[Ulala]

Hey guys, I was hoping you could give your opinion on this monitor I'm considering:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824001185

At only $290 after rebate, the price is right. Specs for those who don't want to go to the link:
Samsung 915N-Black 19" 8ms LCD Monitor 300 cd/m2 700:1 0.294mm Pixel Pitch

The only real problems I have with it is that it can't go to 1600x1200 resolution (but I don't think I can afford an LCD that could anyway) and it's really really stripped down to the basics, i.e. no DVI input. Would this be sufficient to deter you from buying it? Or is the price right enough?

Decisions, decisions. Thanks for your input.

[Descenterace]

Looks good to me. 19" 1600x1200 monitors are hard to find, for any price. And 8ms? Damn. Mine's a 16ms screen and it set me back £200.

I say go for it.

[CP5670]

I haven't seen that model before but the Hyundai L90D is supposed to be overall the best 19" option in that price range. There are better 19" ones, but they cost considerably more. It has DVI, 8ms response time and apparently looks very good for a 6-bit panel.

I don't think there are any 1600x1200 19" LCDs at all, except possibly on large laptops. I've never seen one, anyway.

Also, don't buy from Newegg. Their dead pixel policy sucks.

[Ulala]

Clarification: A 1600x1200 LCD didn't have to be 19", I was talking 21", 24", etc... all of which (as far as I know) I can't really afford.. my price range is around $300... maybe $400 at most.

I'll check out the Hyundai. How much greater is DVI anyway? I haven't had much experience with it yet.

[Edit]And there seem to be quite a few reviews like this one: Don't even think about it!! Beautiful while it works. Mine worked for 4 weeks, then, like others, developed vertical lines on the right side of the screen. HYUNDAI SERVICE IS WORSE THAN NONE. AT LEAST NONE AT ALL WOULD CAUSE LESS AGGRAVATION.
[/Edit]

[CP5670]

I'm not sure. I haven't really heard of any reliability issues on them like some other monitors out there, but it's unusual to see something like that on the Newegg reviews, since they almost always reject all the bad ones and only show the good opinions.

I don't think you can find too many 20" ones (which are all 1600x1200) in that range. Dell runs sales quite often and you might be able to get a 2001FP for under $400, but it's an older model with poor contrast and 16ms response time.

As for DVI, some people say it makes no difference at all while others say it's like using a different monitor. I don't have any firsthand experience with this; maybe someone else here knows more about it.

[Ulala]

I sure wish this wasn't $1000:
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/ProductDetail.aspx?TabPage=overview&sku=320-4221&category_id=4058&brandid=56&c=us&l=en&cs=19

Even this comes closer to 1600x1200 with a 1680x1050 widescreen:
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/ProductDetail.aspx?TabPage=producthighlights&sku=320-4111&category_id=4058&brandid=56&c=us&l=en&cs=19

Still outta price range though.

This is 16ms response:
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/ProductDetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&cs=19&sku=320-4087&category_id=4058&brandid=56


I may just gamble with the Hyundai.

[CP5670]

IIRC mikhael has that L90D; you might want to ask him about his thoughts on it.

That 2005FPW is very popular these days and goes under $500 regularly with Dell's sales and promotion codes, but appears to have some quality control issues. Dell's return policy is excellent though, so you won't get stuck with a dud.

I sure wish this wasn't $1000:
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/...c=us&l=en&cs=19

I bet Sandwich will come in here soon to pimp this one.

[IceFire]

Are there any thoughts on a good gaming 17in LCD?  I'm in the market...

[WMCoolmon]

IceFire:
http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=318451&pfp=cat3

I have the older model (712n) and it works fine for anything but Continuum/Subspace. It's even weathered a water spill in the lower right. (It's slightly discolored, but not very noticeable)

[Grey Wolf]

My BenQ FP737s works pretty nice, and the DVI did make it so I didn't have to adjust setting when the resolution was changed. Don't think it's still in production though, as it was a last-generation model when I picked it up. The only problem is the fairly limited viewing angles.

[Descenterace]

AG Neovo's latest 17" is always a good bet. I know their new 19" screen is up to spec because a friend bought one (it cost £10 less than my Acer AL1912, despite being bought two months earlier and having a 7ms response rate). And I usually recommend AG Neovo screens anyway; the last three computers I built were damned good.

[Ulala]

Can't seem to find any Neovo monitors under 12ms...  

[Grey Wolf]

12ms should be good enough for basically anything you do. I have very minimal ghosting on my 16ms response time monitor.

[phatosealpha]

my only advice would be to research and don't trust the stated stats.  Response time especially can be quite misleading, as different manufacturers measure it in different ways.  One manufacturers 8ms is anothers 16ms.

[kode]

the definition of response time is pretty clear though - the time between fully lit and fully darkened. or something like that.

I bought myself an eizo tft monitor yesterday. still waiting for it to arrive, but heck - eizo rocks.

[CP5670]

The traditional definition of response time is how long it takes for a pixel to go from black to white and then to black again. However, just about every manufacturer these days measures the time needed to change from one shade of gray to another, which heavily inflates the spec. So these so-called 4ms screens are really around 10 to 12ms 95% of the time.

12ms should be good enough for basically anything you do. I have very minimal ghosting on my 16ms response time monitor.

I can notice some ghosting on even the "4ms" screens in certain games. It varies between different people, so it's always a good idea to take a look at what you're buying in advance at a retail store.

I bought myself an eizo tft monitor yesterday. still waiting for it to arrive, but heck - eizo rocks.

Eizo stuff is high quality, but they are designed for good colors rather than fast response times and you have to pay a hefty premium for those monitors.

[bash]

the definition of response time is pretty clear though - the time between fully lit and fully darkened. or something like that.

And thats exactly the point. The stated response time is allways the time it takes a crystal to change between pure white (255 255 255) to pure black (0 0 0). But the time stated in that way doesnt say anything about changes between oder colors, e.g. 218 154 168 to 185 16 98. Those response times can by quite different.

I suggest you check your local store an take a look on how the monitor respondes to different types of applications and base your decision on that .

[IceFire]

How come I've never heard of Neovo before?  I've heard of Benq...I'm not sure about them...Samsung, LG...I've looked at those but I'm not decided yet.

The ones I like generally have some fancy feature (like tilt screen) that I don't want to pay for or use.

[Grey Wolf]

BenQ has a fairly good reputation, as do Sony, Samsung, LG, and, I believe, NEC. Neovo I've heard of, but I haven't really read much about them.

[Descenterace]

Most of the computers I've built for people included an AG Neovo monitor. I've never received one with any dead pixels. The early models in a line tend to have response times between 18 and 25ms, but after a few months they start producing faster versions, sometimes as fast as 4ms. They are technically budget monitors, but the faster ones perform at least as well as any other TFT I've seen.

Come to think of it, I know someone who has a pair of 17" AG Neovos. They look really cool in a dual-head setup.

A good source of Neovo screens is dabs.com.