LCD industry cannot make 16- ms response time for 19+ in LCD

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

LCD industry leaders like Samsung and Sony cannot make 16-
ms response time a reality for 19+ in LCD.

Do you see any LCD with a 16ms response time or better for
19+ inch LCD from them? No. The industry isn't capable to
make it.

When coming to 19+ in monitor, buy a CRT.
28 answers Last reply
More about industry make response time
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Boy, you are angry. You are also wrong. Sony makes a 19 inch LCD with a
    12ms response time (SDM-HS94). They also make a 23 inch LCD with a 16ms
    response time (SDM-P234).

    Richard

    "angry" <angry@lcd.com> wrote in message
    news:22js01lo4ab07e1t9oa0c149nb167rts1l@4ax.com...
    > LCD industry leaders like Samsung and Sony cannot make 16-
    > ms response time a reality for 19+ in LCD.
    >
    > Do you see any LCD with a 16ms response time or better for
    > 19+ inch LCD from them? No. The industry isn't capable to
    > make it.
    >
    > When coming to 19+ in monitor, buy a CRT.
    >


    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    angry wrote:
    > LCD industry leaders like Samsung and Sony cannot make 16-
    > ms response time a reality for 19+ in LCD.
    >
    > Do you see any LCD with a 16ms response time or better for
    > 19+ inch LCD from them? No. The industry isn't capable to
    > make it.
    >
    > When coming to 19+ in monitor, buy a CRT.


    I just entered '12ms' and '19 inch' at Newegg.com under LCD
    Monitors and I got three hits. For 16ms I got 9 hits.


    Too_Much_Coffee ®

    ---
    Got GigaNews?
    http://www.giganews.com/customer/gn26215
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    angry wrote:
    > LCD industry leaders like Samsung and Sony cannot make 16-
    > ms response time a reality for 19+ in LCD.
    >
    > Do you see any LCD with a 16ms response time or better for
    > 19+ inch LCD from them? No. The industry isn't capable to
    > make it.
    >
    > When coming to 19+ in monitor, buy a CRT.


    Only $1624.00US and it's yours . :)
    http://tinyurl.com/5fcyr


    TMC
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 14:59:51 -0500, "Richard Forester"
    <richard_forester(nospam)@msn.com> wrote:

    >Boy, you are angry. You are also wrong. Sony makes a 19 inch LCD with a
    >12ms response time (SDM-HS94). They also make a 23 inch LCD with a 16ms
    >response time (SDM-P234).
    >
    >Richard
    >
    Yeah you're right.

    I've looked at this two. The only thing made me not buying
    the 19 inch SONY is it has a dot pitch of .296mm. Really
    wish they can reduce it lower.

    The 23 inch has 16ms response time and .25mm dot pitch. It
    just costs too much money.

    Again, you're right.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    I agree. The price on the 23" is way out of my range. I do like the 19"
    though but it has the same resolution as the 17" (which is common) so it has
    me thinking of just getting the 17" model. Of course, then it's a smaller
    screen. I really like the Sony LCDs. I've had 2 CRTs from them that look
    just awesome. When I look at other brands they seem to pale in comparison.

    Have you narrowed down your choices as to which one you will eventually get?

    Richard

    "anygry" <angry@lcd.com> wrote in message
    news:61rs01lquatu4hk9vqd5paqhg3p4soukor@4ax.com...
    > On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 14:59:51 -0500, "Richard Forester"
    > <richard_forester(nospam)@msn.com> wrote:
    >
    >>Boy, you are angry. You are also wrong. Sony makes a 19 inch LCD with a
    >>12ms response time (SDM-HS94). They also make a 23 inch LCD with a 16ms
    >>response time (SDM-P234).
    >>
    >>Richard
    >>
    > Yeah you're right.
    >
    > I've looked at this two. The only thing made me not buying
    > the 19 inch SONY is it has a dot pitch of .296mm. Really
    > wish they can reduce it lower.
    >
    > The 23 inch has 16ms response time and .25mm dot pitch. It
    > just costs too much money.
    >
    > Again, you're right.
    >


    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    anygry wrote:

    > On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 14:59:51 -0500, "Richard Forester"
    > <richard_forester(nospam)@msn.com> wrote:
    >
    >>Boy, you are angry. You are also wrong. Sony makes a 19 inch LCD with a
    >>12ms response time (SDM-HS94). They also make a 23 inch LCD with a 16ms
    >>response time (SDM-P234).
    >>
    >>Richard
    >>
    > Yeah you're right.
    >
    > I've looked at this two. The only thing made me not buying
    > the 19 inch SONY is it has a dot pitch of .296mm. Really
    > wish they can reduce it lower.

    1280 x 1024 is standard for a 19". Any finer than that and a lot of people
    have have to do a lot of tweaking to get a readable display.

    > The 23 inch has 16ms response time and .25mm dot pitch. It
    > just costs too much money.
    >
    > Again, you're right.

    --
    --John
    Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "angry" <angry@lcd.com> wrote in message
    news:22js01lo4ab07e1t9oa0c149nb167rts1l@4ax.com...
    > LCD industry leaders like Samsung and Sony cannot make 16-
    > ms response time a reality for 19+ in LCD.
    >
    > Do you see any LCD with a 16ms response time or better for
    > 19+ inch LCD from them? No. The industry isn't capable to
    > make it.
    >
    The Dell 193FP is a 16ms LCD and it is excellent. Bought one for my wife's
    computer. Flawless quality, brilliant picture, runs any and all games
    without smearing even at non native resolution. It's analog only, but the
    crispness and clarity is DV level. $386 right now. I would recommend it
    highly.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Got a viewsonic vx910 , 19inch, 16ms, has dvi, so far no ghosting or
    smearing on games or dvd. Picked it up at compusa for $342 AR. So far runs
    great!


    "Augustus" <augustus@wrtt.net> wrote in message
    news:CUuPd.27886$K54.7761@edtnps84...
    >
    > "angry" <angry@lcd.com> wrote in message
    > news:22js01lo4ab07e1t9oa0c149nb167rts1l@4ax.com...
    >> LCD industry leaders like Samsung and Sony cannot make 16-
    >> ms response time a reality for 19+ in LCD.
    >>
    >> Do you see any LCD with a 16ms response time or better for
    >> 19+ inch LCD from them? No. The industry isn't capable to
    >> make it.
    >>
    > The Dell 193FP is a 16ms LCD and it is excellent. Bought one for my wife's
    > computer. Flawless quality, brilliant picture, runs any and all games
    > without smearing even at non native resolution. It's analog only, but the
    > crispness and clarity is DV level. $386 right now. I would recommend it
    > highly.
    >
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    my dell 2001 20+ inch LCD is 16ms RT. Had it for over a yr so yes they are
    around and getting even faster. Seem to recall reading that several coming
    out at 12 or less even.

    "Richard Forester" <richard_forester(nospam)@msn.com> wrote in message
    news:420e7781_2@127.0.0.1...
    >I agree. The price on the 23" is way out of my range. I do like the 19"
    >though but it has the same resolution as the 17" (which is common) so it
    >has me thinking of just getting the 17" model. Of course, then it's a
    >smaller screen. I really like the Sony LCDs. I've had 2 CRTs from them
    >that look just awesome. When I look at other brands they seem to pale in
    >comparison.
    >
    > Have you narrowed down your choices as to which one you will eventually
    > get?
    >
    > Richard
    >
    > "anygry" <angry@lcd.com> wrote in message
    > news:61rs01lquatu4hk9vqd5paqhg3p4soukor@4ax.com...
    >> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 14:59:51 -0500, "Richard Forester"
    >> <richard_forester(nospam)@msn.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Boy, you are angry. You are also wrong. Sony makes a 19 inch LCD with a
    >>>12ms response time (SDM-HS94). They also make a 23 inch LCD with a 16ms
    >>>response time (SDM-P234).
    >>>
    >>>Richard
    >>>
    >> Yeah you're right.
    >>
    >> I've looked at this two. The only thing made me not buying
    >> the 19 inch SONY is it has a dot pitch of .296mm. Really
    >> wish they can reduce it lower.
    >>
    >> The 23 inch has 16ms response time and .25mm dot pitch. It
    >> just costs too much money.
    >>
    >> Again, you're right.
    >>
    >
    >
    >
    > ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
    > News==----
    > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
    > Newsgroups
    > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
    > =----
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Too_Much_Coffee ® wrote:
    > Only $1624.00US and it's yours . :)
    > http://tinyurl.com/5fcyr

    I saw that the other day.

    Would *almost* eliminate the requirement for a tele in many in cases.

    I want one.

    The Apple have a 30" 2560x1600 display but you need a mac only, geForce with
    a DDL interface, and apparently it's not that great in terms of viewing
    angle and response. Oh well, we're getting there with large, high-res
    screens.

    Ben
    --
    A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
    Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
    I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    angry <angry@lcd.com> wrote in news:22js01lo4ab07e1t9oa0c149nb167rts1l@
    4ax.com:

    > LCD industry leaders like Samsung and Sony cannot make 16-
    > ms response time a reality for 19+ in LCD.
    >
    > Do you see any LCD with a 16ms response time or better for
    > 19+ inch LCD from them? No. The industry isn't capable to
    > make it.
    >
    > When coming to 19+ in monitor, buy a CRT.


    Euh!! I think i'm missing something here.
    Why my new monitor is an 8ms.
    Samsung 915N out here, since 1 week
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "angry" <angry@lcd.com> wrote in message
    news:22js01lo4ab07e1t9oa0c149nb167rts1l@4ax.com...
    > LCD industry leaders like Samsung and Sony cannot make 16-
    > ms response time a reality for 19+ in LCD.
    >
    > Do you see any LCD with a 16ms response time or better for
    > 19+ inch LCD from them? No. The industry isn't capable to
    > make it.
    >
    > When coming to 19+ in monitor, buy a CRT.

    (3 seconds looking on an online store)

    CTX F973L 19" 12ms
    Viewsonic VX912 19" 12ms
    LG Electronics L1980U 19" 12ms
    LG L1915S 19" 12ms
    Belinea 101906 19" 15ms

    I'm sure there are many many more, and wouldn't be suprised to see sub 12ms
    screens if searching a little harder.
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    I guess I have to change the title to "LCD industry cannot
    make 16- ms response time and .294- mm dot pitch for 19+ in
    LCD." Dot pitch is another concern. For all the models you
    guys suggested. They have a dot pitch of .294mm. Look at
    the monitor you claim to have, the dot (smallest unit for
    the panel) looks big.

    You won't find a 19+ inch monitor with both a response time
    of 16ms or better and a dot pitch of .294 or smaller, except
    the 23 inch SONY SDM-P234/B, which has 16ms and .258mm. But
    it's simply too expensive for most of us.
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    angry wrote:

    > I guess I have to change the title to "LCD industry cannot
    > make 16- ms response time and .294- mm dot pitch for 19+ in
    > LCD."

    Of course they can. Just show them a _market_ for a 19" LCD with a
    resolution higher than 1280x1024.

    > Dot pitch is another concern.

    Actually, with an LCD "dot pitch" is meaningless. Look at the native
    resolution, which is what controls the "dot pitch".

    > For all the models you
    > guys suggested. They have a dot pitch of .294mm. Look at
    > the monitor you claim to have, the dot (smallest unit for
    > the panel) looks big.

    Forget the "dot". What resolution do you _want_ to run on the thing? The
    next step up from 1280x1024 is normally 1600x1200 and that looks pretty
    tiny on a 19" monitor.

    > You won't find a 19+ inch monitor with both a response time
    > of 16ms or better and a dot pitch of .294 or smaller, except
    > the 23 inch SONY SDM-P234/B, which has 16ms and .258mm. But
    > it's simply too expensive for most of us.

    --
    --John
    Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "angry" <angry@lcd.com> wrote in message
    news:kavu015ec6p8krq3efjtv1k7o3ennv1lkk@4ax.com...
    >I guess I have to change the title to "LCD industry cannot
    > make 16- ms response time and .294- mm dot pitch for 19+ in
    > LCD." Dot pitch is another concern. For all the models you
    > guys suggested. They have a dot pitch of .294mm. Look at
    > the monitor you claim to have, the dot (smallest unit for
    > the panel) looks big.
    >
    > You won't find a 19+ inch monitor with both a response time
    > of 16ms or better and a dot pitch of .294 or smaller, except
    > the 23 inch SONY SDM-P234/B, which has 16ms and .258mm. But
    > it's simply too expensive for most of us.

    I seriously would suggest you go and have a look at some of those screens
    'in the flesh' - I've gone from a 19" Sony Trinitron CRT with a dotpitch of
    0.24 to a 19" LCD with a dot pitch of 0.294 and I honestly hand on heart
    cannot see any problems - maybe if the LCD were able to run at a higher
    resolution than 1280*1024 then it would be a problem and the dots would be
    noticeable, but as it is, without putting my face right up to the screen, I
    cannot see the individual elements of the screen.

    Running an image editing app and setting the document to 1280*1024, then
    placing my face right up to the screen, I can confirm that each single pixel
    I draw is exactly matched to a single dot on the screen.
  16. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Here is one on sale even, at Buy.com

    Acer AL1914SMD 19" Silver LCD Display - Speakers, 500:1, 1280x1024, 12MS,
    DVI & D-sub - ET.L2302.109
    Dot Pitch / Pixel Pitch - 0.294 mm
    12ms
    $349 - no rebate - free shipping


    http://www.buy.com/retail/product.asp?sku=10392705&dcaid=1688
  17. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Nerevar wrote:
    > I seriously would suggest you go and have a look at some of those
    > screens 'in the flesh' - I've gone from a 19" Sony Trinitron CRT with
    > a dotpitch of 0.24 to a 19" LCD with a dot pitch of 0.294 and I honestly
    > hand on
    > heart cannot see any problems - maybe if the LCD were able to run at
    > a higher resolution than 1280*1024 then it would be a problem and the
    > dots would be noticeable, but as it is, without putting my face right
    > up to the screen, I cannot see the individual elements of the screen.
    >
    > Running an image editing app and setting the document to 1280*1024,
    > then placing my face right up to the screen, I can confirm that each
    > single pixel I draw is exactly matched to a single dot on the screen.

    I currently have a Sony G400 (19" CRT), and run 1600x1200@85Hz. It's
    outstanding quality. I'd like to have a look at some LCDs but I'd hate to
    drop resolution which would mean buying a 20" LCD.

    With an LCD you multiply the dot pitch by the resolution and the is the
    dimension of your panel. With a CRT it's not really as distinct as that.
    Dot pitch of .24 and a resolution of 1600x1200 thats 384x288mm, or
    diagonally, 480mm = 18.9". Since my viewable diagonal is probably around
    18", I'm probably pushing my luck by around 5%.

    Ben
    --
    A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
    Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
    I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...
  18. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    You MUST understand that the .294 dot pitch is DICTATED by the dimensions of the LCD
    screen. That is for 19" there are physically 1280 individual pixels across the screen and
    1024 from bottom to top.

    17" LCDs have a finer dot pitch because 17" diagonally is 2" smaller than 19".

    I've often thought manufacturers could save some money and get more screens from a
    production run if they made the 19" LCDs to a resolution of 1280x960, which is the proper
    4x3 aspect ratio.
    --
    Todd
  19. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 23:32:49 GMT, "Todd" <abc@123.net>
    wrote:

    >
    >You MUST understand that the .294 dot pitch is DICTATED by the dimensions of the LCD
    >screen. That is for 19" there are physically 1280 individual pixels across the screen and
    >1024 from bottom to top.

    If you say 19" LCD will always have .294 mm as its dot
    pitch, then I don't. My understanding is dot pitch is
    independent. If it goes lower, we get a sharper image out
    of the same size panel.
  20. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    angry wrote:

    > On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 23:32:49 GMT, "Todd" <abc@123.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>You MUST understand that the .294 dot pitch is DICTATED by the dimensions
    >>of the LCD screen. That is for 19" there are physically 1280 individual
    >>pixels across the screen and 1024 from bottom to top.
    >
    > If you say 19" LCD will always have .294 mm as its dot
    > pitch, then I don't. My understanding is dot pitch is
    > independent. If it goes lower, we get a sharper image out
    > of the same size panel.

    Your understanding is flawed. Run an LCD at anything but its design
    resolution and there is degradation in sharpness. Running a 1600x1200 LCD
    at 1280x1024 the result is _not_ as good as that achieved with an otherwise
    identical LCD with a native resolution of 1280x1024. Running at 1600x1200
    everything is not "sharper", it's just smaller until you play with the
    display settings and when you do that then you screw up the formatting in a
    lot of menus and the like, and the icons, in Windows anyway, come in only a
    few fixed sizes, so they end up either too big or too small.

    LCDs are not CRTs. Do not assume that they have the same selection
    considerations.

    --
    --John
    Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  21. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    >>>You MUST understand that the .294 dot pitch is DICTATED by the dimensions
    >>>of the LCD screen. That is for 19" there are physically 1280 individual
    >>>pixels across the screen and 1024 from bottom to top.
    >>
    >> If you say 19" LCD will always have .294 mm as its dot
    >> pitch, then I don't. My understanding is dot pitch is
    >> independent. If it goes lower, we get a sharper image out
    >> of the same size panel.
    >
    > Your understanding is flawed. Run an LCD at anything but its design
    > resolution and there is degradation in sharpness. Running a 1600x1200 LCD
    > at 1280x1024 the result is _not_ as good as that achieved with an
    > otherwise
    > identical LCD with a native resolution of 1280x1024. Running at 1600x1200
    > everything is not "sharper", it's just smaller until you play with the
    > display settings and when you do that then you screw up the formatting in
    > a
    > lot of menus and the like, and the icons, in Windows anyway, come in only
    > a
    > few fixed sizes, so they end up either too big or too small.
    >
    > LCDs are not CRTs. Do not assume that they have the same selection
    > considerations.

    I think you're the one who misunderstands. Saying the .294 mm dot pitch
    (and therefore the resolution)
    is dictated by the 19" size is ridiculous. If the manufacturer decreases
    the dot pitch, the native resolution
    will go up. .294 is not a magic number. It can be decreased independent of
    the screen size. If makers
    come out with .25 dot pitch screens, they can use the .25 dot pitch on any
    size LCD they like.

    Tom Lake
  22. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "Nerevar" <monk@mink.monk> wrote in message news:<CxKPd.13539$8B3.2252@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
    > "angry" <angry@lcd.com> wrote in message
    > news:22js01lo4ab07e1t9oa0c149nb167rts1l@4ax.com...
    > > LCD industry leaders like Samsung and Sony cannot make 16-
    > > ms response time a reality for 19+ in LCD.
    > >
    > > Do you see any LCD with a 16ms response time or better for
    > > 19+ inch LCD from them? No. The industry isn't capable to
    > > make it.
    > >
    > > When coming to 19+ in monitor, buy a CRT.
    >
    > (3 seconds looking on an online store)
    >
    > CTX F973L 19" 12ms
    > Viewsonic VX912 19" 12ms
    > LG Electronics L1980U 19" 12ms
    > LG L1915S 19" 12ms
    > Belinea 101906 19" 15ms
    >
    > I'm sure there are many many more, and wouldn't be suprised to see sub 12ms
    > screens if searching a little harder.

    Anyone want to post a review on the new Samsung 915N? (8MS)

    As far as I know from reading though, reponse times are only a small
    indication of the monitors performance. Check out tomshardware and
    anandtech for recent reviews. Plus, they don't always state what the
    reponse times are measured for -white to black, etc. Anyone can make
    the numbers look good on paper.

    Good luck finding a CRT in a computer store lately..took a browse
    through and only 2 19" crt's to pick from. (And two isle's of LCD
    panels) Ugh.
  23. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Tom Lake wrote:
    >>>> You MUST understand that the .294 dot pitch is DICTATED by the
    >>>> dimensions of the LCD screen. That is for 19" there are physically
    >>>> 1280 individual pixels across the screen and 1024 from bottom to
    >>>> top.
    >
    > I think you're the one who misunderstands. Saying the .294 mm dot
    > pitch (and therefore the resolution)
    > is dictated by the 19" size is ridiculous. If the manufacturer
    > decreases the dot pitch, the native resolution
    > will go up. .294 is not a magic number. It can be decreased
    > independent of the screen size. If makers
    > come out with .25 dot pitch screens, they can use the .25 dot pitch
    > on any size LCD they like.

    He's not saying a 19" will always have .294, he's saying that if you have a
    19" screen, and a 1280.1024 resolution, you have .294 dp. And he's right.

    --
    Thomas
  24. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Tom Lake wrote:

    >>>>You MUST understand that the .294 dot pitch is DICTATED by the
    >>>>dimensions of the LCD screen. That is for 19" there are physically 1280
    >>>>individual pixels across the screen and 1024 from bottom to top.
    >>>
    >>> If you say 19" LCD will always have .294 mm as its dot
    >>> pitch, then I don't. My understanding is dot pitch is
    >>> independent. If it goes lower, we get a sharper image out
    >>> of the same size panel.
    >>
    >> Your understanding is flawed. Run an LCD at anything but its design
    >> resolution and there is degradation in sharpness. Running a 1600x1200
    >> LCD at 1280x1024 the result is _not_ as good as that achieved with an
    >> otherwise
    >> identical LCD with a native resolution of 1280x1024. Running at
    >> 1600x1200 everything is not "sharper", it's just smaller until you play
    >> with the display settings and when you do that then you screw up the
    >> formatting in a
    >> lot of menus and the like, and the icons, in Windows anyway, come in only
    >> a
    >> few fixed sizes, so they end up either too big or too small.
    >>
    >> LCDs are not CRTs. Do not assume that they have the same selection
    >> considerations.
    >
    > I think you're the one who misunderstands. Saying the .294 mm dot pitch
    > (and therefore the resolution)
    > is dictated by the 19" size is ridiculous. If the manufacturer decreases
    > the dot pitch, the native resolution
    > will go up. .294 is not a magic number. It can be decreased independent
    > of
    > the screen size. If makers
    > come out with .25 dot pitch screens, they can use the .25 dot pitch on any
    > size LCD they like.

    Well, if they use it on a 19" monitor with the standard 4:3 aspect ratio
    then they'll end up with 1505x1128. Would _you_ buy a monitor with that
    native resolution?

    The dot pitch is dictated by the native resolution and by the screen
    dimensions. If for a given physical screen size the dot pitch is made
    smaller, then the native resolution necessarily increases. That's simple
    geometry. If the native resolution is one that is not widely supported by
    standard video boards, then even if they can be made to support it doing so
    is enough of a nuisance to kill the market for such a display, so the
    manufacturers make them in standard resolutions.

    > Tom Lake

    --
    --John
    Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  25. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "Thomas" <thomas_@lycos.nl> wrote in message
    news:37bhlgF58kn78U1@individual.net...
    > Tom Lake wrote:
    >>>>> You MUST understand that the .294 dot pitch is DICTATED by the
    >>>>> dimensions of the LCD screen. That is for 19" there are physically
    >>>>> 1280 individual pixels across the screen and 1024 from bottom to
    >>>>> top.
    >>
    >> I think you're the one who misunderstands. Saying the .294 mm dot
    >> pitch (and therefore the resolution)
    >> is dictated by the 19" size is ridiculous. If the manufacturer
    >> decreases the dot pitch, the native resolution
    >> will go up. .294 is not a magic number. It can be decreased
    >> independent of the screen size. If makers
    >> come out with .25 dot pitch screens, they can use the .25 dot pitch
    >> on any size LCD they like.
    >
    > He's not saying a 19" will always have .294, he's saying that if you have
    > a 19" screen, and a 1280.1024 resolution, you have .294 dp. And he's
    > right.
    >
    > --
    > Thomas
    >

    I read at Toms Hardware that you cant really go by the manufacture specs for
    gaming performance. They tested a few 19" LCD with claimed 16ms and even
    12ms and most ran way above those specs under normal conditions but were
    still very playable for fps games, but the Xerox claimed 16ms and was not
    playable(120ms).
    http://graphics.tomshardware.com/display/20050110/index.html

    I was actually trying to find a good gaming review of the new 20" and 23"
    LCD's that claim 16ms like the SONY SDM-P234/B, but all I could find was the
    buyer reviews saying "Dude, its awesome! Get it!"
    Anyone found a good review of the new 23" LCD's or have tried one for
    gaming?

    Lou
  26. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    How about a 19" with 8ms response.

    Samsung 915N 19" LCD Monitor
  27. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    angry,

    > If you say 19" LCD will always have .294 mm as its dot
    >pitch, then I don't. My understanding is dot pitch is
    >independent. If it goes lower, we get a sharper image out
    >of the same size panel.

    The centre of our misunderstanding is "native resolution." This resolution is
    determined by the physical number of pixels in the display, in terms of width by height.
    Thus a 19" LCD with a 1280x1024 resolution is a screen composed of that number of actual
    pixels. To fit them into a 19" monitor, physics demands you have a .294 dot pitch.
    --
    Todd
  28. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "Insomniac" <insomniac_cam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:cb8abd4c.0502141052.4dcea70d@posting.google.com...
    > "Nerevar" <monk@mink.monk> wrote in message
    > news:<CxKPd.13539$8B3.2252@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
    >> "angry" <angry@lcd.com> wrote in message
    >> news:22js01lo4ab07e1t9oa0c149nb167rts1l@4ax.com...
    >> > LCD industry leaders like Samsung and Sony cannot make 16-
    >> > ms response time a reality for 19+ in LCD.
    >> >
    >> > Do you see any LCD with a 16ms response time or better for
    >> > 19+ inch LCD from them? No. The industry isn't capable to
    >> > make it.
    >> >
    >> > When coming to 19+ in monitor, buy a CRT.
    >>
    >> (3 seconds looking on an online store)
    >>
    >> CTX F973L 19" 12ms
    >> Viewsonic VX912 19" 12ms
    >> LG Electronics L1980U 19" 12ms
    >> LG L1915S 19" 12ms
    >> Belinea 101906 19" 15ms
    >>
    >> I'm sure there are many many more, and wouldn't be suprised to see sub
    >> 12ms
    >> screens if searching a little harder.
    >
    > Anyone want to post a review on the new Samsung 915N? (8MS)
    >
    > As far as I know from reading though, reponse times are only a small
    > indication of the monitors performance. Check out tomshardware and
    > anandtech for recent reviews. Plus, they don't always state what the
    > reponse times are measured for -white to black, etc. Anyone can make
    > the numbers look good on paper.
    >
    > Good luck finding a CRT in a computer store lately..took a browse
    > through and only 2 19" crt's to pick from. (And two isle's of LCD
    > panels) Ugh.

    New Toms Hardware review of 8ms LCD's
    http://graphics.tomshardware.com/display/20050215/index.html

    Great for gaming, but not so good for movie watching.
Ask a new question

Read More

Radeon LCD CRT Monitors Graphics Product