LCD for UT2k7?

[Jackal`SexPlz]

Since none of us "public" peoples have played UT2k7 yet, I guess this is more geared towards the Epic Crew, but anyone, please leave feed back, suggestions, or comments.

Since my awsome 21" CRT blew out yesterday, I will of course need to get a new one. I am looking at getting one LCD right now, and another one when 2k7 comes out (might go with 3, but doubt it). Any suggestions one which LCD I should get?

It will need to beable to play 2k7 in 1600x1200 with no ghosting of course. I would also like it to be 20/21" in size, and not really WS, as I think 2k7 would look pretty stupid with 2x 21" WS LCDs. My main focus is gaming, so it should be a good LCD, and price isn't that big of a deal to me.

Here's what I'm looking at right now btw:

ViewSonic VP2030b Black 20.1" 8ms LCD Monitor 300 cd/m2 1000:1 0.255mm Pixel Pitch
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824116371

or

SAMSUNG 204B-Black Black 20.1" 5ms LCD Monitor with Height, Pivot, Tilt Adjustments 300 cd/m2 800:1 0.255mm Pixel Pitch
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824001226

Thanks in advance everyone! Any helpful input is allways apperciated :)

[placebo]

I'd urge you to go widescreen as UT2k4, and thus in all likeliness UT2k7 as well as most new games, allow for widescreen gameplay and usually add side-to-side view rather than subtract vertical view.

In that line of monitor, I can recommend the NEC 20WMGX2: it has phenomenal response, brightness, and color.

[Jackal`SexPlz]

Hmm, thanks Placebo. I may go with that if nothing else pops up that might be better :)

[Ntrance]

I dont know but Id recommend this monitor http://www.necdisplay.com/products/ProductDetail.cfm?Product=437 its gotten great reviews even for gamin I saw one at fry's and it looks really really good I mean picture quality is great with "opticlear technology" the only thing that held me back at the time from gettin it was the glare factor seems like its really prone to glare its screen is very reflective. Also could have been the tons of lights they have there that made it look like that and made me not gett it,later kinda regreted it when gettin home and reading alot of reviews online for it it has 4ms response time here is a few specs
Features:
# OptiClear® DVM technology enhances detail and clarity

# 4ms Rapid Response™ technology for clear-motion images

# Dynamic Video Mode real-time automatic color/contrast optimization

# Ambix® technology allows for digital/analog connectivity

# 4-port USB 2.0 hub for easy connectivity

# 340º swivel and 30º tilt adjustment ranges

# Multi-directional NaViKey™ eases screen settings adjustment
PcMag review here.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1926575,00.asp

[oceaN[nova]]

I dont know but Id recommend this monitor http://www.necdisplay.com/products/ProductDetail.cfm?Product=437 its gotten great reviews even for gamin I saw one at fry's and it looks really really good I mean picture quality is great with "opticlear technology" the only thing that held me back at the time from gettin it was the glare factor seems like its really prone to glare its screen is very reflective. Also could have been the tons of lights they have there that made it look like that and made me not gett it,later kinda regreted it when gettin home and reading alot of reviews online for it it has 4ms response time here is a few specs
Features:
# OptiClear® DVM technology enhances detail and clarity

# 4ms Rapid Response™ technology for clear-motion images

# Dynamic Video Mode real-time automatic color/contrast optimization

# Ambix® technology allows for digital/analog connectivity

# 4-port USB 2.0 hub for easy connectivity

# 340º swivel and 30º tilt adjustment ranges

# Multi-directional NaViKey™ eases screen settings adjustment
PcMag review here.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1926575,00.asp
The glare factor and that it doesn't HDCP were the only things holding me back not to buy it.

[Boksha]

I'd urge you to go widescreen as UT2k4, and thus in all likeliness UT2k7 as well as most new games, allow for widescreen gameplay and usually add side-to-side view rather than subtract vertical view. You do realise that adding stuff to the sides is exactly the same as removing stuff from the top and bottom and increasing the FOV value?
(in fact, seeing as the FOV value in most games is defined as the angle between the left and right side of the screen, you'll have to increase your FOV anyway, or else there will be stuff removed from top and bottom)

I would seriously recommend against getting widescreen unless you spend most of the time on your PC watching DVD movies.

What's more, if you want a gaming monitor, I'd recommend against getting an LCD alltogether, unless you need the desktop space it saves or really care about a decrease in electricity usage. (if you do, it's probably still a better idea to get a CRT and replace all lightbulbs in your house with more efficient ones; the difference between a big CRT and a big LCD is generally no more than 75W or so)
Consider getting a nice 21" CRT instead. No lag. No dithering. No fixed resolution. No fixed refreshrate. No backlight bleeding. No overshoot. No dead pixels. No mura defects.
Basically, when you buy an LCD, you really have to think about what you're getting, because there's practically always a catch. With a CRT you basically get everything you could want out of a monitor except for compact size and energy efficiency.

[A-Laon]

OP:

Funny enough, the second monitor in your first post is the one I myself plan on getting for 07. I'm no expert on this stuff, but from what I've seen, that's one of the best deals out there and is undoubtably a very nice monitor.

My totally insignificant experience says go for it. :)

...oh but yes, as Boksha said, go for a CRT if you can, though. Personally, I need the space, so I'm taking the LCD.

[»madMar†y»]

...oh but yes, as Boksha said, go for a CRT if you can, though. Personally, I need the space, so I'm taking the LCD.Yep, I also needed the space and have bought myself an 19" TFT screen. I still have to adjust some settings but it looks great though I have to admit that buying a CRT would be smarter, cause LCD screens aren't that long on the market and probably need lots of research before they're on the level of CRT's. But LCD is probably the future. :)

[drak0n]

Since my awsome 21" CRT blew out yesterday, I will of course need to get a new one. I am looking at getting one LCD right now, and another one when 2k7 comes out (might go with 3, but doubt it). Any suggestions one which LCD I should get?

I'm selling a used 21" Samsung CRT if you're interested.

http://www.samsung.com/Products/Monitor/CRT/CF21GSBUK.asp?page=Specifications

One thing Boska left out is manufacturers are starting to move away from CRT technology, so it's going to be pretty hard to find a good quality 21"-22" CRT these days.

[Boksha]

One thing Boska left out is manufacturers are starting to move away from CRT technology, so it's going to be pretty hard to find a good quality 21"-22" CRT these days. It's true manufacturers are moving away from CRT technology.
It's pretty sad, really, how few CRTs there are in the shops nowadays. Like I said though, those few CRTs have everything you could wish for in a visual output device, except for compact design and energy efficiency. No compromises besides those two.
There may be 20 times as many different LCD screens out there at the moment, but 19/20 of those don't even come close to the quality of an average CRT. So while CRTs may be fewer in number, the few that are still produced blow pretty much all LCDs out of the water.
Rather than it being hard to find a good quality CRT these days, it's a lot harder to find a bad or average CRT, particularly in the top segment.
On the other hand, there are also very expensive yet disappointingly sub-par LCD screens out there.

[Jackal`SexPlz]

Hmm. Well I will be getting two of them for Side by Side hawt action. I guess I could modify my computer desk. I would love to stick with CRT, belive me. But I really would like to have the room that LCD provides. Heh, I guess I could just hook it up to my 60" Sony SXRD lol. I don't even know if UT2k7 will go up that high in res or not (1080p)

I'll look into some CRTs I guess. I just know they are so horrible for your eyes and brain, and being as young as I am, I know it will mess me up later in life (40 years from now) I"ve been on CRT for 10 years now, and I can already tell my eye sight is getting buggy. (perhaps I need to sit back from the screen like they say you should)

I do thank you guys for all of your input. :)

FYI some info on the whole eye/brain thing I'm talking about.

From what I was told by a physisist, a CRT projects images into your eyes, and even though you can't see them all (anything above 60fps), your brain does. Which is why some people get headaches from CRTs. Of course, it's not in it entierty, but that's pretty much what I gathered from his mumbo jumbo :) It's just really bad for your eyes and brain :P

[Boksha]

Completely depends on the refreshrate of the screen.
I think very few people won't get a headache from a CRT operating at 60Hz, and I think very few people will get a headache from one at 120Hz. They might be bad for your eyes, but that applies to directly looking into a light source in general. I don't think looking at a CRT up close in a dark room is much worse for your eyes than looking at an LCD.

[Jezza101]

tbh my LCD was far better than my CRT, perhaps cos I had a low end CRT and high end LCD? I went with the Viewsonic 922, and run at 75Hz - I found 60 gave a very poor UT performance (dont ask me why I just say what I see!).

Anyways the screen is just fine for gaming and I certainly didnt notice any change in my ability to play UT or my enjoyment of it.

The one thing I tend to mention is that size preference is very personal, some people are quite satisfied by small ones and others find large ones hard to handle. Innuendo aside, I really think its important to test screens yourself, some people are strangely defensive about their preference and will thrust their propaganda upon you - so its important to take it all with a pinch of salt.

Personally I find large screens very difficult to play on as I just cant take in all the information presented to me at once, but then perhaps other players dont play to such a high level and arent worried about missing a small glimpse of a player in the far corner. Wide screen is particularly difficult for me, I find I end up straining my neck looking round the screen. The obvious answer is to sit further back but that kinda defeats the point lol! But if you like a 21 inch screen then it might be right up ya ally. Try it out!

One things for sure, there are perfectly good LCD screens out there, heading into 2007 anything else just seems a bit, erm, geeky. I guess not everyone is style concious though ;)!

[Boksha]

Not sure how good the Viewsonic 922 is, but my brother bought a Viewsonic VP930 and he was NOT pleased. It suffered from backlight bleeding and there was a delay which was noticable in games.
It's too bad I didn't get the chance to test it myself, but I know my brother is about as picky as I am.

It's very personal, really.

[[TT]BrundleFly]

Dell 3007WFP - 30 inches of gaming goodness. Played UT2004 at 2560x1600. After that, everything is just smaller...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v195/BaxterT/Computer%20Room/Dell3007WFP.jpg

Also my Dell 2405FPW - 24 inch monitor is excellent running games at 1920x1200... (I also have a 20 inch Dell 2005FPW)...

:D

[UnrealProjects]

I think what you need is a gaming lcd, specificly made for games.......there arer many to choose from but there are some things you need to know before buying one......so check out this website link below and read a bit about gaming lcds'..

ABOUT GAMING LCDS' (http://www.d-silence.com/feature.php?id=249)
GAMING LCD REVIEWS (http://20-1-lcd-flat-panel-game-monitor-review.toptenreviews.com/)

[GiantWeirdo]

I was wondering the same thing, if widescreen LCDs are the future of gaming? It seemed to me like they would be since all the new TVs are digital and 16:9 aspect ratio. People will be hooking their computers to their TVs, so it seemed likely that computer monitors will go the widescreen route too.

I'm suprised to see people against widescreen for games. Can you give some reasons WHY not to go widescreen for games? All newer games support it and I have to wonder if games will start to be designed for widescreen.

The only thing I can dig up against widescreen right now is that their gaming performance isn't as good as the best 19" panels yet.

[GiantWeirdo]

Oh, and I should add, I'm a CRT user now and love my Trinitron (Except for the size and weight), but its on its way out. I bought a new Samsung 19" CRT and the thing is a piece of crap. Picture quality is worse than a cheap LCD! Does anyone make a decent CRT anymore?

[theeDEATHMASTER]

Everything comes down to preference, I don't really like CRTs for reasons such as size, eye strain, etc. The only LCD I like is the kind that ghosts (something I'm sure most of you hate) I actually started disliking screens that dont ghost just because of the feel that I got used to (25 ms response ftw).

[Omniety]

I run my Windows resolution on my CRT @ 1280x1178 (i think those are the numbers) @ 110hz. Only time my eyes hurt is when i've been staring at it all day.

[theeDEATHMASTER]

Everyone's eyes are different :)

[p2xelgen]

I still have a CRT monitor. Had a flat-screen monitor,but I find the picture on the CRT to be better...

[iLL]

I recommend the Viewsonic LCD Widescreen.My last 3 LCD's have all been Viewsonic and on everyone of them not one dead pixel,backlight bleeding,ghosting,or dithering that I can tell.

I have played Doom,HL,Prey,Oblivion,Need for Speed Black,and Quake on all of them with high res and with a 75ish refresh rate and they all looked gorgeous,rich,and vivid to me.

Plus for the price you really should make it a consideration.

CRT's are just too damn big and gawdy,unless you can recess it into the wall.

I like style and design on my desk too,plus LCD's keep your deskspace.

LCD's have come along way and I personally see no problems in gaming with one vs CRT.Just a matter of preference I guess.

[theeDEATHMASTER]

why did u have 3?

[iLL]

The first one started to smoke and eventually caught fire.Good thing I was home.

They sent me a new one RMA and that one started sparking and flickering.

The 3rd one is doing awesome.

LOL :D

j/k man.Relax.

I liked my first one so much I got another 2 for my wife and son.

Normally newegg reviews are pretty accurate and before u drop 4 bills for anything I'd spend a few days checking as many unbiased reviews as possible.

Good luck.

[Mojo]

Article about LCD and gaming.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33348

Check out this video of side by side CRT vs. LCD.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pi2OE6hSh00

I'm no expert but my understanding is that although you can get good frames/sec from a LCD there is a delay from the signal leaving your video card and it being rendered on the LCD. In first person shooters delay is bad. :eek:

[Boksha]

CRT's are just too damn big and gawdy,unless you can recess it into the wall. In all honesty, I can't see size as anything size but a secondary concern; you only have to make space for the monitor once and have to look at it from then on.
If LCDs were the same quality as CRTs, size would become the next thing to select a screen on but they're NOT. The ViewSonic VX922 is apparently currently the only LCD without noticable lag, but it has inferior image quality and low viewing angles.

btw, here's an english version of the article Mojo referred to: http://www.behardware.com/articles/632-1/lcds-images-delayed-compared-to-crts-yes.html
behardware.com/hardware.fr is known to be pretty much pro-CRT, so you may want to be a bit careful trusting what's on there. On the other hand, I've not seen any articles directly contradicting or falsifying theirs...

[wickedsteve]

I have a tiny office for my computer. So a CRT puts my desk nearly in the middle of the room. With an LCD I can actually have my desk back against the wall where it belongs.
Does anybody know if there is lag converting a DVI (digital) output to a VGA (analog) monitor? Or vice versa, a VGA output to a DVI monitor? I heard that using DVI from start to finish keeps the signal digital, resulting in the fastest render. Is it just BS?

[iLL]

DVI is constant
Analog is not
You can see it when you use a camcorder against the two.

Now this creating a millisecond of lag I do not know.

I do know that if anyone buys an LCD they just need to buy one with the lowest response time and the highest refresh rate available,if you're a gamer anyway.

Viewing angles are a limitation,but I am either in front of PC or not.This is not a big factor for me.


Boksha I was pro CRT for long time.I tried LCD and could not really notice a difference in gaming.Then the look and spaciousness sold me as well on keeping it.Sure theres a fews small downsides,just like a couple of small downsides to CRT(imo only),but my desk is not really that deep and a CRT would be right up in my grill if I went back to CRT.I am not knocking them because they are great for gaming.I think everyone knows this.

[Oddside]

I have a tiny office for my computer. So a CRT puts my desk nearly in the middle of the room. With an LCD I can actually have my desk back against the wall where it belongs.
Does anybody know if there is lag converting a DVI (digital) output to a VGA (analog) monitor? Or vice versa, a VGA output to a DVI monitor? I heard that using DVI from start to finish keeps the signal digital, resulting in the fastest render. Is it just BS?Everything takes time, any type of conversion or encoding/decoder takes time regardless of format. The only difference is how much time it takes, ideally the time taken is negligible. The best thing about DVI is simply superior picture quality due to the digital signals.

So in direct answer to your questions, yes there is always a delay & DVI is better but I doubt it's 'faster' in terms of delay, since the raw binary data is encoded (using a form of 8B/10B encoding), sent to the monitor & then decoded. This of course takes time, just like D/A & A/D conversion take time. The only difference is the signal is always digital. As for the apparent 'input delay' that some LCd's have it's difficult to say what that is as it's hard to find info on exactly what an LCD monitor does to the signal after decoding it.

However, the interface delay should be negligible, delays elsewhere in the system are much greater, the time taken to click a mouse button for example.

[wickedsteve]

Everything takes time, any type of conversion or encoding/decoder takes time regardless of format. The only difference is how much time it takes, ideally the time taken is negligible. The best thing about DVI is simply superior picture quality due to the digital signals.

So in direct answer to your questions, yes there is always a delay & DVI is better but I doubt it's 'faster' in terms of delay, since the raw binary data is encoded (using a form of 8B/10B encoding), sent to the monitor & then decoded. This of course takes time, just like D/A & A/D conversion take time. The only difference is the signal is always digital. As for the apparent 'input delay' that some LCd's have it's difficult to say what that is as it's hard to find info on exactly what an LCD monitor does to the signal after decoding it.

However, the interface delay should be negligible, delays elsewhere in the system are much greater, the time taken to click a mouse button for example.

OIC I guess I heard wrong that DVI to DVI has no conversion or decoding thus a better picture.

[Jezza101]

viewsonic 922 has been ace for me, it is far better than my old crt in every respect. Took a week to get used to, but now I couldnt use anything else.

My caution over larger screens is that it becomes harder and harder to take in the whole screen. Perhaps it depends on your level of play but I just gotta be able to catch the little glimpse of a player in the top corner - not sure I could do that on a large wide screen? Especially as my old eyes are failing me - its true, starring at a screen for 20yrs does nothing for your vision ;)!

Try before you buy imo, as everyone will have their own optimum preference. Personally >19 makes game play a real strain.

[Oddside]

OIC I guess I heard wrong that DVI to DVI has no conversion or decoding thus a better picture.The better picture is simply due to the better noise immunity of the digital signal & lack of conversion errors. Ideally there is zero information loss when encoding/decoding digital signals, when converting digital signals to analogue signals there are ALWAYS errors (information loss), plus analogue signals are more easily corrupted by noise. So, DVI should give better quality, just not for the reason you thought. :)

[GiantWeirdo]

My guess about the LCD lag that that website is talking about could be because there were running the game in a resolution other than the native resolution. When you do this, the monitor must scale the incoming signal to the screens native resolution. Earlier DLP TVs had problems like this. Scaling is much much more intensive then 8B/10B decoding. That is a relatively simple task and I doubt it would cause more than microseconds of delay.

[Oddside]

My guess about the LCD lag that that website is talking about could be because there were running the game in a resolution other than the native resolution. When you do this, the monitor must scale the incoming signal to the screens native resolution. Earlier DLP TVs had problems like this. Scaling is much much more intensive then 8B/10B decoding. That is a relatively simple task and I doubt it would cause more than microseconds of delay.I hadn't thought of that, but you are absolutely correct, scaling the image will take much longer than any type of encoding/decoding, I notice in the article they do not mention the resolution of either display. Although they suggest that the delay is only present 'sometimes.' Anyway, I know for certain that there is insufficient info to determine exactly what's causing it.

Just for reference, it takes approx. 200ms to blink. ;)

[Artmic]

I love my Dell 2407, bought it like 2 months ago, and it rocks. I'm playing GOW on it now.

[3Deeing]

You can buy an IBM P275 21" monitor from Azatek for about $130 shipped!

It'll do 1920x1440@90hz or 2048x1536@80hz or more :D

Also, 1600x1200@100hz is great. :)

[Lee_Shagwell]

What's more, if you want a gaming monitor, I'd recommend against getting an LCD alltogether, unless you need the desktop space it saves or really care about a decrease in electricity usage. (if you do, it's probably still a better idea to get a CRT and replace all lightbulbs in your house with more efficient ones; the difference between a big CRT and a big LCD is generally no more than 75W or so)
Consider getting a nice 21" CRT instead. No lag. No dithering. No fixed resolution. No fixed refreshrate. No backlight bleeding. No overshoot. No dead pixels. No mura defects.
Basically, when you buy an LCD, you really have to think about what you're getting, because there's practically always a catch. With a CRT you basically get everything you could want out of a monitor except for compact size and energy efficiency.

Gotta admit, I whole heartidly agree with what this man has just said. My desk is dominated by a massive 24" Monster of a CRT. My friends often take the piss out of it, calling it ugly and dated.

The fact of the matter is, I just cannot stand LCD screens, I cant look at them for more than 10 minutes. I personally have my CRT set to 1152 x 864 the text is just right. If I was to buy an LCD of the same size it would probably be fixed to some stupid resolution like 1600 x 1200. The text on LCD screens always appears too small for my liking. I know you can drop down on modern LCD's but then you get all that nasty blurring effect.

All of this new brightening technology on LCD's makes the colour look false, I also dont think its good for your eyes to be staring at a LCD that is brighter than the sun.