New Monitor Help Plz?

[DaLagga]

Well, I got home from work the other day, sat down at my comp to relax, turned the power on and then switched the monitor on and...poof!  I was greeted with one giant mushroom cloud of smoke and an electrical smell that persisted for 10-12 hours afterwards.  So lets just say I'm now looking to purchase a new monitor.  I've looked around quite a bit and looked up some information, but am not sure what to go with so any help you all could provide would be greatly appreciated.  My budget is around $250 and I'd rather not go much over that.  I've chosen a couple and am not sure what to go with.  Here's what i'm considering.

1. ViewSonic X Series VX922 Black-Silver 19" 2ms DVI LCD Monitor 270 cd/m2 650:1

or
2. SAMSUNG 216BW Black-Silver 21.6" 5ms DVI Widescreen LCD Monitor 300 cd/m2 DC 3000:1(1000:1)

I'm open to other options, but what I'm wondering about is that while I like the second one I had a few concerns.  First, it's a widescreen and I was wondering how that would affect gaming?  Will my screen be distorted or chopped off on some games?  Or will they expand appropriately?  Secondly, the native resolution of the second monitor is a bit higher than I like to run most games in (1680x1050) and I was wondering if image quality will suffer significantly for not running it in its recommended resolution?  Thanks again for the any help you can offer!

 

[Skyrage]

Pretty much all newer games have full-screen support so you don't have to worry about that bit. As for high resolutions, I always play at max if possible (1680*1050) and it looks pretty nice. Games which don't support widescreen resolutions will unfortunately look slightly blah, but then again, there's nothing much to do about it. It won't look utterly horrible though - just a bit stretched really and I tend to get used to it after a couple of minutes. But yeah, it's up to you really to decide. Should also think about the contrast and response times. If you're a serious gamer I'd personally not go beyond 5ms. I've got a 5ms and very fast, sudden movements (fps games then mainly) will leave a slightly noticeable shadowtrail, but that's more than acceptable. As for the contrast, well, the higher the better, but on the other hand, really high contrast monitors have a bit smaller life-span. Overall, they give a way better look though.

Personally I'd just go to a store and check out different monitors since in the end it's all about taste and preferences really, and the best way to find a monitor that you like is to actually see it.

 

[DaLagga]

Thanks for the reply!  But a couple of things.  First off, I know higher resolutions look better (naturally) but the thing is, for newer games I prefer to run them in a lower res (usually 1024x76 so that I can get a higher FPS with only a minimal image quality sacrifice.  But my question is, will running a monitor whose native resolution is high in a lower res cause the image look alot worse than running it in the same lower res with a monitor that has a lower native res (if that makes sense)?  Also, I did a little research on what certain specs meant since my knowlege of monitors is virtually zilch and from what I've read contrast ratio doesn't seem to matter much at all unless you have a perfectly pitch black room to begin with.   This made for an interesting read.  According to that article, if you have even so much as a candle worth of light in the room there is no difference between a contrast ratio of 500:1 and 10,000:1.  I don't know how much truth there is to it though. 

And I had considered actually going to a store (the horror!!!) and looking at different monitors for myself, but first off I doubt I will be able to find prices that compare to newegg's and second looks don't mean much since it can depend alot upon just how it is set up (the settings and such on their demo setups).  What I love about newegg is the user reviews, and often times I will make certain purchase decisions almost solely on those.  That's how I narrowed it down to those two in the first place, because they're the right size for the right price and the first one has a 79% perfect review out of 872 and the second an 84% perfect out of 61 reviews.  Either way, I don't think I can go wrong since they both look good.   Last question though.  Do M&B and HL2 run fine in widescreen?

 

[Skyrage]

Well, games should preferably run in the screen's native resolution for optimal look due to the way LCD monitors work. Things won't look too bad in other resolutions though. M&B (thanks to the no widescreen support) is bit stretched, but otherwise fine. HL2 looks excellent since that has support for every resolution that exists today. If your computer is powerful enough then I'd try and run games in max resolution whenever possible. Besides, if you upgrade your computer later on then a decent screen will be a good investment.

 

[Archonsod]

LCD/TFT based monitors have a less sharp picture than good old CRT phosphorus. The result is that running a game at a lower resolution than the monitor is intended to display looks worse, since the display can't handle the fine differences needed on the display surface.

Doesn't mean it looks horrendous though, in the main the only people I've heard complain about it are the same types who obsess over such things. Unless you're the kind of person who slits their wrists if their favourite game doesn't offer AA and HDR you'll probably not notice.

 

[N0ught]

Go buy a decent used monitor - chances are it will last just as long as a new one, and if it doesn't, you can go buy another one because it was so cheap.

Try asking your friends, and have your friends ask their friends. I have found that most people who have a computer have an extra monitor kicking around that they would be more than happy to just give to you.

I mean, why spend $250 on a monitor when you could get a monitor and a couple upgrades for your computer off of eBay even? Go for a monitor, memory, a video card, an audio card, etc.

Hell man, go look at Goodwill.

 

[1]

Hey DaLagga,

Excuse me for being at the peaks of being lazy today, I just didn't read all the words here. The only thing I want to ask if you are sure that you want an LCD. As far as I understand, although you're not a gaming monster, you do care about gaming performance. Then why don't you buy a brand new CRT. Your budget would give you a CRT with much higher specs than a $250-LCD can offer. As other guys mentioned, you need to use your LCD with its highest resolution as they are optimized only for that res. With a CRT, on the other hand, you have the freedom of choosing the res that your computer can handle with different games or other applications.

Also, if you're still determined to buy an LCD, you should not buy a wide-screen one, imho. The reason is that a WS 19" LCD has much smaller height than a regular 19" has. Yeah, they're good for watching movies but when it comes to games or even office applications, they suck.

Oh btw, I -the very same guy who wrote the above lines- just bought a new LCD today!! It's a Samsung 961BF. I tried it with M&B and the result was just fine. Of course, I have the luxury that I know that I'm not going to play much on this computer. I chose that one for office applications and surfing.

 

[Skyrage]

Kinda funny how the majority of serious gamers tend to go for LCD screens nowadays despite the listed disadvantages you listed above

 

[Instag0]

Kinda funny how the majority of serious gamers tend to go for LCD screens nowadays despite the listed disadvantages you listed above

Ahah! Except for me, 'cause even with my small desk, I still think LCDs are silly!

 

[Archonsod]

Only non-CRT monitor I have is rigged into a DVD player...

 

[Lhorkan]

I bought a Samsung SyncMaster 940 NW (19" widescreen, 5ms) recently, and I'm really happy with it. I like it a lot better than my old 17" CRT. The clunky CRT was getting on my nervers, and it was way too dark (even on 100% brightness and contrast).

My advice: buy the widescreen. They are made of awesome, and 21.6" makes it even better.

 

[1]

Kinda funny how the majority of serious gamers tend to go for LCD screens nowadays despite the listed disadvantages you listed above

It's mostly because -just like what people say- the size matters. And unlike what Emmanualle says the smaller is better, which makes the screen discussion an exception within all the problems of the humanity.

Seriously, we -not only hardcore gamers but all the people- all want to have a larger screen but no one would ever like to put a giant mass of plastic, glass and electronic circuits on his desk. LCDs occupy almost no place and they have a much much better look. This should be what seduces people to buy LCDs instead of huge-but-lovely CRTs.

If you're brave enough to oppose this enticement and can control your mind to focus only on performance aspects, then you're eligible to buy a CRT!

 

[Archonsod]

Seriously, we -not only hardcore gamers but all the people- all want to have a larger screen but no one would ever like to put a giant mass of plastic, glass and electronic circuits on his desk. LCDs occupy almost no place and they have a much much better look. This should be what seduces people to buy LCDs instead of huge-but-lovely CRTs.

Speak for yourself. I've never understood the whole minimalist thing.

It's like the conversation I was having regarding my new rig. One of the guys at work wanted to know why I wasn't going for the quiet, liquid cooling option. Me, I'm thinking "I'm spending a grand and a half on a beast of a machine. When I turn this thing on, I want it to sound like frigging Airwolf". Maybe it's just the engineer in me talking

 

[N0ught]

IMO There is no real difference between monitor types. They just have different advantages and disadvantages.

The industry just claims phosphorous monitors are clearer so people will still buy them. They tend to have less definition from my experience, though many just need their "focus" knob adjusted.

Overall, flatpanels are lighter, and therefore easier to move around. However, their picture can be damaged easily by impact, unlike traditional monitors.

It seems the monitor/flatpanel industry has succeeded in creating as much opposition as the coke/pepsi industry.

 

[1]

Speak for yourself. I've never understood the whole minimalist thing.

I have only one desk in my sweet home office and it's already completely covered with books and lecture notes. Those extra few inches I gained by switching to the LCD screen are so priceless for me!

It's like the conversation I was having regarding my new rig. One of the guys at work wanted to know why I wasn't going for the quiet, liquid cooling option. Me, I'm thinking "I'm spending a grand and a half on a beast of a machine. When I turn this thing on, I want it to sound like frigging Airwolf". Maybe it's just the engineer in me talking

Then I have a gift for you: use this to power up your beast

I'd prefer those roars you mentioned in my car. When it comes to the PC, however, I look for complete silence. But guess what? It's Murphy effect: my car is delicate like a girl and the PC sounds louder than anything else in my house. The curse is that I'm an engineer. Everything goes the bad way if it has the chance.

 

[Archonsod]

IMO There is no real difference between monitor types. They just have different advantages and disadvantages.

Quite a bit actually, operational wise. CRT's use phosphor dots being bombarded by an electron beam. LCD's on the other hand utilise two plates of polarized glass with a liquid medium between them, and use electrical currents (usually guided by TFT these days) and selective light blocking to display the image.

The industry just claims phosphorous monitors are clearer so people will still buy them. They tend to have less definition from my experience, though many just need their "focus" knob adjusted.

No, there are several hardware limitations on the way LCD's work versus CRT's, which mean that the picture on an LCD isn't as sharp or defined as that on a CRT.

 

[DaLagga]

Wow, I leave for a few days and this thread is on page 2!  Anyway, I went to order the 19" and discovered it was sold out so I just went with the widescreen.  I did originally want to go with a CRT since from what I have heard as well their picture quality is slightly better and they're cheaper.  But the problem I ran in to was that the selection of CRT's was rather small.  That, and my poor desk was literally beginning to buckle under the weight of my near 80 pound CRT.  I'll let you all know how it works when it arrives (should be a couple more days). 

I mean, why spend $250 on a monitor when you could get a monitor and a couple upgrades for your computer off of eBay even? Go for a monitor, memory, a video card, an audio card, etc

Because I'm planning on upgrading to a new system in 5 or 6 months or so and any money spent on upgrades would then be a waste.  Besides, my 3 year old system still runs all the latest games at a good fps (I'm running STALKER at 50-60 fps on high settings, although I do have to turn dynamic lighting off) so there's not much need yet.  I don't see the point until the DX10 games start comming out. 

 

[Archonsod]

To be honest, even when the DX10 games do start coming out I'm not sure if there'll be much point in upgrading. Unless you really need slightly better water effects