For the first time in five LCD screen comparison tests, none of the six screens tested proved to be bad enough to be eliminated at the outset. Each has an image that is good enough to make it worth buying. It appears that, as is the case with CRT screens, the ranges are moving ever closer to each other and the differences between one manufacturer and the next are decreasing rapidly. In the future, it may well be that only price, design and ergonomics will make the difference between one monitor and the next.

At present there is still some way to go in terms of brightness and cost, and less with regards to the trailing effect left on the screen, since the six screens tested are acceptable in this area, even for fast-moving games. Despite the huge reduction in the price of LCD monitors over the last two years, the 15" LCD display continues to be almost as expensive as a 19" CRT. Only two manufacturers of the six in this test, AOpen et QDI, have made a real effort in this regard. The monitors made by the former are only available in North America, those of the latter, only in Europe.

Leaving the matter of cost aside, only one screen really stands out from the crowd, thanks to the quality of its images, the Samsung 152T. The image is as good as that of the best 17" CRTs.

The other three monitors, ADI, LG and Philips, are good, but it's hard to understand why they are so much more expensive than the AOpen and QDI models.

Finally, here's an interesting statistic: of the 60 LCD monitors tested in a year (not all of which were published in Tom's Hardware Guide), 25% had a Philips LG panel and 20% a Samsung panel. This means that nearly half the screens tested were equipped with a panel made by one of the market leaders.