Curse

Admael · Apr 13, 2008, 05:48 AM // 05:48

5ms is not slow.

Anything 12ms or less is more than enough for a casual gamer. I use to hate widescreen on a desktop. But it's a must now.

The higher display size monitors just look weird to me if they're not widescreen.

Lord Sojar · Apr 13, 2008, 05:59 AM // 05:59

Ugh...

Ok...

You could go with this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009094

Don't listen to anyone... that monitor is excellent, one of my friends has it.

I own this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824001234

You could go with this if you can push budget:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009113

Brianna · Apr 13, 2008, 06:38 AM // 06:38

Well, I realize a lot of people in this thread are state of the art technology fanatics, so of course stuff that is still good doesn't get the credit it deserves - I know that.

My monitor isn't what anyone would consider ''Good'' but it really is, it cost me 250$ 2 years ago though and it's just a 19" Full screen.

I've been thinking about the Samsung ones I mentioned earlier, that seems like the best deal really.. I think all ''Potential'' flaws with hardware is bloated and over-exaggerated in those reviews, because once you have it in real life it's completely different, It's like scare tactics reading those reviews on newegg.

Though the insight is helping none the less so thanks for all the comments so far, the Acer doesn't look half bad really, and it's more in the price range I'm looking for.

Blackhearted · Apr 13, 2008, 08:01 AM // 08:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admael

5ms is not slow.

Anything 12ms or less is more than enough for a casual gamer. I use to hate widescreen on a desktop. But it's a must now.

Eh, i dunno about 12ms being good. I've seen some at that and i noticed quite a bit of blur on even simple old school mario games.

Brianna · Apr 16, 2008, 01:07 AM // 01:07

Ok I have one I'm thinking of.

LG L226WTQ-BF 22in LCD Flat Panel Monitor 1680x1050

*2Ms response time

*3000:1 Contrast Ratio

Vs:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009094

Acer AL2216Wbd Black 22" 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor with HDCP support

*5Ms response

*700:1 Contrast.

The LG one is only 30$ more, so I have to make a choice. However I'll still keep looking to see what else is out there, might be something better.

rob0626 · Apr 16, 2008, 01:30 AM // 01:30

found this on newegg. seems to be a very good monitor, and it's incredibly cheap for the specs you are getting. If i had the money, i would buy this. It's a little over your price range tho.

ASUS VK222U Black 22"
5000:1 Contrast
2ms (GTG) response rate
$289.99

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824236034

Snograt · Apr 16, 2008, 03:18 AM // 03:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by KZaske

This is what I have. I would have gotten the BW model but they were out of stock at the time.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....1831601 37115

5ms is just too slow. Yes, it does make a difference.

Got the 2232BW just yesterday. It's absolutely awesome - the blackest blacks and the brightest brights. 2ms response, but nobody's interested in that nowadays - it's grey-to-grey that's all important.

Don't ask me to explain it

Lord Sojar · Apr 16, 2008, 03:23 AM // 03:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianna

Ok I have one I'm thinking of.

LG L226WTQ-BF 22in LCD Flat Panel Monitor 1680x1050

*2Ms response time

*3000:1 Contrast Ratio

Vs:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009094

Acer AL2216Wbd Black 22" 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor with HDCP support

*5Ms response

*700:1 Contrast.

The LG one is only 30$ more, so I have to make a choice. However I'll still keep looking to see what else is out there, might be something better.

Brianna, how is the search on the Best Buy auction coming along? Did you get registered correctly? I saw some great deals on there.

Assuming you can login to it, here is a link to one that really caught my eye.

http://bestbuy.dtdeals.com/auction/i...m?P=5&I=166018

For those that can't see it. Here is the stats:

G L226WTQ-BF Flatron 22in Widescreen Flat Panel LCD Monitor

Experience cutting-edge graphics with this 22" widescreen flat-panel LCD monitor, featuring an ultrafast 2 ms response time and wide viewing angles for a quality multimedia experience.

Features
Ultrafast 2 ms response time
3000:1 contrast ratio 300 cd/m brightness
1680 x 1050 maximum resolution
170 degree horizontal and 160 degree vertical viewing angles
15-pin D-sub and DVI-D (VGA) inputs
Flatron F-Engine chip adjusts contrast and brightness separately to enhance color and clarity of displayed visuals
eZ-Zooming one-touch resolution adjustment for easy changes to the screen display
Tilt and swivel functionality lets you easily change the monitors position to your viewing preferences
100mm x 100mm VESA-compliant
ENERGY STAR compliance assures energy efficiency
Microsoft Windows Vista compatible

Current bid: $155.00
Bids: 4 bids
Buy it Now:
$243.53
Shipping & Handling: $19.99 (within the continental USA only)
Time Left: 17 hours
End Time: 04/16/08 1:38:05 PM Pacific Time

If you can get it for 175 + 20 shipping + tax, that would still be 110 dollars below MSRP.

GL Brianna!

Snograt · Apr 16, 2008, 03:56 AM // 03:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief

Microsoft Windows Vista compatible

Lol?
__________________

majestikk · Apr 16, 2008, 04:08 AM // 04:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief

Ugh...

Ok...

You could go with this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009094

Don't listen to anyone... that monitor is excellent, one of my friends has it.

I own this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824001234

You could go with this if you can push budget:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824009113

1st one is an OK monitor. the drawback being 700:1
comes with a 3year warranty so that's cool

2nd one is nice if you have SLI. otherwise you'll see less performance from your gpu on such a bigger resolution. 22" widescreen is the biggest you want to go on a single gpu.

3rd one basically the same thing. You want to avoid 24" unless you have SLI or a monsterous 98 gx2 or whatever that beat of a new card is with 1mb

the rest of the monitors posted look like great choices
good luck with your search

Brianna · Apr 16, 2008, 04:14 AM // 04:14

I can see that link Rahja, I got it all set up.

Try this one out since you can, it's the same one but in better shape: http://bestbuy.dtdeals.com/auction/i...m?P=5&I=167925 it's in better condition than the other one and it's 240$ B/O, no one has bid on it yet.

I'm thinking of dropping a bid on it though.

Also I have an 8800 GTS, I think I'll be fine at those resolutions.

KZaske · Apr 16, 2008, 07:33 AM // 07:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianna

How is 5ms too slow then? It's looking like my options may be limited to that if I can't find a 250$ 'Ish Monitor.

The one I have now is 5Ms and I don't notice much of it.. I get 60 frames in most games so how exactly does it affect things?

I had a Samsung 19 inch WS (1440x900) with a 5ms refresh rate, I got 20 (lowest) to 140 (highest) FPS. I upgraded to my Samsung 2232GW (1680x1050) 2ms refrest rate. My FPS now range 35 (slowest) to 165 (Highest I have seen). Same video card, same system. Not bad for an AGP card if I say so myself.
Yes, VSYNC is off; no need for it. So, yes the response time does make a difference.

If you want to get your socks knocked off Get a Samsung, spend the little extra money even if it means delaying the purchass a bit. You will NOT regret it.

Admael · Apr 16, 2008, 09:00 AM // 09:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by KZaske

I had a Samsung 19 inch WS (1440x900) with a 5ms refresh rate, I got 20 (lowest) to 140 (highest) FPS. I upgraded to my Samsung 2232GW (1680x1050) 2ms refrest rate. My FPS now range 35 (slowest) to 165 (Highest I have seen). Same video card, same system. Not bad for an AGP card if I say so myself.
Yes, VSYNC is off; no need for it. So, yes the response time does make a difference.

If you want to get your socks knocked off Get a Samsung, spend the little extra money even if it means delaying the purchass a bit. You will NOT regret it.

Oh how wrong we can be.

The ms rating is the response time it takes for one pixel to go from white (from every single color) to black. If a monitor has 2ms W2B response time, it is a good LCD. Now, if it's 2ms GTG, it means *nothing* (gray to gray? sounds like a scam to me!)

As a marketing ploy, companies like to list some monitors as 2ms GTG. That's very misleading because you want 2ms W2B.

EDIT: GTG=gray to gray, W2B=black,white,black

Nanood · Apr 16, 2008, 09:40 AM // 09:40

Go Go Go 24 inches

Lord Sojar · Apr 16, 2008, 10:27 AM // 10:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianna

I can see that link Rahja, I got it all set up.

Try this one out since you can, it's the same one but in better shape: http://bestbuy.dtdeals.com/auction/i...m?P=5&I=167925 it's in better condition than the other one and it's 240$ B/O, no one has bid on it yet.

I'm thinking of dropping a bid on it though.

Also I have an 8800 GTS, I think I'll be fine at those resolutions.

Oh nice find. Also, if you want to drop a bid on this baby, do so.

http://bestbuy.dtdeals.com/auction/i...m?P=5&I=167202

24" juicy goodness. <3 My best friend has that bad boy, and it is sure pretty.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snograt

Lol?
__________________

It was a copy paste off the site. A lot of monitors say that. Not sure what they are referring to, but w/e.

Snograt · Apr 16, 2008, 09:41 PM // 21:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Someone technical

Grey-to-grey response times can not be compared with the black/white response times previously given out by manufacturers.

When measuring b/w responsiveness, the time it takes a pixel to shift from black to white and back to black again is determined. There are two separate times within the b/w change that add up to the specified overall time: The "rise" time it takes from black to white and the "fall" time it takes back from white to black. Therefore, the response time specified represents the sum of rise and fall time. The b/w shift is defined in the standard ISO (1) 13406-2.

To the contrary, the grey-to-grey response time represents the average value established over several measurements from one grey shade to another grey shade. In doing so, only the time from starting gray to end grey is being measured but not the time it takes to change back to the initial grey value. Thus, there is only one reading per measurement and nothing to be summed up.

Unfortunately, no official standard as to how exactly the grey-to-grey time is to be measured has been defined by now. This way, manufacturers can basically measure and specify grey-to-grey response times as they see fit. A new, revised form of the European ISO 9241 standard, expected to be released this year, is supposed to bring about the changes needed in order for customers to be able to better form an opinion on how displays actually perform.

But even today, it is fair to say yet that grey-to-grey measurements are much closer to practical reality and thereby provide more insight on how a given panel actually performs in terms of responsiveness. Since b/w shifts bear the biggest change in contrast requiring the highest amount of voltage in order to align the liquid crystals, b/w shifts create a kind of ideal condition which is usually rarely seen in practice. Everyday use rather means varying colors and lots of grey scales, where there are differences in contrast to be dealt with that are much less pronounced than it is the case in b/w shifts. This, however, asks for smaller voltages impressed for aligning the liquid crystals, as well. And less voltage means there is less energy for the crystals to align by. Therefore, low grey-to-grey response times are closer to practical reality than low black/white response times.

In order to be able to further decrease response times, more and more manufacturers have recently turned to employ the novel Overdrive technology.

Nevertheless, it won’t be until the new ISO 9241 standard is finished that one can truly compare the specified response times of different manufacturers among one another.

Doesn't make any difference really - as long as you don't compare GTG with WTB. It's all marketing when it comes down to it

KZaske · Apr 17, 2008, 05:00 AM // 05:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admael

Oh how wrong we can be.

The ms rating is the response time it takes for one pixel to go from white (from every single color) to black. If a monitor has 2ms W2B response time, it is a good LCD. Now, if it's 2ms GTG, it means *nothing* (gray to gray? sounds like a scam to me!)

As a marketing ploy, companies like to list some monitors as 2ms GTG. That's very misleading because you want 2ms W2B.

EDIT: GTG=gray to gray, W2B=black,white,black

Well at least you started out on track but you missed my point completely. A faster refresh rate can, and in my case did result in better frame rates.
As for the value of W2B or G2G ratings, it really does not matter as long as you don't mix them. Technically, W2B (W2B2W) is a more accurate representation of the capabilities of the monitor; however G2G is more commonly used because it reflects, more accurately real world use of the monitor. If one is going to use the monitor where color accuracy is a huge issue; look for W2B ratings, if you are going to use it for gaming, watching DVDs and general day to day applications G2G is “good enough.”
I would also like to point out that the color capabilities of the monitor have a dramatic effect on W2B ratings as every color is represented individually.

Admael · Apr 17, 2008, 06:28 AM // 06:28

The only reason I brought it up was because both monitors in your previous post are 5ms W2B. And you claimed one of them gave better FPS.

KZaske · Apr 18, 2008, 05:39 AM // 05:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admael

The only reason I brought it up was because both monitors in your previous post are 5ms W2B. And you claimed one of them gave better FPS.

All I can say is that I expected it to provide fewer FPS due to the higher resoulation. I was very surprised to see the frame rates go up, as was my wife and most of my friends several of which came over to see for them selves. The previous monitor was also a Samsung but it was 5ms G2G 1440x900, this one is 2ms G2G 1680x1050 both are setup using DVI-D. There were no other changes, not even the cable.

Brianna · Apr 18, 2008, 09:43 PM // 21:43

Omfg I just bought this: http://www.newegg.com/product/produc...82E16824001262

I am in love! I'm so glad I went with Samsung, it was so worth the extra 50$ that I didn't want to pay, couldn't be happier.

It has no dead pixels either, and just a slight bleed on the left which is barely ever noticeable. I'm going to buy Samsung monitors from now on, but what I'm really happy about is no dead pixels!

Oh yeah and to add my performance is just as good as it was on 1280x1024, I still get all the same FPS as I used to get.