Computer Monitor, Im just stumped

[vadersoul]

At present the workaday computer I have that I wish to build to replace uses a 19inch monitor and it seems big enough however in going for a new build I am unsure when asking myself "What monitor size is a good fit" would be good enough.

My next build will be primarily for gaming.

Some people have said "Go with a TV and use it as a monitor" but something in that just screams.. eh? Surely TVs since they cater for a completely different medium would fall down in areas a gaming monitor needs... after all if that wasnt the case, everyone would just buy TVs and connect them to their PCs.

Some other people have said 24 inch is big enough.

I have the room to stick a 46 inch display on my desk if I want but I am extremely conscious about field of vision.
Whilst I am confident I would be able to SEE a large screen on my desk, my eyes would be darting around the different sides of the screen if facing it close at a desk like most PC gamers would.

I am seriously considering Eyefinity 3 screen display. I have my eye on 3 x SM2443BW 24" screens at £165 each, which would result in a potential 60" or so panoramic view around me.


So what I want to know, is there anyone who has an idea on what a good screen setup is?
Would you go for 1 monitor over 3 linked via Eyefinity?
If 1, which sized monitor would you pick and why?
If 3, which size of monitors would you go with and why pick this over a 1 monitor option


Im half tempted to buy a 40inch panel, mount it to my wall and shunt my desk a foot or 2 back however I leave it upto those in the know to guide me to nirvana!

 

[MagicPants]

The problem with large displays mounted at a great distance is that if you ever look down, say at your keyboard, your eyes need to refocus and it causes quite a bit of strain.

Imho opinion the largest screen you should have for gaming is 27". The smaller the screen, the less eye moment, the faster your reactions. A performance ideal size is 23".

With something like eyefinity, you're still okay because the side monitors only fill in what would have been your peripheral vision, all the important stuff is in the middle screen.

Up close, anything larger than 30" is too much. Using a giant TV as a monitor is a bad idea. Not only are the pixels huge and blocky, but TVs aren't designed for twitch gaming, they usually have huge input lag. Viewing angle will also start coming into play as you can only look at part of the screen directly from close up.

For a 3 monitor setup, 3 24" monitors are ideal. Their resolution isn't so high that fill rate will be an issue (assuming you have multiple GPUs).

Going up from 24" will cost you an arm and a leg, and anything over 24" won't have a great response time or input lag because the panel makers don't expect people to game with them.

For a 3 monitor setup I'd go with dell u2412s, because of they are IPS with low lag and decent response time.

That said, for a single monitor solution I'd go with a 27" IPS monitor. In fact, that's what I did (an HP zr2740w). It has low lag, but a fairly lousy response time.

 

[vadersoul]

£600 for a 27 inch is outside my price range
I have seen one for £190 and whilst I imagine it wont be stunning- I am sure it will do the business.

I really wish I had a way to compare 24 inch vs 27 inch side by side.. Might be worth going to a PC world and doing some tests (or in fact propose the question to them, pull out my wallet and allow them to test... but get something come up and "i have to go")

If what you are saying is accurate, 27 inch is big enough so all i need to do is find out if it is too big.

 

[MagicPants]

If you are on a budget, 24" gives much better bang for the buck. Cheaper 27" panels are only 1920x1080 anyway, so there's not a lot of point in them unless you use reading glasses.

 

[vadersoul]

I dont get what you mean by :

[/quotemsg]
Cheaper 27" panels are only 1920x1080 anyway, so there's not a lot of point in them unless you use reading glasses.
[/quotemsg]

Can you explain please?

 

[ssddx]

what he means is that both the 24 and 27 inch models are the same resolution. this means that the smaller screen will be sharper but the details will be smaller. if you have trouble seeing (ie, you need reading glasses) this might case too much eye strain for you. if you have good vision you probably wont mind the extra clarity.

--

as for your original post,

i myself use a 40" lcdtv at a distance of around 3-4 feet away and it works perfectly fine. the only games where things might seem overpowering are in fps games. however, once you get used to it you should be fine. the only thing with using a tv is you are stuck at 1920x1080 so it will not be as crisp and clear as as smaller 24 inch screen obviously.

quite a few people seem to be using televisions nowdays it seems. it works well when the pc is for mainly gaming/media purposes but not as well when you need to do office tasks or for extensive web browsing. short sessions are okay though.

keep in mind that you need the hardware to power eyefinity. this means more expensive hardware and more frequent updates. also keep in mind that (opinion here) the bezels can really to interfere with your viewing experience. i've found one monitor to be best for everything but rpg (two is nice if you have vent, music or internet windows open) or rts (if you have something like supreme commander where it can use two windows at once). even then, one window is normally perfectly fine.

another reason for going with one monitor is that instead of getting 3 really cheap panels (bad color, bad viewing angle tn panels) you might be able to get a better single monitor (ips type) instead. or a television, your choice there.

for sitting on a desk 24 inch is a good size to go with. 27 or 30 may be a little large depending on preferences. for wall mounting depending on distance 32-40 is ideal.

-

what you need to do is to go out to a store and compare models and sizes. bringing a tape measure along to view the monitor from the distance you would at home can help here.

 

[vadersoul]

The more and more I think of it, the more that 24inches sounds a good fit

It takes me back to around 8 years ago when I bought either a 22 or 24 inch monitor. These were the days before mainstream TFT (so it was CRT).

It was HUGE... it was almost as big as my TV

The back however was massive and it took up half the desk!


I am confident that 24 inch is the way to go so now all I need to do is narrow it down

Some I have my eye on are
LS24PULKF/EN
LS24MYKABCA

Are either of these that good?

Is there a decent one I should be setting my sights on?

What is the score with IPS? Is that something to watch out for?

 

[MagicPants]

IPS has better all around color. You get smoother gradients, and the color doesn't shift near the edges of the screen or when you move your head around. IPS also tends to have a wider gamut than TN, which most people prefer (though you can get a similar effect by tweaking "digital vibrancy" up in your video card settings.)

The downside is that it has a little more motion blur than TN, and it costs a lot more.

Samsung is alright for TN panels, but they don't make IPS (they have one IPS like monitor called PLS, but it has massive backlight bleeding issues)

Whenever a person says they like CRTs better than LCDs, I assume they haven't seen an IPS panel.

 

[vadersoul]

I think that there is just far too much conjecture and no solid testing and benching on IPS vs TN for gaming.

We know that IPS is vital to colour accuracy so photo and design enviroments REQUIRE an IPS.

THen when you take response lag out of the equation and even factor our viewing angle (unless you are running on a treadmill whilst gaming, you are stationery and angle is not an issue) we get the real question... what is the big difference?

I have seen reviews, videos and side by side comparisons and I wont doubt that the IPS has a sharper and brighter picture but there is really nothing out there that says "For gaming you MUST have IPS"

We all know CPU and GPU differencs have a noticeable and measurable differences that justify spending more but between IPS and TN units, there just isnt enough direct evidence that tells you an IPS is better for gaming.

I would love to spend an extra £100 on an IPS unit, I can get a HP IPS VW for about £250.
I just dont see enough evidence compelling me to do so when a lot of people say "It will run your games very nicely with a TN... a little sharper with an IPS"... its almost like someone giving advice about a car and say "Well the 1000t model has a nicer interior than the 995t model, but ultimately you wont notice it when you have your eyes on the road and the performance of the car is just as good"


Unless someone has such evidence, im pretty resigned to the fact that a good enough 24 inch display for a fair enough price (not cheapest but not most expensive) then ill just get a TN

 

[MagicPants]

Once you get over a certain size, (about 24") viewing angle becomes an issue as you can no longer view all parts of the monitor's screen directly from the same vantage point.

TN is fine, IPS is for videophiles. If you're going cheap, TN is the (only) way to go. If you are buying any sort of premium monitor, I'd go with IPS (it is for example way more important than 120hz or LED)

As for your car analogy, IPS over TN is more like going with Lexus over Scion. They are both really Toyotas. Lexus is clearly better, if you care about that sort of thing, but if you just want a nice car to get you from place to place the Scion is great.

 

[vadersoul]

I like it...

I was having it out a bit with someone who is getting an LG 24 inch IPS panel and they were convinced it was 100x better than any 24 inch TN panel. The LG one has a reported 5ms but I am told that IPS panels will always show less response time on average that a TN of the same (ie IPS 5ms vs TN 5ms = TN wins) but they are convinced I am wrong.

That being said, since response time directly affects FPS and both of our builds include high end GPUs, noticing a difference in this would be next to impossible because although the FPS argument goes on and on, I am convinced that there is no passive way to detect a difference between 40-100 FPS so telling the difference between 60 FPS and 50 FPS is next to if not impossible and since it isnt possible to bench these without having some serious testing equipment, the argument will go on.


As long as my game looks good, I dont give much of a hoot... but its surprising how little effort is put into Monitor selection for new builds, often people use a monitor they already have and are more willing to upgrade other parts than their screen.

I am hoping that within the next few years there is a LEAP forward in Monitor design where every article, magazine or forum post will be able to hang its hat on a new type of technology that puts a certain Monitor type above all others. To tell you the truth, I am surprised the Panel manufacturers havent cottoned onto this... if they put research into finding something SPECIAL, like a key factor that makes buying that Panel for gaming 100% the way to go, our problems (and the money our of our wallets) would be flying away!

 

[ricard4836]

IPS has better all around color. You get smoother gradients, and the color doesn't shift near the edges of the screen or when you move your head around. IPS also tends to have a wider gamut than TN, which most people prefer (though you can get a similar effect by tweaking "digital vibrancy" up in your video card settings.)

The downside is that it has a little more motion blur than TN, and it costs a lot more.

Samsung is alright for TN panels, but they don't make IPS (they have one IPS like monitor called PLS, but it has massive backlight bleeding issues)

Whenever a person says they like CRTs better than LCDs, I assume they haven't seen an IPS panel.

The information is very interesting. I thing the IPS monitors is the best of computer monitors for me.

 

[ssddx]

in truth no one panel type is "required" for any task. sure ips panels are suggested in the design field but since not everyone uses an ips for viewing your work it can be a moot point. the same is true for gaming in that some people demand ultra-low input lag tn panels but most people will never notice the difference.

as far as all the numbers go, you cannot rely on them alone. depending on what is being measured and the process for doing it the numbers could be way different. visual comparison is the best way to make sure the monitor is what you like no matter what anyone else says to you.

personally i will get nothing but an s-ips, equivalent or better. the color shifting on tn panels (even small laptop ones) is absolutely horrendous. some panels feature a coating which reduces this a little. a cheaper solution would be e-ips as it maintains the same viewing angles but is visually comparable to va or tn panels in terms of color depth.

 

[vadersoul]

When you talk about colour shifting - can you explain this in more details?

 

[ssddx]

sometimes dark and light colors look inversed or images look like you turned the contrast to zero. in general its very ugly.

you might only need to move 5-10 degrees off center to see it. sometimes the edges of the display are this angle from your vision so you see it even when sitting in front of the screen.

its most noticible in laptop tn screens but still perceptible in desktop versions though not quite as bad.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=tn+panel+color+shifting&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=703l6516l0l6672l23l15l0l7l7l0l469l4455l2-8.3.3l16l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1009&bih=455&wrapid=tlif132258715267110&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi#um=1&hl=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=tn+vs+ips&oq=tn+vs+ips&aq=f&aqi=g1g-S9&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=39047l40859l4l41094l13l8l0l0l0l2l391l1844l2-3.3l6l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=b2429e2f829e35dd&biw=1009&bih=455

not sure if you can figure out what i'm talking about but theres a few google images to look at.