Which of these ViewSonic monitors? Help asap pretty pls :)

Buyers frequently bitch about Viewsonic quality and service.... suggest you check out Samsung, NEC, and LG/Philips.

Actually, I live in Brazil and in the city I live, besides those ViewSonic models all I can find is:

LG L1952H
LG LH1950
Samsung 940B
AOC 193FW
Philips 190X6


That's about it. I need to go pick it up locally tomorrow or the day after that, sooo....

Thanks again!

Those are all TN Film panels so the picture quality is likely to be similar. I'm a Samsung fan. They have a good reputation for service.

Ah, also, how do I tell 8 bit for 6 bit models? I do a little occasional Photoshopping, so probably the dithering wouldn't be welcome I suppose.

Supposedly, there's no way to tell for sure. Though, if it is says exactly 16.7 million colors, then it just might be 8-bit, though that is no guarantee. If it says 16.2, then it probably is not 8-bit. Considering your limited choices, you might only have 6-bit monitors to choose from (unless you are willing to go elsewhere or order online or something).

Those three things should be really easy to check in the store. Make sure they let you check out the monitor before you leave.
Just some ideas:
1. Bring a ruler (or look for the product specs on the Viewsonic site), and look at the max resolution the monitor supports and see if it is the proper ratio that you want.
2. Put a dark image up on the screen.
3. Watch it during boot up and/or put a dark image with black on the screen.


There are actually very many subtle things that can go wrong with an LCD. The technology is no where near perfect. Some models have the problems mentioned below, while others have solved the problem. However, it is a lot of work to find a monitor that has the fewer problems. Some of the issues LCDs have or have had in the past include the following:

[*:3da4ddcb3d] Inability to reproduce as many colors as a CRT resulting in a "dithering" effect instead of a smooth color transition on images. This has improved.
[*:3da4ddcb3d] Inability to scale well to different resolutions. Only the max/native resolution looks right and resolutions that are 1/2, 1/3, etc... that size will look right. This will always affect all LCD monitors (there is no known solution to this problem). You can, however, put black boxes around the picture, making it smaller, so that you keep the native resolution so to speak.
[*:3da4ddcb3d] Bad response times, resulting in "ghosting" or "smearing" of fast motion. 6-bit panels have helped with this, but by sacrificing color reproduction somewhat. Also, overdrive helps with this considerably, since the main problem is not that the monitors are unable to get to a low enough response time, but that they are unable to implement that low response time for all 65,536 or 4,096 shades of color/grey. The response time listed on the box only measures 1 of those shades' response time, thus leaving you to guess what the other several thousand are (which can be many times higher). Overdrive makes the other several thousand more consistent (intead of being many times higher, only a little higher). As you will notice from this PDF: http://global.acer.com/products/mo [...] seTime.pdf we only really need a response time of 16ms to achieve around 60fps. However, dues to the problems mentioned above, the specs listed on the box are almost worthless (since they don't tell the true picture).


However, with LCDs you also get the following benefits:

[*:3da4ddcb3d] Reduced eyestrain due to the fact that the picture on LCD monitors due not flicker. The flickering effect on CRT monitors at lower refresh rates can cause eye strain and headaches. Raising the refresh rate helps to dramatically reduce the flicker.
[*:3da4ddcb3d] Absolutely 0 distortion in the pixels because each pixel is physically a square on the screen. The picture cannot be distorted by tiny amounts that is common CRT screens (creating a moire effect).

Other people also list the weight and power requirements as a benefit, but I could care less about this. What is most important is a good screen; I can make room for a big monitor if it's a good screen.

As mentioned before, they all have TN panels... so, they're all going to be similar in performance. Pick your poison.

How about the VA1912wb or the VG2021M? Those are the two that we know have overdrive (called clearmotiv by Viewsonic).

Out of these two, if you look at the specs:
http://www.viewsonic.com/products/ [...] 21m/#specs
vs
http://www.viewsonic.com/products/ [...] 2wb/#specs

both are the same width:
16.1" horizontal
yet the 20" is higher:
12.1" vertical vs 10.0" vertical
So, the 20" is the same width as the widescreen 19", but with extra screen space above and below. So... seems like the better choice would be to get the 20" and run it with the black bars on the bottom and top for widescreen (since that's the size the 19" is anyways).

Be warned though, the 20" has a listed response time of 8ms vs the 19" response time of 5ms. But, as I explained earlier, response time measurements are not accurate; and it might not be as big of an issue since these monitors have overdrive. You can decide if you want to go for the lower respone or not.

If you buy the 20" you will be be getting the widescreen one as well.

The 19" is 16.1 x 10 inches in size.
On the other hand, the 20" is 16.1 x 12.1 inches.

As you can see, you can fit the 19" widescreen inside of the 20" regular ratio monitor. So, when you play xbox in widescreen, you are looking at the exact same sized screen whether you have the 20" or 19"
On the other hand, by getting the 20" you have that extra screen space when you are in non-widescreen mode for computer usage, regular tv, etc....

Well, the 20.1's are mostly UXGA and have slower VA panels. The one above is a widescreen... SXGA and most likely a TN panel. Speed-wise OK, but there's always the possibility of undesirable scaling in many models.

As far as the 20.1, UXGA, that's right. But where did you get the idea that a monitor "scales everything 4:3"? Can you go to BB and check them out? They often have games running as demo.... the widescreens don't scale what they're showing to 4:3.

As far as the 20.1, UXGA, that's right. But where did you get the idea that a monitor "scales everything 4:3"? Can you go to BB and check them out? They often have games running as demo.... the widescreens don't scale what they're showing to 4:3.

You misunderstood me. What I said was that it scales everything that is 4:3 to full screen on the 16:10 monitor by stretching horizontally.

You're right... stretching mostly sucks.... TV, too. Better to view in "designed resolution" than bigger just because it's stretched.

1. I don't think they all do that. If the one you have in mind which does, consider something else. How a game scales can be determined by the game itself.

2. Avoid the risk of all that... buy a conventional monitor. After all, widescreen isn't ALL that big of deal, IMO. (May I suggest the NEC 90GX2?... it's really quite FAB!)