What is a good LCD now (dare i say best)?

TorqueTorque
edited June 2003 in Hardware
Ok, im looking to get rid of this vacuum tube monitor i have that is about 14 feet by 15 feet...

First thing is first... let me get this out into the open... i WILL be gaming on this monitor... so if lcd's still suck for gaming please tell me :) (i'm not that picky)

Size - well, 17"-18" i would prefer...
How much I am willing to spend... depending on how good the monitor is (which means, i would spend the extra $100 for a much better monitor)

So i see all these things like contrast ratio; brightness; response time... and i have no idea whats good...

i saw some samsung monitors and they looked hot.. but i still want good picture... so i am clueless

so if any of you could suggest a specific model (which i would prefer) or what to look out for, i would greatly appreciate it... :D

THANKS

And it needs to have a DVI link... cuz the video's and gaming that will occur

Comments

  • AMD-FanAMD-Fan Virginia Beach
    edited June 2003
    The best clearest images are still on CRT monitors. You can
    get good LCD monitors but for best picture its still CRT. I have
    a sony E540 21 inch and it rocks in games.
  • TorqueTorque
    edited June 2003
    yeah... but i want lcd... so :p

    but for real.. i know crt's still kick butt... lcd is what i want though...

    thanks for the input!
  • AMD-FanAMD-Fan Virginia Beach
    edited June 2003
    Thet do not even tell you dots per inch on LCD monitors. I am
    sure someone can recomend a good LCD monitor for a pretty
    penny. I sure like having a 21 inch screen in games it rocks!!
  • dydxdydx Cymru, UK
    edited June 2003
    You need a low response time for decent game and bideo performance from an LCD.

    I have an iiyama 17" LCD, its a decent screen, but the main monitor on my machine is a CRT, CRTs produce colour a lot better than LCDs and the image isnt as jagged.

    LCDs are fine for office work, but for multimedia purpouses, id prefer a CRT.


    mD
  • NebulousNebulous New York, The Empire State
    edited June 2003
    Stoopid just got a 17" BenQ LCD. I say it's decent in price and the image quality is fantastic. Took all but 10 minutes to setup. he adjusted the rez and played a few rounds of UT2k3. I have to admit for an LCD, the images looked really sweeeeeeet!

    I give it a ^5. Wish I had the money to get one.
  • EnverexEnverex Worcester, UK Icrontian
    edited June 2003
    Remember, a 15" LCD has the same viewable area as a 17" CRT. So take that into co sideration when thinking about LCD monitor sizes.

    Best thing to do is go to shops and have a look at the LCDs and buy the one you like best (or find the same one cheaper on the net).

    NS
  • ClutchClutch North Carolina New
    edited June 2003
    NS is right, if I was in the market for a lcd, I would head over to best buy or circuit city and look at the selection, then write down or remember model #'s and all. But crt's are still the way to go for games, but I know crt's produce a lot more heat than lcd's so for heat and power lcd's are ahead. IMHO if I were going to put soo much into a monitor I would want to see it in person before I lay down any money.
  • drowddrowd Texas
    edited June 2003
    i recently bought an 18.1 inch Dell LCD from their online store. they are pretty pricy without coupons, but if you wait for the right timing you can get some pretty sweet deals. when i got mine, i had been holding on to a 15% off coupon. As i was browsing fatwallet forums ( www.fatwallet.com a great site for tech deals) i found that all lcd's were marked down 150 dollars. so i tossed it in my cart, applied the 15% off coupon and ended up with a great 18.1 inch lcd for just under 400 bucks. prolly the best deal i have ever made. it has pretty good reviews for gaming too. i love it . . .
  • Ed-ChigliakEd-Chigliak West Yorks (UK)
    edited June 2003
    For a gaming LCD I think you should be looking at a 17" screen maximum since above this size the response times are lower. A 16ms response screen may not be as good as a 20ms response screen because they work with a reduced range of colours and 'trick' the eye into seeing other colours by alternating between two 'wrong' colours so for unsupported colours the response is slower than 20ms. Interesting article on tomshardware at the moment you should check it out.

    I have viewsonic 18.1" vx800 models with a response time of 25ms used mostly for work but also some gaming. Moving drawings around in CAD there is a noticable 'shimmering' that is not present with a CRT screen and I guess the same is present in games but I notice less in games because of the more balanced mix of colours. With CAD you soon learn not to focus on the drawing while it is moving and after a week or two you don't notice so much. Moving the drawing and reading the drawing are seperate activities with the LCD but with a good CRT you can read and pan at the same time. I have come to the conclusion that looking and reading a drawing as it moves is a bad habit you get into with the CRT screens a bit like reading a book in a car. Now I am no longer try to read a moving drawing I honestly feel more relaxed working and less tired. The clarity of the still image is amazing but only at the native resolution.

    Anyway I have been playing Mech Warrior 4 and it looks and plays great on the LCD.

    Hope this helps.

    Ed^
  • TorqueTorque
    edited June 2003
    thanks for the help guys... read the article at tom's hardware and i might just buy the one they recommend... cheap and best quality... kinda rare huh :)
  • McBainMcBain San Clemente, CA New
    edited June 2003
    Yeah, just read that too. I'd love to get a bigger lcd, i.e., 19", but if the 'shimmering' is still present for gaming. I'll guess I have to wait. Hopefully by oct.
  • dydxdydx Cymru, UK
    edited June 2003
    Get a dual monitor setup on the go.

    I use my CRT as a primary for video and games, and the LCD as a secondary for web browsing and working.

    Pretty useful having 2 screens.


    mD
  • karatekidkaratekid Ogdensburg, NY
    edited June 2003
    Well I am kinda in the market for an LCD (not sure if I will get one or not, but am looking) and I have noticed that the Hitachi CML174 seems to be getting great reviews for its gaming performance. Has a 16ms responce time and people say it has good color and brightness. It is also realitivle (sp) cheap at about 450. It is currently my favorite if I ever end up getting an LCD (though I have not actually seen it in person.)
  • stoopidstoopid Albany, NY New
    edited June 2003
    We're awaiting final editting to get a BenQ review on the frontpage... it's a real winner if you're looking for good performance for the money (not the BEST, but for $400 shipped you certainly would be pleased).
  • TorqueTorque
    edited June 2003
    looks like im probably gonna go with the Hyundai Q17 (www.hyundaiQ.com) ... 20 ms response

    and karatekid... i read this off of tomshardware, so you might be interested to read about 16 ms
    When we tested the first monitors of this kind, the Iiyama AS4314UTG and Hitachi CML174SXW, we were surprised to find much less afterglow on the 20-ms monitor than on the 16-ms. We have gone into this matter since then, and it turns out that the term 16 ms is exaggerated. 16 ms (max.) would be more accurate. If the manufacturers were really frank about this, they would indicate that 16-ms panels only display 262,000 colors instead of the usual 16 million. In fact, AU Optronics uses its extra fast response time to display 16 million colors in the end. With luck, the color your game needs will be one of the 262,000available to start with and, if so, the response time actually will be 16 ms.

    But if the color is not in the 262,000 table, the panel will display the two closest shades alternately. Because the display is very fast, your eye will only detect one shade, the right one. But for you to see an image, the monitor has to draw two of them. (AU Optronics has confirmed this.)
  • karatekidkaratekid Ogdensburg, NY
    edited June 2003
    So now, can somebody tell me what the Rise Time and Fall Time are, and how those relate to Responce Time. Most companies only specify one number. Sony, on the other hand, is specifing the Rise and Fall Times, and they are Rise Time: 20ms Fall Time: 30ms. I am wondering cause Newegg has an 18.1inch Sony on sale for 499, looks like a good deal, but how does the responce times relate to the responce time of, say, the Hyundai at 20ms.

    BTW, thanks Torque for the info.
  • AgeekAgeek
    edited June 2003
    Ok, think this way-- rise is gen of charge, ie: time it takes to make a pixel show a color (waveform rise is charge increase, LCDs glow when charged). Fall is DISCHARGE time(time from glow to no-glow).

    To respond to a requirement to change color, you typically have more than one pixel involved (and sometimes also alternate cycles of showing different fine hues to fool eye into thinking a color in between the two is what is being shown).

    So, responce on the LCD you speced could be 35-50 ms. The 35 is based on the eye bneing attracted to brighter pixel with a multi-pixel display strategy in use and thus ignoring a dimmer pixel when charge drops below 50% of full active charge. The 50 is based on fall+rise, 30 ms to fall to zero plus 20 to rise to new charged state. And for that monitor, I do not know the exact panel used so cannot say if it is a multilayer panel (price says probably not, so more like 50 ms). Modern 17" viewables should be about $800.00-$900.00 right now (they are not refurbable as far as panels themselves(panel would have to be replaced), do not buy refurb LCDs at all). I also would go with the Q71.

    Tom's Hardware Guide did a review of the 16ms and 20ms LCDs that seems to agree verymuch with this recommendation (and although Tom Pabst is working with German engineers (tomshardware.de as well as tomshardware.com) these days and they are conservative and thus may not please gamers, they do know math and warranties and those are important for things like LCDs).

    John Danielson
  • imported_makoimported_mako SF Bay Area, CA
    edited June 2003
    I bought a Hyundai Q17 off Outpost.com for $300 (after $100 in rebates) and I'm really happy with it. After using CRTs for so long, it's amazing to have such a thin, bright display. Did I mention that it's thin?

    Response is "20ms", and I didn't notice any streaking during gameplay. Firebird would sort of "bleed" the text as I scrolled, though, but that's a trifle.

    You have to run it at 1280x1024, though, otherwise you have to use the "Most Advanced Image Scaling" which interpolates among the fixed pixels and still looks rather poor. The downside of 1280 is the small text size. At least, it looks small to me. I had change the text size in the advanced display settings.

    Overall, I like it. You can game on it, if you can do 1280x1024. And Tom's HW has even made up an ICM profile for it.

    - mako
  • NikumbaNikumba
    edited June 2003
    I have the Hitachi CML174SXW and it rocks for gaming. It has good colour, no ghosting, but i will say if you are going to use a LCD/TFT use the DVI connection it is SOOO much better

    Nikumba
Sign In or Register to comment.