Post your Experiences with Gaming LCDs!!!

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Marl65

Member
 
Joined
Apr 13, 2003
Location
Indiana
I run a Dell 1905FP that I got a steal on. I don't know what kind of response it has but I love it!!
 

Jedi Mind Trick

Member
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Location
Glen Ellyn, Illinois
Hanns-G HW192D
19'' Widescreen
5ms
700:1 contrast
1440x900 maximum resolution

Pretty good for gaming. I play lots of CS:S and BF2, and it all looks great. About the only complaint I have is that 1440x900 is just a bit low, but for what I paid its an awesome monitor.
 

blitzkrieg1110

Member
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania
Westinghouse LCM-22w2
22" Widescreen
5ms
1680x1050 Native Resolution

I absolutely love this monitor for gaming. That's pretty much all I do on my PC and it has been spectacular since I got it. Just beat Prey on it and the game looked incredible.

One bad note: after a month, I got a stuck pixel. I know this could happen to anyones monitor by chance but it's still a bit disappointing.
 

jisleyjr

New Member
 
Joined
May 22, 2007
blitzkrieg1110 said:
Westinghouse LCM-22w2
22" Widescreen
5ms
1680x1050 Native Resolution

I absolutely love this monitor for gaming. That's pretty much all I do on my PC and it has been spectacular since I got it. Just beat Prey on it and the game looked incredible.

One bad note: after a month, I got a stuck pixel. I know this could happen to anyones monitor by chance but it's still a bit disappointing.

I just picked up this monitor last week and it is pretty nice. No ghosting on any gaming so far. With the native res that high it pulls my video card pretty hard though. Good excuse to build a new computer.
 

Veratule

Registered
 
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Location
San Diego
Dell 2407WPF
24"
6ms refresh
1000:1 Contrast
500 cd/m2 Brightness
9-in-2 media card reader
2 extra USB 2.0 ports
Supports VGA, DVI, S-Video, Component Video, and Composite.

This is truly the greatest monitor I could have chosen to buy. It is quite simply, the ****. :) Currently $600.
 

Thund3rball

Member
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Location
British Columbia, Canada
Wow! Old thread is new again...LOL. Never saw this one before. Guess I should read more Stickies :p

Dell Ultrasharp 2007WFP
20.1" @ 1680x1050
S-IPS LG Panel (later came the S-PVA Samsung Panel)
800:1 Contrast Ratio
300cd/m2
16ms response time
One DVI-D Input w/HDCP Support - One Analogue Input - One S-Video Input - One Composite Input
2 USB Ports on the side

[edit: I should mention the on screen menu is a little weird at first but you have a TON of adjustment options for colour etc...]

By far the BEST 20" WS monitor around for the price. Nothing beats an S-IPS panel for colour accuracy. DO NOT be duped by very low response times compared to this monitor's 16ms. Far inferior TN panels have low advertised response times to appeal to gamers. I play FPS games almost everyday and have never experienced any ghosting issues.

If you want a quality 20" LCD for gaming or otherwise there is no beating the Dell 2007WFP!
 

youngbuck

Member
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2002
Location
CO, USA
I've had no problems with a lot of FPS gaming on my Dell 2007WFP. In fact, I can say that I am thoroughly pleased.
 

RedSkull

Member
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2002
Location
neither here nor there
Samsung syncmaster 206bw @1680x1050
2ms, 3000:1

great monitor until i play any sort of FPS game...

no ghosting but then again im not sure what im looking for. incredible motion blur and tearing. this is my first lcd so ive never experienced it before first hand, but having to set vsync at 60 and insta-switching between 60 and 30 in an fps is terrible, it truly makes me stop playing after a few minutes. the motion blur it so incredibly distracting that unless im standing still in all FPS ive tested (doom 3, quake wars demo, fear, hl2) its just unbearable...when i move the mouse quickly its like the entire world gets all smeared out.

UPDATE: This is with the "A" panel which upon further investigation i discovered is not a Samsung panel but some AUOptronics panel (spelling?) that is actually 5ms and according to various sites performs much worse in several areas (especially color representation) I havent found direct mention of similar motion blur problems as most reviews online have the "S" model (funny how samsung seems to get the good panels into all the right hands...) and I dont have both side to side to see if Im just overly anal or its an inherent problem with this particular panel. Either way the shadiness of Samsung in the basically bait and switch tactic has permanently banned them from my list of possible options in the future and I would strongly advise anyone considering their products to do research carefully. I personally would like everyone to ban them as this is unacceptable behavior and shows lack of concern over customer satisfaction whatsoever. If there was a problem with the "s" panel which forced them to swtich to the "a" they should have made it clear that the specs had changed and changed the model number. In numerous interviews online they were clearly denying the fact even when being questioned by interviewers who physically had the evidence of both panels on hand.
 
Last edited:

Mobious

Member
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2005
Location
Massachusetts
Hands down, my Viewsonic VX922 was (and still is) my absolute favorite monitor. 2ms response time, no ghosting, absolutely amazing. So the color reproduction is average, and the backlight bleeds in from all sides, and it has a resolution of only 1280x1024, and there's only DVI and VGA inputs, but in the end: this monitor has never failed me (if only my 2407WFP-HC was this good :p).

-Mobious-
 

macstranded

Member
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Why are so many people paying $450+ for 17" LCD monitors with 16ms refresh rate when there are plenty of 19" LCDs with 5ms rr that cost only $150-$200? Are there some important specs that I am missing or something?
 

Mike360000

Member
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2001
Location
Stokesdale, North Carolina
Why are so many people paying $450+ for 17" LCD monitors with 16ms refresh rate when there are plenty of 19" LCDs with 5ms rr that cost only $150-$200? Are there some important specs that I am missing or something?

Gee you need to look at the all the dates of when people wrote all these replys.... Yes I have updated to a Samsung 216 (21.6") since I wrote my original post and I only paid abou $225.00 for my Samsung too.....

Cheers,
Mike
 

Thund3rball

Member
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Location
British Columbia, Canada
Why are so many people paying $450+ for 17" LCD monitors with 16ms refresh rate when there are plenty of 19" LCDs with 5ms rr that cost only $150-$200? Are there some important specs that I am missing or something?

Ya you are probably looking at old threads. But it is worth mentioning that response times are not the be-all and end-all of LCD specs. A quality panel with a 16ms response time is not necessarily bad for gaming. It's just that everyone jumped on that band wagon instead of the colour accuracy wagon and manufacturers are pumping out crap panels with 2ms response time and everyone is eating them up. So now we have a marketplace full of crap that ain't worth half of what you are paying IMHO, and even the good panels are being phased out and replaced with junk.

Ok rant over :)
 

NewbieOneKenobi

Member
 
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Location
Warsaw/Poland
HP w2007v. Didn't know v was for value before I bought it. ;) However, it does perform well for a "value" monitor, not to mention it cost more than one. I'm quite happy with it, although some things do give me a headache. It's horrible to get the settings right. It isn't as good on the eyes as I had thought. Isn't as sharp as it looked in the shop, either. "Native resolution" is a pain also. All in all, if you have a CRT, stay with it or buy the best used CRT you can get, which is still less than a cheap LCD.

And wide screen is overrated. Unless you want films, go for 4:3 for games. Or unless you actually like widescreen gaming, but apart from car racing games, I don't see where you'd like it. Should be more or less neutral in RPGs. But in stuff you need to control with your eyes, I'd say 4:3 is the best unless you can actually find 5:4 maybe (1280*1024 would look the best on that kind of monitor).
 

shaggbaggins

New Member
 
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Help me out guys. I have a 720p tv and all the ps3 games that support 1080p are looking like crap on my tv, when i say crap i mean i see all these jagged lines. i try to set the smoothing option to the on setting but it does not work. what can i do to fix this if any?
 

MAXIMINA

New Member
 
 
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Location
TN
I just got a Samsung 305Tplus, the 30-inch...

It arrived without any dead pixels, has a great response time, and 2560x1600 resolution, which equates to more pixels than two 24-inch monitors combined. It is also the maximum resolution of most performance video cards.

This is the first time in years that I've ever felt comfortable with a single monitor instead of a multi-monitor setup. It really is nice to have the same amount of real-estate but without panes splitting up my desktop.

Definitely worth every penny (roughly $1200 on Newegg), and I'm sure the price will come down a great deal in the next 2 years.

Important things to note if you go with one of these:
The monitor puts off a lot of heat. You can feel it radiating against your face from several feet away when the screen is all white. It needs as much ventilation as your system, and should be kept away from windows.
They recommend that with such high resolutions to go with vid cards with larger than average Ram. I have a 9800GT over-clocked with 1Gb, which runs Cod4 at full res, maxed out, at an average of 30-45 fps... So I may upgrade the card, but for now it suffices (nobody really needs anti-aliasing at this resolution). I got this monitor mostly for image editing of course.
Since the monitor stands so tall, you might want to keep ceiling lights off that are behind you. Even though the monitor is anti-glare, some lights can get annoying bouncing off the top of it into my eyes.
 

ollien33

Registered
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2011
Location
Melbourne, Australia
haha - 16ms response time! Brilliant!
I am running 3X Asus VG236H 3d monitors at 5760X1080
I do love them for gaming, but for every day use they are a bit bright and piercing - and also they are a little small. I wish I could have got 3X27" monitors, but no room and no money!
 

CompuTamer

Member with Some Fancy Text Under His Name
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Location
Brandon Mississippi
2 Dell E2311H's at 1080p and 5ms response time... could have gotten a panel at 2ms, but i didn't want to spend the extra money.
 

OCDGaming

New Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Location
Lindon, UT USA
I have a Viewsonic VX2753MH-LED with a 1ms response time. As far as input lag I've heard that the 24 inch model has around 12ms, so if that's the case, then this is one of the top LCD gaming monitors a solid budget option as well.

In the future I'm hoping to afford something like the Dell U2312HM which despite having a 8 ms response time has super low input lag (around 1ms) according to TFT Central and Prad.