Best 19 inch LCD display for under 500 bucks?

JMEaT · Post by **JMEaT** » Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:33 pm

I'd like to get one but like I said in my other thread I'm not too LCD savvy. Any suggestions for under 500 bucks? Thanks!

Matrix · Post by **Matrix** » Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:40 pm

Stress is selling some very sexy 18.1" Dells for $400, If I didn't already have dual 19" flat screen crts I'd pick one of these up.

phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=5317

BULLGOD · Post by **BULLGOD** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 2:37 am

Aother vote for the Stress route as im VERY HAPPY with this LCD.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 7:39 am

Gateway FPD1950 19" LCD Flat Panel Display

My dad got me one of these recently. I never liked the idea of getting a screen from Gateway, Compaq, etc, but, to my surprise, this screen kicks the butt of most LCDs out there. @ 12ms, this is about your best bet for gaming, with a 19". Sent mine back for a replacement because of a few dead pixels (my brother's has no dead pixels), so I'm on my 19" Samsung CRT right now (ugly and bland, by comparison

). Target recognition was much easier with the LCD. I tried out FarCry, the Half-Life 2 demo, and a game called Chaser, and I didn't notice any ghosting. I did notice some ghosting when I tried Descent3, but unless you want to wait for Samsung's 8ms 19" to come out next month, I don't think you can do any better. This screen has a maximum refresh rate of 75Hz (1280x1024) on an analog interface, but, at least with my ATI Radeon X600 Pro, only 60Hz on DVI... I use analog because of that. Their picture doesn't do justice to the screen's stand, which attaches at the middle of the back, not the bottom, and has a turn-table in the base.

I would highly recommend it. The only draw-back, IMO, is the 60Hz on DVI. I don't know if that's a screen or a card issue... you might ask Gateway.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 9:35 am

A side topic:
Isn't refresh rate sort of a non issue with LCD anyway because the image on screen isn't "drawn" line by line from top to bottom the way a CRT image is?

BUBBALOU · Post by **BUBBALOU** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 10:19 am

Pixel Response Time
(general refresh rates)
for LCD's @ NATIVE RES

30ms = 33.0 FPS
25ms = 40.0 FPS
16ms = 62.5 FPS
12ms = 80.0 FPS
8 ms = 125 FPS

So for gaming the minimum you want is 16ms, of course lower is better

Contrast Ratio 300:1 or better (for grayscale is ref)

Viewing angle 130 or better

Connectors
VGA (Analog Only)
DVI-I (Digital or Analog)
DVI-D (Digital Only)

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 11:32 am

That's what I thought, the pixel response time is the important part, DVI stuck at 60Hz isn't necessarily a bad thing if you still have 12 or less pixel response rate.

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:07 pm

But to cloud the issue, the response rate is a bunch of mumbo-jumbo. Often low response times STILL result in significant ghosting because the rate is measured from black to white. The *true* response time should be grey-to-grey times, which are often a LOT higher than white-to-black times.

Best to demo any LCD panel you are checking out, or at least refer to good hardware sites for a review of that particular panel.

Don't forget, some panels with low rates also have a much-reduced color range as a trade off: it might work fine in games, but be next to worthless for photoshop editing and normal desktop work.

BUBBALOU · Post by **BUBBALOU** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 10:07 pm

where is that STFU Mobius Pic when you need it

I really tire of his ridiculous conspiracy theories

Considering this is the guy who put his videocard in the freezer!

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 10:48 pm

BUBBALOU wrote:I really tire of his ridiculous conspiracy theories

Considering this is the guy who put his videocard in the freezer!

As much as I hate saying it, he actually did have a point. Some companies do measure the refresh timing incorrectly. This was even pointed out in an anandtech review a while back. Display articles

As for the freezer bit, that was to allow the removal of the heatsink without taking the GPU off of the PCB due to the epoxy.

That trick actually works.

BUBBALOU · Post by **BUBBALOU** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 11:08 pm

But with mobius..since he always buys the cheap sh!z he gets burned, with attempts to pimp it or degrade it

--------------------BACK ON TOPIC---------------------

Seriously, the price you pay with LCD's

#1 the size

#2 quality

Currently a quality LCD for Gaming is at least 999.99 and up. As for Photoshop, ratio must be at leasts 300:1 for 256 values of grey, and video editing at least 40 FPS.

Stay with a CRT unless you have some GRUMP for gaming LCD

Vertigo · Post by **Vertigo** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 1:13 am

I' still using my prophetview 920 pro's and they are awesome for gaming. No ghosting whatsoever, very good contrast/brightness, and they look very cool to boot

Unfortunately they stopped making these

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 1:28 am

BUBBALOU wrote:Currently a quality LCD for Gaming is at least 999.99 and up.

Depends on the size. You can get a nice 17" LCD for $400. My Samsung SyncMaster 712N was about that much, and is really solid in all the games I play.

If you're going with a 19" LCD for gaming, I don't know what that's going to cost you. But make sure you demo it on a legitimate game before you buy it, and watch for blur. I tried the 19" version of what I have now, and it just couldn't keep up in D3.

Dedman · Post by **Dedman** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:02 am

Lothar wrote:Depends on the size. You can get a nice 17" LCD for $400. My Samsung SyncMaster 712N was about that much, and is really solid in all the games I play.

I have the same one. In my experience it is great for games and basic office use. I play D3, Madden 2004, and a few racing and flight sims and I have never had a problem with ghosting.

BUBBALOU · Post by **BUBBALOU** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:34 am

Im sorry guys but Im just used to 21 Crt/19 LCD's and just recently some 20" and 23" LCD's have been getting their response times down too.

No doubt there are some quality 17 LCD's out there that have 12-8ms with alot of other features. but the bargain ones are the majority and we all have to watch out for those

(17LCD = 19CRT in viewable size)

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 12:48 pm

Good stuff, Bubba, thanks. As I mentioned earlier in this topic, Samsung is going to be coming out with a 19" @ 8ms sometime in February. That would be something.

Here's an interesting read, about response times, that I just came across on TigerDirect's site:

TigerDirect.com wrote:The Truth About Response Time
In our continuing effort to provide up-to-the-minute information to consumers, our editors wish to shed light on the multitude of numbers (or specifications) that accompany advertisements, brochures, user manuals, etc. regarding LCD monitors. Amid the cacophony of digits large and small appears one expression that is particularly important, but often overlooked. This mysterious number represents image response time and is articulated in terms milliseconds (ms), such as 12ms, 16ms, 24ms and so on. Response time is the screenâ??s signal reaction speed, or the time it takes for a liquid crystal panel to go from total white to total black and then back again. A 16ms LCD monitor corresponds to 63 images per second, while 12ms is equivalent to 83 images a second.

What Does this All Mean?
Bottom line -quicker response times translate to smoother and more fluid images. So, the next time you notice an advertisement shouting to the world that a specific LCD monitor boasts a lightning quick 24ms response time - which is actually a fairly nice standard - remember that a product that sports a 12ms response provides a major upgrade in image smoothness and fluidity.

In Case Youâ??re Curious - What About the Science?
Broadly speaking, the response times of LCDs are slower than those of CRTs. In the past, the response time of most LCDs was between 20ms and 50ms, and the adverse effects of this relatively long interval could be noticed during playback of DVDs or when playing games that required especially quick scene changes. You would, for example, find that fast-moving objects would cause ghosting, particularly when black objects passed through a bright-colored background. The human eye will perceive a series of sequential images displayed at a frequency of 30Hz (30 images, or frames, per second) as continuous, as is the case with movies (24 frames per second). Screen images displayed at 60Hz will offer even more comfortable viewing, but careful scrutiny will reveal a slight sense of "flickering", as is the case with the NTSC television standard (which displays at 60 frames per second). According to standards set by VESA (Video Electronics Standards Association), the frequency necessary to achieve flicker-free display with a CRT is 72Hz. Most VGA cards and software applications, in order to accommodate the use of CRT monitors, have working frequencies set at 75Hz. In the past, the LCD monitors with 16ms response time that predominated in the market supported frequencies only up to 63Hz (1/0.016), making their display performance inferior to that of CRT monitors. Avid gamers therefore continued to use CRT monitors.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:20 pm

By the way, I'm reasonably certain that Gateway's monitors are made by LG (Life's Good).

You might also want to have a look at the Sceptre X9g-Gamer, JMeat, it's specs seem to match those of the Gateway (aside from the brightness: 400cd as opposed to 250), but it ends up costing a lot less. The stand doesn't look quit as nice, though. Just a suggestion: you might try to get your monitor locally, if possible, so that you can more easily return it in the event of a defect (dead pixels, etc).

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:54 pm

Contrast ratio is also often a load of BS, a monitor will say it has a 600:1 contrast ratio or even 800:1. But keep in mind that perfectly bright and dark CRT has a contrast ratio of only about 200:1.

JMEaT · Post by **JMEaT** » Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:46 am

Thanks for the feedback.

I think I'm going to hold off a bit before dropping the dough on a new LCD.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:36 pm

Samsung SyncMaster 915N 19" LCD (8ms)

@ PC Connection

19"... 8ms... 700:1... 300cd... 160/160... $470

This just keeps getting better and better.

Analog only, though... That's kind of wierd, considering how new it is.