LCD monitors for gaming?

Post by **Clown** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 2:45 pm

Honestly? No. You need a mega computer for the quality I run games at. I like to run things with everything at high, and this just isn't possible with such a large resolution on games like BF2.

Screen quality is very good though. Probably one of the best I've ever used.

NRGizeR · Post by **NRGizeR** » Thu Sep 22, 2005 5:09 am

Clown wrote:Honestly? No. You need a mega computer for the quality I run games at. I like to run things with everything at high, and this just isn't possible with such a large resolution on games like BF2.

Screen quality is very good though. Probably one of the best I've ever used.

You showoff

I would actually take a good "office" monitor over a good gaming monitor since I code, map, and write lots more than I play, but it would still be nice to have a monitor that would be ok for gaming too. The WS format would grant me alot of extra workspace for various programs, which would make it desireable for me. And you could always run games at lower resolutions, scaling at 1680x1050 can't be that bad... But if the image quality is good, I'll probably save some money and get me one of those, they look very nice on paper at least

Post by **Clown** » Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:20 am

Scaling on a TFT monitor is always terrible. You could run at native res, but then the picture is just too small. I'm guessing you can get two 17" TFTs for about the same price as the 2005FPW, but the widescreen gimmick sold me. Buying the best hardware to match this resolution is half the fun, though it leaves me penniless.

NRGizeR · Post by **NRGizeR** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:19 pm

as it turns out I found a nice 17" MVA panel that was affordable, and very very good IMO... I can see only very little ghosting, and that's only in q2, in other (newer) games I hardly notice it at all

I bought the Samsung SyncMaster 173p Plus, and I love it

only problem now is that I'm going to have to get used to 60 fps (since I play with vsync) instead of 115 that I had on my old monitor

Post by **Clown** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:54 pm

No box jumping for you.

Picer · Post by **Picer** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 5:31 am

Do it the easy way, and maybe the geeky. One CRT for teh games, and one LCD for eveything else. And belive me, when you start using two monitors instead of one you cannnot imagine how you got around with just one.

And it looks sooo much cooler

Post by **nemesis** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:00 am

Samsung SyncMaster 913B for the win!

NRGizeR · Post by **NRGizeR** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:42 am

nemesis wrote:Samsung SyncMaster 913B for the win!

Naaah, I have just as much screen "real estate" as you (1280x1024), and I can guarentee you that this monitor is better than the TN-panel versions

(I win AGAIN!

*wink*)

oh and Picer: I might go down the dual screen road if I find a decent dual-DVI gfx card (that won't require me to completely empty my bank account) but I would never go back to using CRTs, the image quality of a good LCD is soooooo much better, and the fact that they don't take up almost any space on my desk is a big bonus too...

Picer · Post by **Picer** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:52 am

NRGizeR wrote:
nemesis wrote:Samsung SyncMaster 913B for the win!
Naaah, I have just as much screen "real estate" as you (1280x1024), and I can guarentee you that this monitor is better than the TN-panel versions (I win AGAIN! *wink*)

oh and Picer: I might go down the dual screen road if I find a decent dual-DVI gfx card (that won't require me to completely empty my bank account) but I would never go back to using CRTs, the image quality of a good LCD is soooooo much better, and the fact that they don't take up almost any space on my desk is a big bonus too...

That, i belive, realy depends on the crt

Flyer · Post by **Flyer** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 8:21 am

i had a 17'' CRT from 98 earlier but it got broken some weeks ago and now i got a 19'' CRT and im still the best player B< doesnt really matter imo

Post by **WizardExt** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:34 am

I recently bought a Samsung Syncmaster 930BF. It's reaally good and also a decent price.

Resolution: 1280x1024
Inch: 19"
Response: 4ms

NRGizeR · Post by **NRGizeR** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:28 am

Picer wrote:That, i belive, realy depends on the crt

Well yeah, but from what I understand about the laws of physics (please educate me if I'm wrong) a CRT can NEVER be as sharp as a LCD monitor, simply because the magnetic field that guides the electrons in a CRT can never be made so uniform that it can produce the same effect as a LCD where you can just turn on/off pixel x,y that in itself has physical boundaries towards the neighboring pixel. That's why CRTs are always a little unsharp, compared to a LCD, given that the LCD isn't doing scaling of course.

In the color department the CRTs are generally speaking better than the LCDs though, however, the new panels are getting really close to the same color spectrum, and I bet that this monitor is better than my old (somewhat crappy) CRT monitor in that department as well.

Picer · Post by **Picer** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:46 am

Well, since when did physics follow laws?

Atm im sitting with the same thing on my CRT and my LCD to compare, and yes they are side to side. And atleast for my eyes, the CRT i actually sharper than the LCD. Although i can't get the brigtness to fit both screens the LCD seems brighter, but with more delicate colors, while the CRT might even be too sharp.
My CRT is a Hansol 900p bought in 2002/3 and my LCD is a Fujitsu Siemens bought a year later or so. But its second hand for me so i only had it for a couple of months.

sajh · Post by **sajh** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 1:43 pm

Noticed today that benq released a 19" with 2ms

Flunx · Post by **Flunx** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 1:47 pm

Picer wrote:...My CRT is a Hansol 900p bought in 2002/3...

I've got a Hansol 920D and it's sharpness is superb. I find it to be much sharper than most LCDs

I'm still not comfortable enough with LCDs in AQ2 so I'll hang on to my giant CRT a little bit longer.