-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Need 8ms and 1600 x 1200 19"...
- Thread starter Rumrunner
- Start date
- Joined
- May 26, 2004
- Location
- San Diego, CA
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824009051
Dosn't do 1600, but it does have a 700:1 contrast ratio w/ 6ms response. Good LCD.
Dosn't do 1600, but it does have a 700:1 contrast ratio w/ 6ms response. Good LCD.
- Joined
- May 28, 2004
If you need a good LCD, I would recommend that you get either the Dell 2005 FPW or Dell 2405 FPW model (a 20.1 inch and 24 inch widescreen monitor, repsectively). Their resolutions are also 1680x1050 and 1920x1200, respectively. I would go for them, as widescreen is so much nicer than normal 4:3.I am not exactly sure on the refresh rate, but I think its around 12 ms. I know it's not 8 ms, but I've gamed on them and there wasn't a single bit of ghosting, and CS:S never looked better. I bet they would be perfect for what you need.
Kenshin Himura
Kenshin Himura
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2005
- Location
- Chicago, IL
If you want 1600x1200, you'd definitely need 20" LCDs, mainly the Dell ones mentioned above.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2004
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
Try finding this:
http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktopdisplays/lcddisplays/aseries/va2012wb/
Though at $440 if you can get it, the Dell 2005FPW is a better deal for sure.
http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktopdisplays/lcddisplays/aseries/va2012wb/
Though at $440 if you can get it, the Dell 2005FPW is a better deal for sure.
The monitor you are looking for does not exist. To my knowledge there are no 19" lcd monitors capable of 1600x1200 resolution. To get that resolution you would have to go to a 20" screen or bigger, but the price difference between a 19" and a 20" is much, much greater than the jump from a 17" to a 19".
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2005
I have yet to notice ghosting on it, and I've had it for a few weeks and watched a few movies and such. It's a very nice monitor.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2004
- Location
- Detroit
Rumrunner said:
Some people have reported blurring / ghosting with the Dell's. It varies on an individual basis depending on how good one's eyes are. I think more people can't see ghosting than can on them, but there have been a few.
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2005
- Location
- Chicago, IL
Echo_ said:
My guess is because it probably just fit or wouldn't look too right, I don't think that many pixels can fit on a 19" screen.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2004
- Location
- Detroit
darksparkz said:
It's done on 19" CRTs so it would probably look ok on a 19" LCD. I believe it's purely a technology limitation. 1280x1024 is probably the most pixels that can be manufactured (at least economically) on a 19" LCD panel right now. More than that is probably beyond current capabilties in regard to pixel density.
- Thread Starter
- #13
doublejack said:
Hmm I may have to rethink this a little. 12ms is a little on the high side. My current monitor is a 19" sony rated at 19ms, and ghosts pretty badly and jumps around quite a bit. I have seen a few 19" monitors rated as low as 2ms grey to grey for about $400. But I really wanted a higher max resolution than 1280 x 1024. I guess the technology is just not available yet without paying insane prices. Maybe i would be better off getting a crt.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2000
- Location
- Sheboygan, Wisconsin
doublejack said:
You also have to remember that a 19" CRT has a view area of 17" to 18". Where as a 19" LCD has a view area of 19".
rumrunner said:
Right now I have a Dell 2001FP 20.1" view area with a 16ms response time. So far I have played UT2k4, NFS:UG1 and @ and most wanted as well along with BF2, all with no ghosting of any kind. All my games run at a 1600 x 1200 res, the 2001FP has been tested many times and has always won.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2004
- Location
- Detroit
Wicked_Klown said:
That doesn't matter. In fact, it's all the more reason why 19" LCDs should be able to display 1600x1200, in theory at least. They have plenty of screen area in other words, but the technology can't pack the pixels in that tightly... at least not yet.
Similar threads
