Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

19" TFT Monitors

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
April 22, 2005 12:42:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

What's a good one for gaming??

It's time to retire my Iiyama 1451 19" CRT.

Does any one use a 19" flat panel? is it any good? What one do you have?
I have looked around and while the current generation of 17" seem well up to
gaming 19" have slower response times. I can't go smaller than a 19" as it
will be used to watch TV also. My reasons for not getting the last of the
CRT monitors is its used in a small room and space and the amount of heat
generated are also a factor.

Thanks
{AGUT}Visine

More about : tft monitors

April 22, 2005 3:51:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

the 19" that could be good for gaming still 1280x1024, as a17" native.
the dot pich is bigger, that is the only thing.
i am using a 17", samsung 710n, never had a problem, dvd, divx, ut2004,
doom3, nfs, hl2, tv tuner all day running, no gosting whatsoever.
make sure you read reviews before you buy, some may claim 16 ms and in fact
they go up to 35-45ms.(some lg and viewsonic).
tomshardware has long reviews, have fun.

[DøM]Loner

www.domclan.com



"{AGUT}Visine" <Visine~not~@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:uN2ae.655$p06.475@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
> What's a good one for gaming??
>
> It's time to retire my Iiyama 1451 19" CRT.
>
> Does any one use a 19" flat panel? is it any good? What one do you have?
> I have looked around and while the current generation of 17" seem well up
> to gaming 19" have slower response times. I can't go smaller than a 19"
> as it will be used to watch TV also. My reasons for not getting the last
> of the CRT monitors is its used in a small room and space and the amount
> of heat generated are also a factor.
>
> Thanks
> {AGUT}Visine
>
April 22, 2005 5:53:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 08:42:02 GMT, "{AGUT}Visine"
<Visine~not~@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>Does any one use a 19" flat panel? is it any good? What one do you have?
>I have looked around and while the current generation of 17" seem well up to
>gaming 19" have slower response times. I can't go smaller than a 19" as it
>will be used to watch TV also. My reasons for not getting the last of the
>CRT monitors is its used in a small room and space and the amount of heat
>generated are also a factor.

You also have to consider the native resolution of the monitor and
whether you have the horse power to drive it, or if the monitor output
will look acceptable at a lower resolution. I ended up with a 15" for
gaming as I didn't want more than 1024x768 for gaming.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Related resources
April 22, 2005 7:43:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

{AGUT}Visine enlightened us with:
> It's time to retire my Iiyama 1451 19" CRT.
>
> Does any one use a 19" flat panel? [...] I can't go smaller than a
> 19" as it will be used to watch TV also.

Remember that a 19" TFT will actually have a larger visible part of
the screen than a 19" CRT. A 17" TFT will probably come pretty close
to the 19" TFT you have now. You might want to take that into account
when making a choice ;-)

MeltDown
--
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
April 22, 2005 7:46:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

Good point I'll get the tape out and go and measure a few.

Vis

I did a bit more reading and found veiwsonic have a new monitor out at 19"
with an alleged response time of 4ms its the VX924. Seems like a huge jump
in speed but who knows.

Later :-)
April 23, 2005 12:40:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

{AGUT}Visine enlightened us with:
> I did a bit more reading and found veiwsonic have a new monitor out at 19"
> with an alleged response time of 4ms its the VX924. Seems like a huge jump
> in speed but who knows.

That's a pretty nice monitor!

MeltDown
--
April 25, 2005 7:15:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

15" is not that good for gaming imho.
17" lcd or 19" crt.
there is a big diff in FOV with 1024 vs 1280.
that is if you are a real ut freak.
i can't stand gaming under 1280x1024.
The hardware today allows you these settings easy.
[DøM]Loner

www.domclan.com



"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:mb0i61po9vb582qpl7ajogp453lb3jorl7@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 08:42:02 GMT, "{AGUT}Visine"
> <Visine~not~@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>>Does any one use a 19" flat panel? is it any good? What one do you have?
>>I have looked around and while the current generation of 17" seem well up
>>to
>>gaming 19" have slower response times. I can't go smaller than a 19" as
>>it
>>will be used to watch TV also. My reasons for not getting the last of
>>the
>>CRT monitors is its used in a small room and space and the amount of heat
>>generated are also a factor.
>
> You also have to consider the native resolution of the monitor and
> whether you have the horse power to drive it, or if the monitor output
> will look acceptable at a lower resolution. I ended up with a 15" for
> gaming as I didn't want more than 1024x768 for gaming.
> --
> Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
> Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
> please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
> Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
April 25, 2005 11:18:20 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 03:15:50 -0400, <user> wrote:

>15" is not that good for gaming imho.

I went from a 19" CRT to a 15" LCD but the difference hasn't bothered
me, I am happy with it.

>17" lcd or 19" crt.
>there is a big diff in FOV with 1024 vs 1280.

FOV doesn't change with resolution.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
April 25, 2005 3:16:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

your fov, not game's fov.
u see more at 1280.

"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:D a6p61p2ptkhdusnppgjc8pbg8q8t3o9lq@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 03:15:50 -0400, <user> wrote:
>
>>15" is not that good for gaming imho.
>
> I went from a 19" CRT to a 15" LCD but the difference hasn't bothered
> me, I am happy with it.
>
>>17" lcd or 19" crt.
>>there is a big diff in FOV with 1024 vs 1280.
>
> FOV doesn't change with resolution.
> --
> Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
> Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
> please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
> Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
April 26, 2005 2:39:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 11:16:21 -0400, <user> wrote:

>your fov, not game's fov.
>u see more at 1280.

Nothing worth seeing IMO, and I prefer having a higher framerate.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
April 26, 2005 2:39:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

u cant go higher than 85 online.
bigger fov actually helps.
it is harder to hit the target at 1280 than it is at 1024, but once you get
over it, you cant go back to 1024. it is just crowded.
:p 

[DøM]Loner

www.domclan.com


"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:mcsq61t3e35ind42u6o01tbif8ipu150e0@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 11:16:21 -0400, <user> wrote:
>
>>your fov, not game's fov.
>>u see more at 1280.
>
> Nothing worth seeing IMO, and I prefer having a higher framerate.
> --
> Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
> Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
> please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
> Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
April 26, 2005 11:40:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

<user> schrieb:

> u cant go higher than 85 online.
> bigger fov actually helps.
> it is harder to hit the target at 1280 than it is at 1024, but once you
> get over it, you cant go back to 1024. it is just crowded.

you mean UT or 2k4?

In UT I have a 110 FOV on- and offline.



--

Bora Ugurlu
mailto:boraugurlu@yahoo.de
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
April 29, 2005 7:22:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

This is getting confusing.....

I'm fairly sure that the picture always contains the same information at
any 4:3 setting. Only the number of pixels differs.

When I position myself so that my view corresponds with some objects in
the map and I change my setting, the same objects are still at the same
positions respective to the sides of my monitor.

At 800x600 and at 1280x960 the picture is exactly the same, they are
both 4:3 aspect ratios. At 1280x1024 the picture is elongated in
comparison, since this is 5:4 aspect ratio. Depending on your monitor it
either compresses the picture vertically or it cuts off part of it
horizontally.

Ie. unless you have a wide-screen variety. In that case 1280x1024 or
1280x720 would give a more accurate picture.
If you have a widescreen lcd than 800x600 would probably give a
different visible area than 1280x1024. Do you?

Ursa..

user wrote:
> sorry for not being more elaborate:
>
> at 800x600 you see a certain part fo the map.
> at 1280x1024 you see a lot more, this at the same FOV in the game. short,
> what you see is not the same at 800x600 as compared to 1280x1024.
> i can not play ay 1280x960 cause i use an lcd and that is my native
> resolution.(1280x1024).
> about the fps online, i dont remeber about ut99, but i am sure about
> ut2004( no more than 85fps online).
April 29, 2005 7:55:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

MajorUrsa enlightened us with:
> I'm fairly sure that the picture always contains the same
> information at any 4:3 setting. Only the number of pixels differs.

That's true. By default, you have a 90 degree field of view, no matter
what resolution you're using.

MeltDown
--
June 5, 2005 10:15:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

I'm done with CRT and its history....

LCD for me anyday...
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
June 18, 2005 6:43:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament (More info?)

{AGUT}Visine wrote:
> What's a good one for gaming??
>
> It's time to retire my Iiyama 1451 19" CRT.
>
> Does any one use a 19" flat panel? is it any good? What one do you have?
> I have looked around and while the current generation of 17" seem well up to
> gaming 19" have slower response times. I can't go smaller than a 19" as it
> will be used to watch TV also. My reasons for not getting the last of the
> CRT monitors is its used in a small room and space and the amount of heat
> generated are also a factor.
>
> Thanks
> {AGUT}Visine
>
>
NEC has a 19" TFT great for gamers, 8 ms response time for $400-$500.
seen it at Frye's. very nice monitor, even has the new High-glossy,
bright screen, very nice.
I would buy it, but I'm still very happy with my 17" "Matrix" TFT. Have
no problem playing UT on it.
Julius
!