I'm sorry about the long post. I appreciate anyone that takes the time to read this and helps me with my decision.
I'm a gamer/enthusiast, but more toward the gamer end of the spectrum. I'm running 2 GTX 570's in SLI with a core I7 950, and I'm using an LG monitor from my 08 PC build that only has 1680 x 1050 res. I feel like I'm preventing my PC from reaching its graphical potential, and I'm itching to amp up my display.
The thought of playing Crysis at high res on a large screen sounds phenomenal, so I'm trying to find an LCD monitor with a 1920 x 1200 resolution, 27 inches, and 3ms response time or lower.
I've noticed that monitors at this PC res are EXTREMELY rare now. The industry seems to be moving more toward the 1080p resolution, which is bad for heavy PC users, gamers, and enthusiasts alike.
I haven't found exactly what I'm looking for. What I have found is that a monitor will have good ms, good res, but not a large enough viewing area. Likewise, I'll find a monitor that has a large screen, good res, but not a low enough response time. Two monitors that I've found with these problems are the Samsung 275T and the ASUS VW266H.
The Samsung 275T has 1920 x 1200 res, 27" screen, but 6ms. I guess it has a slower response time because it's kind of old. This monitor is also kind of pricey ($850+ !) and hard to find. If they still made monitors at this res and size, we'd probably see a similar model as this one with a lower response time. Unfortunately, we don't. =[
The common Asus VW266H has 1920 x 1200 res, 3ms response, but only has a 25.5 viewing area. This seems kind of appealing to me, but I feel like 300 dollars would be a waste of money on this monitor, considering I already have a 22" screen that looks similar in size because of how LCD monitors are measured.
I'm about 80% sure that I'm about to compromise the full res and go with an 1080p monitor unless someone can convince me otherwise. The newer Samsung P2770FH looks very appealing because it's 27" and sports a 1ms response time, which would help me unleash some more brutal beastage in fps games. It's also a mere $400 (tops), which seems like a decent price.
I'm still indecisive as to whether this monitor is the proper choice for my needs though. For one, the aspect ratio is 16:9, which seems SUPER wide for my desk because I only sit a mere two feet or so from the screen. The extra viewing area of a 27" inch monitor would seem better spent length wise rather than width wise, so that I can read, program, and do school essays more comfortably. This is why 16:10 seems more appealing to me.
If anyone could find what I'm looking for within a reasonable price bracket (800 seems a bit excessive), or could offer me insight into my monitor candidates, I'd appreciate it.
I know it only has a 5ms response time, but I'm not sure if one would notice visually. It does have 1920x1200 and the reviews seem to be good. My local Microcenter happens to have it in stock to I'm going to go check it out tomorrow and see how the picture looks.
Also, my friend just bought a 25" monitor from the same brand and thinks it's awesome, so it seems promising.
^5 +1 what jaquarskx said. You can get better than I-Inc or Hanns-G.
I would also add that the response time and contrast ratio's are grossly exaggerated in advertising. Every single technical review that actually measured reponse time clearly indicated that response times are higher. Every single technical review that actually measured contrast ratio demonstrated that the ratio was way off. Those are two specifications that should not be taken seriously. I guess it is part of the "bigger, faster, more" is better syndrome.