LCD. High definition looks just as good on a 1680x1050
The only problem I've ever had was when I switched from my old VGA(for some reason I was using vga on this shit) to DVI, some of my older games were blurry. When I switched my graphics card though, the blurry picture went away, so everything looks perfect now besides some stretching, but there's nothing you can do about that even if you went CRT. You'll get used to an LCD right away. If you want though, go to your local computer store and look at the quality of the picture. They really do look incredible.
-
About the widescreen thing, some games actually have widescreen resolution options, like Oblivion.
-
You can also force some games to run widescreen, including Age of Mythology and the Battlefield games. It's a matter of adding some code to the shortcut that tells the game what res to run at.
-
I figured I wouldn't find something at exactly 1920x1080, and if I really wanted bragging rights I'd be throwing money at an awesome LCD HDTV to use as a monitor. Truth is I just want something a little better than what I currently have, which has been VERY satisfactory the last 7 years. That's why I was worried about lower resolutions, refresh rate, ghosting, and black levels. You guys have made very convincing arguements for the first three, but the last I seem to still be divided on. I took Neophyte's advice and checked out the selection at a local computer store, and I have to say the blacks look darker, and the colors more vivid on the CRTs (with the exception of the very high end LCDs where the difference is negligible but the price is astronomical). In my defense I'm very picky about graphics and I work in a very dark room where the difference woul d be most noticable.
Would you guys lynch me if I said I was still considering a CRT?
-
I figured I wouldn't find something at exactly 1920x1080
Well, yeah, I already said a few times you won't find anything with that resolution since that's 16:9. Computer monitors are 16:10, and for that reason you should look for 1920x1200.
-
Would you guys lynch me if I said I was still considering a CRT?
YES. You dafty.
I stared at a CRT until I was 18 and now I wear glasses. Since I got my TFT my peepers have been a lot better but my parents definitely blame my video gaming addiction for me not being able to make out a numberplate without specs.
Now with my TFT I get a lot more womens.
This post rocks mainly because I managed to sneak in the word "peepers".
-
took Neophyte's advice and checked out the selection at a local computer store, and I have to say the blacks look darker, and the colors more vivid on the CRTs (with the exception of the very high end LCDs where the difference is negligible but the price is astronomical).
They still had CRT's at your local computer store? :crazy:
And what brand LCD's were you looking at? I mean I worked at a computer store this past year and the LCD's I've seen are pretty insane, and they only cost about $250. There's lots of room for customization for your LCD's too, since you can change the mode on the monitor depending on what you're doing(gaming, reading, etc).
The colors look much more vivid in gaming mode than the factory settings of the LCD.
-
Sasmung LCD's have very nice colors btw...
*reads self post on samsung lcd*
But if you wish to get more colors and less resolution, you might always run for your local store and buy an lcd T.V., I personally suggest 2653(h) - Samsung probably around 350 bucks
-
What is the difference between LCD tvs and monitors? I have a LG lcd that also works as a TV, the only thing I used it for other than as a monitor was to watch a DVD and the image quality was rather bad
-
I picked up a 19" Widescreen HD LCD screen for less than $150 by shopping around and sending in a mail-in rebate. And generally LCD monitors are pretty cheap and (IMO) look better than CRT. They're also thinner $$. :D
EDIT: And by less, I mean $129 including tax.
-
Would you guys lynch me if I said I was still considering a CRT?
omg dude, yes. yes I do want to lynch you. :fogethuh:
Let's look at this point by point.
CRT Monitors
Behemoths (good luck finding room for one on your desk)
Heavy (40lbs+ usually)
Painful on the eyes (unless you have a CRT with insane refresh rates... even this won't be as good on your eyes as a 60hz LCD)
Great color (but even printing companies are moving to LCDs where color matters so what does that tell you)
Blacks are true (but who cares... this piece of shit is consuming your desk even at 17")
LCD Monitors
Ultra thin (hey I have room for my keyboard now!)
Light (LAN parties are suddenly much more feasible now!)
Widescreen (hey watching widescreen movies is suddenly much more enjoyable!)
Ghosting - doesn't exist anymore on new LCD's
Poor color - is really only found on the really cheap models - even this can be fixed with your video card's color correction
Blacks not black enough - usually they are black enough. If not this can be corrected with the video card to a degree*.
Also, please note that places like Best Buy feed out a signal to all the monitors that isn't even specialized or optimized for each particular one. I often see a slide show running on a 24" widescreen going through VGA running at 1024x768 (NOT A WIDESCREEN RES!). Also, usually the colors haven't been optimized through the LCD which can be a matter of turning the contrast up.
EDIT*: fixed as per recommendation of inri.
-
No, the not-black-enough can't be corrected with different videocards because LCDs have that back-light and even when it's supposed to be showing black some of the light leaks and this results in the black not looking black enough, but I think that when they invent LED monitors this won't exist anymore
-
Your right. I meant 'to a degree'. Without color correction my LCD blacks don't look black at all. With color correction, they're much better.
-
But what about a completely black screen?
-
But what about a completely black screen?
Turn off the monitor.
The black on my LCD look pretty black compared to plastic surrounding it.
-
Video cards can help compensate for color richness and black levels, but it doesn't completely do away with it. It comes down to what the monitor can display and not the data that it's receiving. My ONLY gripes are the colors and the blacks, I could care less how big it is or how heavy it is. And it's only painful on the eyes in low refresh which is why if I get something with decent refresh at 1920x1440 then everything below will go even higher and therefore not be an issue (specially since ill probably use lower resolutions than that most the time anyways). My old monitor is 21' CRT that must weigh 40-50 lbs, and I'm not transporting it anywhere so it's not an issue. What is an issue is when I ask my friends who have CRTs and LCDs in dual monitor to switch to clone mode and load up a game, I can DEFINITELY tell the difference. The darkest blacks are not only a dark grey in comparison, but even the color gradients look like the LCDs are just unable to show the same amount of colors on screen. When on desktop, I agree, I can't tell the difference there. But I'm not interested in that, I'm a gamer at heart. The only time they look comparable is when I look at the very high end models at circuit city. But this isn't really LCDs vs CRTs, its "whats the best monitor for $200-$300 that wont just look like I have a very big cell phone screen". Considering CRTs have no doubt improved as well, and all the articles I can pull up comparing the two show that pro's of CRTs are still the color depth and the clarity of lower resolutions. If I can have the better image quality at the cost of size and weight, that's something I can live with.
CRTs only still exist for the freaks out there like me. Even if LCDs got me more women I'd still complain.
I found $209 Viewsonic G90FB-4 19' that goes up to 1920x1440 at 75Hz (so thats an easy 85-90Hz at 1920x1080), so right now I'm pretty much looking around for an LCD thats comparable to it (since you guys got me rethinking about LCDs so much).
-
I bought a used 22 inch crt that does 1920x1440@75 for 50 dollars almost 2 years ago. So 200 is a bit expensive (plus they probably will make you pay for the shipping). So yeah, I don't think I would ever buy a crt new today.
also 19 inches for 1920x1440 is way too small, you will hurt your eyes. You will probably end up using 1600x1200 (which it can probably do at 85hz). Also, you will probably never use the CRT set to a widescreen resolution (if that was what you were talking about). There is so much wasted space on the screen.
And as for me, I have used CRTs my whole life, and unless I am using a 1k dollar LCD, I can tell that colors do not look good and blacks aren't the blackest. You loose detail in colors the darker you get. So, I am assuming you are someone who has been using CRT your whole life too and you will notice these problems if you get a budget LCD. But at the same time if you just suck it up and buy some LCD, you will get used to it's flaws and forget about it in like a week.
-
Ah, a fellow CRT enthusiast :d
Well you did buy it used, and this is one of the better viewsonic CRTs. If it lasts anywhere near as long as this current one did it will be well worth the cost.
I'd just want to go that high for 1080 HD movies, I'd probably still do gaming at 1600x1200 (probably get 90hz-100hz on that, imo) or even 1280x960 if it's something very straining like crysis. And yea, I've been using them my whole life, and have had times when I had to use LCDs temporarily, and I always can tell the difference when I go back.
-
Just so you're aware, a good 30-40% of your screen is going to be black bars if watching a full 1080 widescreen movie. That's where the widescreen monitor has an advantage - it's much closer to the resolution movies are recorded at.
-
On the other hand, plasma tv screens are now optimized for gamers (oh yes, stop fearing the old brands) and it IS awesome when it comes to blacks (if you don't mind the loss in sharpness).
-
I have this monitor:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009108
it works gr8.
I'd say to go with something like it if you want a cost effective monitor.
-
I hear plasmas have horrible life spans, and are prone to suffer more dead pixels than LCDs.
-
I have a Samsung SyncMaster 932bw 19" widescreen LCD monitor. It runs natively at 1440x900 at 75hz. LCDs have come a long way. This baby displays even the fastest games with no blurring or ghosting. I bought mine for 232usd.
When shopping for a monitor, look at the contrast ratio, and the response time. My Samsung has a very fast response time at 2ms, and a very good contrast ratio at 3000:1. A standard Dell or Gateway monitor, for example, usually has a 6ms response time and a 600:1 contrast ratio, so it's slower and has lower color range (But it's still better than the LCDs of yesteryear.)
Every LCD you will find these days will be widescreen. It's hard to avoid it, so you might as well get one.
-
2ms or even 1ms still means it's present. I can't tell when a LCD is running at 60hz, however I can tell when a CRT is. Combine this with the fact that I love using vsync whenever possible, and the higher refresh will give me a much smaller hit to performance when it's on.
-
I can't tell when a LCD is running at 60hz, however I can tell when a CRT is.
That is probably because CRTs flicker like shit at 60hz
Also, when it comes to response times, I'm sure 2ms must be pretty fucking good, I mean, I have 8ms and unless I'm playing an NES game or something, it's not going to be noticed
btw response time and refresh rate are pretty different issues
-
That is probably because CRTs flicker like shit at 60hz
...
btw response time and refresh rate are pretty different issues
It's because they're different technologies. They don't display an image the same way.
-
Combine this with the fact that I love using vsync whenever possible, and the higher refresh will give me a much smaller hit to performance when it's on.
What do you mean by this? Your monitor (regardless of CRT/LCD) won't display FPS above your refresh rate anyways, so performance hits mean nothing with vsync enabled, in your case. If you are getting 120 fps without vsync, and 60 fps with vsync, they should look identical because the monitor doesn't display at infinite FPS.
-
What do you mean by this? Your monitor (regardless of CRT/LCD) won't display FPS above your refresh rate anyways, so performance hits mean nothing with vsync enabled, in your case. If you are getting 120 fps without vsync, and 60 fps with vsync, they should look identical because the monitor doesn't display at infinite FPS.
Actually, the picture with vsync will have less vertical tearing, and since vsync is enabled it will have lower framerate than if an identical machine had vsync enabled, but a maximum fps limit of 60. The performance hit to vsync doesn't just come from the absolute limit to framerate, but because it also introduces a bottleneck since it has to wait for the RAMDAC to fully draw a frame before going on to the next one. Even though you wont be able to tell the difference between 120fps and 60fps, setting refresh to 120hz and turning on vsync would allow you less of a framerate hit by reducing the bottleneck.
-
I have a Samsung SyncMaster 932bw 19" widescreen LCD monitor. It runs natively at 1440x900 at 75hz. LCDs have come a long way. This baby displays even the fastest games with no blurring or ghosting. I bought mine for 232usd.
When shopping for a monitor, look at the contrast ratio, and the response time. My Samsung has a very fast response time at 2ms, and a very good contrast ratio at 3000:1. A standard Dell or Gateway monitor, for example, usually has a 6ms response time and a 600:1 contrast ratio, so it's slower and has lower color range (But it's still better than the LCDs of yesteryear.)
Every LCD you will find these days will be widescreen. It's hard to avoid it, so you might as well get one.
Good advice.