Gaming Monitor (LCD @ 1600x1200?)

[RaidSoft]

Hey all, just wondering if anyone has any experience with LCD monitors and gaming, because i know that a bit older LCD's were HORRIBLE and had insane ghost effects and basically unplayable..

I'm looking for an monitor that can run 1600x1200 (I HATE WIDESCREEN) and it needs to be able to handle fast games etc.. I've noticed that widescreens are very popular now but I got my 32" LCD tv to watch movies so this is 99% for gaming really..

Anyone that have experience with 1600x1200 monitors and that can help me out in choosing?

These are the models i've looked at:

LG L2000C
Samsung SyncMaster 204B
HP LP2065
ViewSonic VP2030

Also, which panel type is best for gaming? (if there even is a diffrence) (such as S-IPS, TN, IPS etc)

Peace out!

 

[realzeus]

I would try to find a good CRT if I were you...

 

[RaidSoft]

indeed CRT's are awesome, however an 19" CRT is too small when using 1600x1200 (in my opinion, everything becomes VERY tiny) and an 21" CRT that can handle 1600x1200 @ 85HZ (anything less then 85hz is just unacceptable) costs ALOT these days because of low supply and demand, could probably buy 2x 19" LCD's or something for the same price..

Not to mention the CRT's weighs like 50 kg and take up ALOT more space...

But what you're saying is there just isn't any acceptable LCD's when it comes to gaming? I thought that they had made alot of progress in that area....

 

[jaguarskx]

TN panels are generally considered better for games because of the low response times; as low as 2ms. However, TN panels basically suck at everything else compared to other types of panels. On the bright side, they are relatively cheap.

TN panels are bad for color accuracy, viewing angles, and image artifacts.

P-MVA, S-PVA, S-IPS are better than TN at everything except response times; the fastest is 6ms. They are also more expensive especially the S-IPS in larger LCDs. For example, a 24" S-IPS LCD monitor basically starts at $1,200.

Of the LCD monitors you listed I would choose the HP LP2065 Carbonite because it uses a S-IPS panel.

I would also recommend the PLANAR PL2011M, they have one of the best customer service policy. I think I used to be better though, when I bought my Planar PX191 about 4 years ago and they make high quality LCD monitors. The monitor is either S-PVA or P-MVA; the only bad thing about Planar is that trying to find out exactly what type of panel they use is harder than pulling teeth.

 

[jaguarskx]

But what you're saying is there just isn't any acceptable LCD's when it comes to gaming? I thought that they had made alot of progress in that area....

LCD monitors have a long way to go if you are trying to do a direct comparison to a CRT monitor, both have advantages and dis-advantages. The most obvious are size and weight.

Some people can see ghosting effects on an LCD some people can't. The only way to find out is to see it for yourself. The problem is everyone's are different and everyone's brain processes what the eyes see differently. Therefore, while I may see ghosting effect on a 5ms LCD monitor, you may not.

 

[RaidSoft]

I realise that LCD's are still quite a bit behind, also that not everyone percieves everything the same, a good example is for example that I see a HUGE diffrence in 60 and 85 hz on CRT's while my mother doesn't see any diffrence whatsoever.

What i'm interested in though is if there's an LCD (and which one) that's good enough for gaming to be worth it, sure CRT's are good, but nowdays they cost about twice as much as TFT's when you get to the 21" range which is kinda crazy.

But if i had the possibility of testing out all the monitors i'd surely do that but that's easier said then done, most demos are just windows stuff and you can't really tell ghosting effects etc. so i'd have to know someone that owns that very same monitor, and that's not very likely..

I'm leaning towwards getting an 21" CRT anyway but i'm sure it even fits in my desk beacuse of the ridiculus size and weight.

Also another of the downside with CRT's the radiation, considering how many hours I spend in front of my computer....

 

[RaidSoft]

Ok this has not evolved into a question of the size of the CRT ViewSonic P227F (21") because it's measurments say: 501x503x477 mm however my desk is only 450mm wide at the narrowest point, however if the "back" of the monitor can fit in those 45 cm then it's not a problem but there are no measurments that I can find for that monitor of the narrower part of it.

So now I need to find someone that owns an ViewSonic P227F (21") and can measure if the narrower part of the monitor can fit in my desk which is 45 CM and also how much of it would stick out in front (i mean, how far back i could push the monitor before it say stop)

The problem looks like it's the lower part of the back part of the monitor..

I'd REALLY REALLY appreciate if someone that owns one of these monitors could take these measurments for me so I know if Ican buy it or not!

Picture of monitor from front and behind!

 

[realzeus]

I concur that no LCD is a match for a good CRT. However, LCDs are not as horrible as they used to be and can be adequate for gaming; just do not expect CRT image quality, resolutions and refresh rates.

 

[stefx]

I have a 204B as a secondary display to my main monitor (24'' Dell 2407fwp)

If you are looking for a gaming monitor, I would recommend you go for a wide screen. I find that the wide aspect ratio is more natural for our horizontal view angle, especially in first person shooters.

 

[RaidSoft]

I've recently changed my mind (again) and i'm now looking at the Samsung 226BW which is an 22" widescreen with 2 ms response time (TN panel I believe) and it has gotten great reviews on pretty much every site i've seen, also it costs less then an 21" CRT..

 

[picture_perfect]

Some people can see ghosting effects on an LCD some people can't. The problem is everyone's are different and everyone's brain processes what the eyes see differently.

I don't think ghosting is subjective, just subconcious. The reason it doesn't always register is that moving objects are expected to blur. The added blur of ghosting is not distracting untill you try to track the moving object (effectively making it stationary) and it remains blurry. This is when most people subconciously move their focus to another part of the screen.

I also doubt its possible for the brain to "process" a clear picture from two frames that are literaly smeared together. Image persistance (the other LCD blur) is a biological response to light everybody has (the degree of variation i doubt significant).


That's speculation though. The real argument comes from all the posts i've read of people who never saw ghosting until a direct CRT/LCD comparison changed their mind. They are usually very surprised.