want to get an LCD

marscheese · Post by **marscheese** » Mon Nov 04, 2002 7:30 pm

well, I'm wanting to buy a 19" LCD. I don't really know anythign about LCD's. I would be a gamer and ghosting would be a concern. I know that one should never buy a monitor without seeing it first, but at places like Best Buy, CompUSA, etc...they dont' have anygames, and it's never dark enough to see if the monitor would experience any ghosting. I have a fairly large spending range, I just dont' want to get f*cked on buying something that doesn't have the quality, especially if I'm spending $900+ for an LCD. Are there any suggestions? I'm taking this quite seriously, money is (basically) no object, I want something nice, but that doesnt' mean I want to blow money away for an extra touch of quality that I probalby won't even notice. I don't really care about max res, though 1600x1200 might be nice, 1280x1024 is completly acceptable, I don't want to spend another $200 for a higher res.

A side note: if LCD's are supposed to be so much clearer, why is their dpi so much smaller that CRT's? I thought that dpi=quality.

Jim Z · Post by **Jim Z** » Mon Nov 04, 2002 8:58 pm

they dont' have anygames, and it's never dark enough to see if the monitor would experience any ghosting.

it doesn't have to be dark to see ghosting. It looks like smearing or trails on anything that's moving. I have yet to see an LCD that I'd call suitable for gaming.

A side note: if LCD's are supposed to be so much clearer, why is their dpi so much smaller that CRT's? I thought that dpi=quality.

No, not in this case. DPI for an LCD gives you an idea of the smallest pixel it can display. A CRT with smaller dot pitch isn't necessarily higher quality either, a lot depends on the regulation and how precisely it controls the eletron beams.

LCDs have (IMHO) two advantages: 1) no flicker. LCDs still update the image at a certain frequency, but they only address pixels that are changing. Pixels that don't change stay on constantly. CRTs, on the other hand, need to continuously scan with the electron beams to keep the phosphors lit.

2). LCDs with a DVI connection are MUCH sharper than analog LCDs or CRTs. The digital signal precludes any pixel jitter or blurring, so the image remains rock solid.

bottom line, if you do a lot of desktop work, get an LCD. If you're a gamer, stick with a CRT.

Hipnotic_Tranz · Post by **Hipnotic_Tranz** » Mon Nov 04, 2002 9:41 pm

I was under the impression that within the last few years, LCD monitors have gotten a lot better so gaming on them is actually possible. If I remember correctly, Schwartz has an LCD that he plays games on and said was pretty nice. All I really know is get one with a response time of no more than 25 if possible but with that I bet goes up the price

[searching]
heres the thread actually:
http://www.pcabusers.net/forums/showthr ... hlight=LCD

He's got a Viewsonic VG191b. I'm not a big fan of Viewsonic (I don't like your dads 19" CRT downstairs) but this one looks rather nice. <a href="http://direct.mwave.com/mwave/skusearch ... 61&bop=and" target="_NEW">Mwave.com</a> has it for $840.

Schwartz · Post by **Schwartz** » Mon Nov 04, 2002 9:59 pm

The thread Hipnotic_Tranz posted pretty much sums it up.

If I want to really nitpick yes there is some ghosting. I generally don't notice it and it doesn't detract from my gaming. As far as I know any LCD on the market is going to exibit it to some extent, some more or less than others.

Whatever you get find one with 25ms or lower response time. When I was looking for one back in the beginning of the year it was really hard to find many places that would tell you what their response times were. I took that as I probably wouldn't want to know anyway. I don't think I found one faster than 25ms either.

You must get one with a DVI interface if you are getting a LCD as a main display. The DVI makes it much better. I ran on the normal DB-15 on my GF3 before I got my GF4 with DVI. It makes a big difference.

It really is a personal choice. I'll take whatever slight ghosting I get for the clarity and the ease on the eyes.

Pugsley · Post by **Pugsley** » Mon Nov 04, 2002 10:08 pm

Kinda off topic, but isnt that slower then most peoples ping to game servers? So then you would be getting monitor lag!

Hipnotic_Tranz · Post by **Hipnotic_Tranz** » Mon Nov 04, 2002 10:25 pm

Here's a question I have (and bare with me since I'm knew to LCD's). I've read in reviews that when you go below/higher than the natrual resolution (1280x1024 on most 19") then it shrinks/stretches the image to fit the screen and usually looks bad. Now, does this mean that if I go back and play original DooM or some DOS game, that I won't be able to do it? And if I can, the image will be all stretched and crappy?

Jim Z · Post by **Jim Z** » Mon Nov 04, 2002 10:29 pm

you can't go higher than native, it is physically impossible.

lower than native had two possible results: one is interpolation, where the image is scaled up to fit the screen. Usually ends up being blurry and crappy unless the resolution is exactly half of the native (i.e. a 1600x1200 panel run at 800x600).

nexus_7 · Post by **nexus_7** » Mon Nov 04, 2002 10:32 pm

if U are using xp though it has a fix for that...I dont remember what it is called...smothvision or something.

Greg

Hipnotic_Tranz · Post by **Hipnotic_Tranz** » Mon Nov 04, 2002 10:32 pm

Alright, thanks for clearing that up.

[edit]
Greg, I believe Smoothvision is something with ATI...FSAA I think? Though I didn't know that about WinXP. That would be pretty cool. See, what I wonder is how bad does it look? Is it noticably bad?

ShibasScotch · Post by **ShibasScotch** » Mon Nov 04, 2002 10:38 pm

The only Monitors that are ALLOWED to touch this PC are Viewsonic and Samsung.

nexus_7 · Post by **nexus_7** » Mon Nov 04, 2002 10:45 pm

I have a lovely FP. its a mitsubshi. best one I have ever used. 18.1 viewable. Beats the sony, hp, and samsunv oh and viewsonic FP's I have used or seen. still isnt flawless but it isnt really noticable.

Greg

Jim Z · Post by **Jim Z** » Tue Nov 05, 2002 8:29 am

if U are using xp though it has a fix for that...I dont remember what it is called...smothvision or something.

cleartype? It won't help interpolation blurriness.

marscheese · Post by **marscheese** » Wed Nov 06, 2002 12:55 pm

I've been looking up LCD's, and most of the 19" I'm finding all have the same specs...1280x1024 native resolution, 250 candella illumination, 1:600 contrast level, .29 dpi, 25 millisecond response time, 170 degree viewing angle. If all of them have the same specs, then couldn't I just choose the cheapest one? does it matter? The warranties are all 3 year, so I'm not really seeing any up or down side to any of them other than the physical look of the moniter. What do you guys think?

also, I've had some people tell me that an LCD is not as clear as a CRT. I thought this was not the case. Well, actually I've heard some things are clearer, others are not.

Restating the fact that my computer is a gaming machine, would it be a mistake to get an LCD?

Schwartz · Post by **Schwartz** » Wed Nov 06, 2002 6:43 pm

I don't know what to tell you, go find someone that has one and see if you like it or not. I saw a 19" LCD with MOH and JK2 running on it at Best Buy last weekend. Go find some place like that to see if you like a LCD for games or not.

Here is something else to consider... I would say don't get one unless you have a GF4 Ti4600 or better to drive it using a DVI interface. Prices for a LCD that does 1600x1200 are still a bit prohibitave so 1280x1024 is what you will probably be going for. You are going to want to run the screen at it's native resolution no matter what. So you need a card that can push games out at that resolution and do it well.

Hipnotic_Tranz · Post by **Hipnotic_Tranz** » Wed Nov 06, 2002 7:11 pm

He's got the best card on the market right now, the 9700 Pro

I'm sure he's got the horsepower for games (minus DooM III)