Ok, I looked at all these monitors and noted so key things, so take a look please.
By the way, I am 13 so I definatley could be wrong in anything I say so correct me if I am wrong, thanks.
The dell seems to have the best professional oriented use altough no HDMI which is helpfull. Also the Dell monitor has a small contrast ratio than other monitors and a slightly wider pixel pitch, but these are barely noticable. So I do like the bit more expensive dell if need to be rotating the monitor alot, so its a good deal. I like it.
The LG and ASUS have good response time. Also the LG has great contrast ratio, but no speakers which could be a hassle. Although I am happy to see and HDMI port
ASUS at a good price has nice contrast ratio, HDMI, and speakers, so I think it is a contender at just 200 USD as the best bang for ur buck monitor. Unfortunatley it does not come with an HDMI cable which can cost some money if you wanted HDMI over DVI.
Finally, the Samsung. The first thing I noticed was the peculiar resolution that is slightly above 1080P. I love this as I like unigue things and better resolution
No speakers though and no HDMI so for 200 USD it could be good with the resolution although its not that much a difference from 1080P.
I think, but not sure, that all these monitors have a typical contast ratio of 1000:1?
yea most monitors claiming 50,000:1 etc. only have 1000:1 typical and those are dynamic contrast. Now HDMI is really only an issue if you plan to run your xbox or ps3 off it it, otherwise it wont really make a difference, and hdmi and dvi have the same output qaulity except hdmi outputs sound, but the 2343BWX has no speakers so it doesn't really matter. And to be honest no one is buying their monitor for their speakers, you buy the one that has the best features.
Also the samsung monitor has a higher resolution then 1920 x 1200 pixels and is a 16:9 monitor, which is eventually going to replace 16:10 and I personally like it better for games. The samsung monitor is also good for doing work on and can swivel and turn. ! Obviously though the downside is it's to big for playing 1080p videos fullscreen and you need a relativley high end video card to play games on it.
In my opinion it is a great monitor for the price and the screen really looks sharp compared to other monitors in the price range since it has such a high resolution on only a 23"!! For the price it really is a steal.
hmm good that makes sense ok thanks. Ive been seeing alot of 16:10's lately which I did not know existed until recentley. I thought it was all 4:3 and 16:9, but are not 16:9's better than 16:10's becuase most things recognize widerscreen?