Best 23" or 24" widescreen for Gaming

[UltimaBoB]

I am getting a new computer and my first LCD. My Samsung 19" CRT still works - but to my mind the cool thing about going LCD was screen size. I'd rather have a 21" CRT than a 20" LCD as desk real estate or power usage aren't issues for me.

I am teaching English in Korea so I thought about getting a Samsung.

But I keep hearing bad things (for gaming) about

a) LCDs vs. CRTs
b) widesreens slower than non-wides
c) over 20" being too slow compared to 20" and 19" LCD
d) Samsung's PVA tech being great for photos and color but slower for gaming

So would getting a 24" widescreen LCD with PVA tech combine all of these problems and be less able than a CRT?

Are there any good 23" or 24" widescreens for gaming out?

 

[strangestranger]

LCD's are fine for gaming or anythnig else.

one thing to remember is only a few people actually make the panels that go into their LCD's.

my dell for instance uses a samsung panel. dell has a new 24" out which if anything as good as mine would be a good choice.

also remember that advertised latencies mean nothing. samsung make good ones and as a result so do dell. if you can try to pick up one of my own ones the dell 2405FPS. it doesn't ahve a HDMI socket and might not be as fast latency wise as the 2407FPW but it is an excellent monitor.

i am sorry i can be of no more help but all i can do is recommend what i know and as far as 24" monitors go i have only used this one.

 

[b1gn]

Bob,

I have the 2407WFP and it's a pretty good monitor. It does have HDCP support too which is necessary to view HD DVDs. Not really needed now but it's good to have that support for when they make HD DVD drives for computers.

Stranger is right in that there are very few manufacturers of the lcd panels themselves. Companies like Dell, Apple, HP, etc buy the panels then put the electronics and drivers behind them to get them to work better than the next guy. You'd be hard pressed to do better than the Dell 2407WFP for the money. The Samsung 244T uses the same panel as the Dell 2407WFP and has slightly better drivers to boot, but it is slightly more costly.

Do check out this web site if you haven't already for other alternatives and reviews:

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com

 

[UltimaBoB]

I am thinking of getting the ACER 2423w as it seems to be the best pure gaming monitor of the 24" widescreens - the new BenQ is also promising.

But I was going to go with a single ATI card solution (1950XTX) for the first while and then maybe upgrade to Nvidia SLI dual cards after DX10 comes out.

If my monitor doesn't have 1:1 pixel mapping will I need an Nvidia card? Is this a problem w/ going ATI?

 

[strangestranger]

go for what monitor you feel is best however i fail; to see what reasoning you ar using about gfx cards.

the 1950 is a good choice but going SLI with the new cards automatically would not. if a monitor does not support 1:1 pixels then you will have to use whatever ooptions the monitor has. both ATI and nvidia support scaling options.

my advice would be go with the 1950 if you have the cash but hold off buying any dx10 card until more is known about them. it sounds like you would be thinking of buying the nvidia ones as soon as they are released without waiting fot the ATI competition to be released which would be one fo the worst buying decisions ever concerning gfx cardds IMO.

if the ACER is for you fine, however can you gie me your reasons for thinking so. please do not say because of a low latency cause it would be a bad reason ifit is. if it is due to good reviews by independanr reviewers then fine.

 

[UltimaBoB]

You have to understand that I am a bit of a computer noob when it comes to anything inside the box. I play a lot - but know jack about systems. I'm living here in Korea and teaching - and don't have any trusted tech savvy friends. And I am using a computer shop that I trust to order, assemble, troubleshoot, and install drivers - but that I cannot communicate with that well due to language barriers. Also, there is no chance to "test drive" monitors etc... I have to do it all off online reports. So I'm doing the best I can. If I am making some assumptions that in fact I don't understand - that is why. At the end of the day I will have to make some assumptions and choices based partly on gut feel and guesswork since in the end I don;t know what I am talking about.

After a week of online research the Acer monitor seemed to be the most Gamer-friendly of the 24" choices in terms of speed which I prioritize over color quality and viewing angle. I could be wrong, but that is what I took from my research overall - as an overall feeling - not gonna quote sites and reviews etc... I heard too many things about "input lag" on S-PVA panels to want to risk my money there. The Acer is one of the only higher speed 24" WS monitors out that doesn't have S-PVA. It also has gotten lots of solid reviews. If my take is wrong, how so?

I also got the impression that I will need a very powerful card to run my 24" at native rez with eye-candy on. However, I am persuaded to leave some cash sitting until I can get DX10 cards - not right after they come out - but rather in like Q2 2007. So I need a mobo and vid card to last 6-9 months that will power my 24". But I don't want to go too crazy right now on GPU either.

I am now thinking about a single Nvidia Geforce 7950 GX2 w/ an Asus P5W DH and Intel 6700. I'll still have ~$USD 1,400 in the kitty left for a new Mobo and DX10 -ATI or Nvidia - in like March or APril 2007. I can use the P5W DH and 7950 GX2 in my current (soon to be old) computer as an upgrade at that point so they won't totally go to waste as itis nice to have 2 computers for when friends stay here and visit etc... When it comes time to upgrade to DX10 cards and mobo I will then decide ATI or Nvidia, SLI, dual card - whatever is best then - hard to predict the future.

Does this strategy make sense? My computer is my TV, gaming center, stereo etc... and I have a lot of cash earmarked for it. But I don't want to waste too much either.

 

[strangestranger]

as long as reviews say the acer is good then go for it. i just didn't watnt you to think that if something had an advertised latency that was lower it was a better monitor. my monitor has a usual latency of over 20ms but i find it great for games. if someone has played on it and given it a good review then that is a good sign.

as for gfx cards, the 7950 is a good choice if you can afford it. it is a waste if you are playing at low res's but for your monitor would be perfect. tbh a 1900, 7900 or the other 2 you have mentioned will be fine i am sure. still it is a good coice in the nvidia.

waiting that long for a dx10 cards ia also a very good choice as for all we know they might have brought out a refresh or even a new card than the first generation.

just remember about your monitor choice that latency isn't everything and that the advertised one means nothing. do as your doing looking at reviews and 'm sure you'll do fine. also i'm sure whatever one you choose will suit your needs.

good luck with your purchases, it should be a fast comp.