Gaming Monitor..?

[WildThane]

What monitor would be the best for gaming..Dell 2001...or..Gateway fpd2185 What do you all think?

 

[darXoul]

My three current favorites / tips among LCDs (I assume you're not interested in CRTs):

A. ViewSonic VX 922/924 (TN panel, 19", 2/3 ms gtg)

+ good price
+ extremely fast, virtually no ghosting
+ crisp, vibrant colors
+ nice design

- poor viewing angles (especially vertical)
- 6-bit color
- subpar video playback
- lack of height adjustment, pivot, swivel
- 5:4 "square'ish" aspect ratio
- large pixels (grainy image, screen door effect)
- blacks not as deep as on VA panels

Conclusion: a good, affordable monitor if fast gaming is your top priority and you don't care much about anything else.

B. ViewSonic VP2030b (P-MVA panel, 20", 8 ms gtg)

+ fast panel, good even for fast games
+ good viewing angles
+ good, 8-bit color
+ deep blacks
+ good for videos
+ small pixels and lots of real estate @ 20"
+ tilt, swivel, pivot, height adjustment

- may be prone to backlight problems like its smaller brother VP930b
- large footprint
- colors not as good as on S-PVA new panels (e.g. on Samsung 970p)
- not as fast as quickest TN panels
- requires a potent video card for serious gaming
- aging design

Conclusion: maybe the best gaming/allround non-widescreen monitor available.

C. Samsung 244t (S-PVA panel, 24" widescreen, 6 ms gtg)

+ very fast panel, IMHO better than P-MVA, almost zero ghosting
+ very good viewing angles
+ great, 8-bit color
+ deep blacks
+ good for videos
+ widescreen = pure bliss in some games
+ tilt, swivel, pivot, height adjustment
+ good design
+ HDCP support (not confirmed 100%)

- widescreen support still weak on the whole
- pricy
- potentially some pixel crawl in movies
- requires an even more powerful GPU to run games in high settings @ native res

Conclusion: not cheap but possibly the best LCD monitor on the market, IMHO thanks to its panel, clearly eclipsing the popular Dell 2405FPW.

My own recommendation: many gamers favor fast TN displays because of their reaction time. Even though I'm a gamer as well, I do not. 8 ms P-MVA and 6 ms S-PVA panels are really close in terms of ghosting behavior but offer much better viewing angles, colors, image quality in general.

Other good options available now: Dell 2405FPW (12 ms PVA), Eizo S2410W (8 ms MVA), Samsung 214t (8 ms PVA), Samsung 204b (5 ms TN), Samsung 970p (6 ms PVA), ViewSonic VP930b (8 ms MVA), ViewSonic VP2130b (8 ms PVA)... There are a few decent NECs, BenQs or Belineas as well. Samsung 930bf (4 ms TN) is also popular but some heavy artifacting was reported by one of the most credible review sites so check it out before buying.

 

[MHat]

I'm mainly a video editor, but I do play a lot of games. I was thinking of getting two Dell Ultra-Sharp 19"s, since it would be excellent to have a dual display for editing, but then since I play games as well I thought I should go with a single, widescreen LCD. Your suggestions (even if it includes getting a really nice single 19")?

 

[imported_Bleh]

Dell 2005fpw ftw. I have it and love it. Great for games (CS, BF2, etc) and movies. I also have a C++ programming class this semester and with widescreen it makes programming easier (wider screens).

 

[MHat]

When you play BF2, is your screen stretched due to widescreen, displaying a more awkward than usual visual?

Also, I heard that LCDs lose about 30% of color quality. Is this true and is it improving?

 

[xtknight]

Wow, darXoul, great post. You could take over my job. One thing though: 8 ms P-MVA is generally regarded as being as fast or faster than 6 ms S-PVA. You can also check this out on some of the BeHardware reviews (970P vs VP930b).

LCDs lose 30% of gamut? Yes, most have a color gamut/saturation of 72% or so in the NTSC color space. I don't know how that compares to CRTs. I think only the best graphics-editor-oriented CRTs or LED backlight LCDs can reach 100%.

WildThane: what size are you looking at? price range?

 

[IceWindius]

Originally posted by: MHat
When you play BF2, is your screen stretched due to widescreen, displaying a more awkward than usual visual?

Also, I heard that LCDs lose about 30% of color quality. Is this true and is it improving?

It is unless you do the widescreen hack to allow it to display it properly, even though it still crops off some of the screen, but it won't be stretch. BF2 looks wonderfuly at 1920x1200 on my 2405

 

[darXoul]

Originally posted by: xtknight
Wow, darXoul, great post. You could take over my job. One thing though: 8 ms P-MVA is generally regarded as being as fast or faster than 6 ms S-PVA. You can also check this out on some of the BeHardware reviews (970P vs VP930b).

Thanks Your job is appreciated but I'll gladly support.

As for 8 ms P-MVA vs. 6 ms S-PVA, I must say I prefer the latter, based on the limited opportunity to compare them that I have. hardware.fr (behardware.com in ENG) claims they don't have a preference for gaming if they have to choose between the two panels. They are pretty much on par. Judging from screenshots I must say I would select the PVA though. The ghost is completely transparent and barely defined, similar to what you see on fast TN panels. On the MVA, you can see that the ghost is not too defined either but colored. Also the worst case image on the PVA looks better IMO, although behardware says otherwise. The ghost is pretty transparent whereas on the MVA you might not see the third ghost but the second phantom image is pretty much as defined and clear as the primary image.

I just need to see the 6 ms PVA in real action but I believe it's at least as good as 8 ms MVA. This is my subjective opinion, of course. behardware is probably right saying both panels provide pretty much the same gaming performance.

 

[broly8877]

Honestly, 2005 is old news, and dated.

I'd get a FPD2185W.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: darXoul

Originally posted by: xtknight
Wow, darXoul, great post. You could take over my job. One thing though: 8 ms P-MVA is generally regarded as being as fast or faster than 6 ms S-PVA. You can also check this out on some of the BeHardware reviews (970P vs VP930b).

Thanks Your job is appreciated but I'll gladly support.

As for 8 ms P-MVA vs. 6 ms S-PVA, I must say I prefer the latter, based on the limited opportunity to compare them that I have. hardware.fr (behardware.com in ENG) claims they don't have a preference for gaming if they have to choose between the two panels. They are pretty much on par. Judging from screenshots I must say I would select the PVA though. The ghost is completely transparent and barely defined, similar to what you see on fast TN panels. On the MVA, you can see that the ghost is not too defined either but colored. Also the worst case image on the PVA looks better IMO, although behardware says otherwise. The ghost is pretty transparent whereas on the MVA you might not see the third ghost but the second phantom image is pretty much as defined and clear as the primary image.

I just need to see the 6 ms PVA in real action but I believe it's at least as good as 8 ms MVA. This is my subjective opinion, of course. behardware is probably right saying both panels provide pretty much the same gaming performance.

Well, yeah, I'd say the graphical test shows negligible difference but look at the text test. Then again the S-PVA seems to have its contrast hold up better or something.

 

[darXoul]

Yes, I've seen the text test. Puzzling. Since it's black <-> white, the cards should be pretty close here. The VP930b is 20 ms bwb. I wonder where the difference comes from. The P-MVA looks a bit weird - there is practically no double text but the one displayed seems "shaded".

 

[WildThane]

Thanks For the help guys...Looks like i may be going for a Dell because of the info you posted.By the way,Dell has a sale on monitors going on now..that will help...Thanks All--