LCD Monitor Advice

[Control_Phreak]

Well as a few ppl know I'm seriously considering getting a LCD screen. The biggest concern I have is ghosting as I do game quite a bit, and I have a reputation to uphold at gaggles for stealing all their prizes :D

I've got the specs of 4 sony 17" LCDs which I think could be good (all 16ms response) but there are little or no reviews for them :(

First 2 seem identical other than the viewing angle and $140 difference.

SDM-X73_HKR (http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/urltrurl?lp=ja_en&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecat.sony.co.jp%2Fcomputer%2F display%2Fproducts%2F.%2Fspec.cfm%3FPD%3D15696%26K M%3DSDM-X73_HKR)

SDM-X73 (http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/urltrurl?lp=ja_en&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecat.sony.co.jp%2Fcomputer%2F display%2Fproducts%2F.%2Fspec.cfm%3FPD%3D14661%26K M%3DSDM-X73)


The last 2 dont have a DVI connector. Not sure if that's as huge of an issue as everyone makes it out to be so I'll post the specs here anyway.

SDM-S73 (http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/urltrurl?lp=ja_en&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecat.sony.co.jp%2Fcomputer%2F display%2Fproducts%2F.%2Fspec.cfm%3FPD%3D14666%26K M%3DSDM-S73)

SDM-HS73P (http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/urltrurl?lp=ja_en&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecat.sony.co.jp%2Fcomputer%2F display%2Fproducts%2F.%2F.%2F.%2Fspec.cfm%3FPD%3D1 5581%26KM%3DSDM-HS73P)

Any opinions on these monitors would be appreciated.

[Grrr!!]

As for the DVI interface:

Firstly, due to the lack of digital -> analog -> digital conversion, the image quality will be better (better color differentiation, etc), however this may give a digital vibrance that some people find unnatural and ... ugly.

Secondly, the lag on the DSub interface really depends on the speed and quality of the DAC and ADC. In general the DAC's on nVidia and ATI cards are of a high standard, and don't cause any noticible lag (though if scientifically measured there probably is a few nano-seconds difference). However, the ADC's in the lcd's themselves vary largely in quality, and if the manufacturer has decided to skimp on quality here, you will notice a severe difference. Knowing sony is using these lcd's to replace it's trinitron line, I am almost certain this isn't the case.

A very stupid third point. A monitor with a dual interface has the advantage of effectively allowing the switching between to comp's at a lan without hotswapping or other nuisances. This is worth a lot to some people.

IMHO:

If you have the money, go for the DVI interface. While it may or may not be proven to be faster, it will probably make a difference in the right direction.

[Grrr!!]

I'm not sure how much you trust xbit, but most of those monitors are covered in these two reviews:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/response-6.html
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/response-5.html

[FKF]

Originally posted by Grrr!!

IMHO:

If you have the money, go for the DVI interface. While it may or may not be proven to be faster, it will probably make a difference in the right direction.

Seconded. I noticed the difference going from analogue to digital on my old GF3, and an even bigger difference between the two on my 9500 Pro.

[dust]

My mate read a review on LCD screens and it was concluded they were overpriced and generally not the best, classic sony.

Theres 2 threads on here bout LCD's have a look at them, i just bought a CMV 17" 16ms, with DVI and D-sub connectors and its great not ghosting what so ever. At $720 its hard to pass up and more and more retailers keep adding them to their range of products so it must be good :)

i luv it

[Valium]

samsung 172X but its still ~$1100. 12ms response.

[SerN]

The 172X sucks on games and anything to do with motion. The Viewsonic 171 is a much better LCD for gaming and only costs a little more than the 172X.

http://www.tomshardware.com/display/20031105/lcd-17.html

[Valium]

Originally posted by SerN
The 172X sucks on games and anything to do with motion. The Viewsonic 171 is a much better LCD for gaming and only costs a little more than the 172X.

http://www.tomshardware.com/display/20031105/lcd-17.html


Thanks alot for that, I was rather close to blowing my money on it...

[SerN]

No problem, I was looking at buying the 172X too but after reading stuff like that I soon changed my mind. I tried out John Styles viewsonic 171B which I played a few fast motion games like UT2k3, quake3, bf1942. I was so impressed with it!, wasn't long before I got on myself. :)

[Knightjak]

Originally posted by dust
At $720 its hard to pass up and more and more retailers keep adding them to their range of products so it must be good :)

i luv it
Where did you get yours?, i went to XP last week and the guy didnt know what i was talking about. Then i showed him it on the net and he was still scratching his head.....

[dust]

OEM Computers in Manukau, they have them in stock on site :)

[Knightjak]

Cheers Dust, i thought their price was higher than that


EDIT: I might check them out after the lack of communication at XP Computers

[dust]

No Problem :)

[gorillapie77]

I have an AOC LM721A. Can't complain and i'll never go back to CRT. I dont play games like U2k3 so cant comment there but I play a fair bit of BF42 and GTA and have never had a problem with ghosting. it was $700 incl shipping a cuple of munths ago but it's 740 now (pricespy). Personally I think it's a damn good monitor.
Something to take into account is color rendering. My screen has a bit of an issue with rendering a difference between the lightest whites and darkest shades of black.
Theres some really good stuff on Toms Hardware about LCDs have a look at that to.
Probably the most importaint thing I can say is remember that you will probably want to run all games and applications at the screens native resolution (17"= 1280*1024) otherwise they look a bit crappy so make sure you have a graphics card thats up to it.
And if you have the opportunity theres no substitute for try before you buy.

[Siris Le Osiris]

Yea i have a LM721A too, had no problems except it cant match the brightness of my auriga 17MLV

[Walt]

I would be a little sus on that Toms Hardware review of the Samsung 172X - their version was 16ms, and many other reviews had a 25ms supplied (for all intents and purposes not a 172X!!).

I have one, and I also have it's elder brother the 172T. 12ms vs 25ms. The 172X kicks it quite easily, and in gaming I experienced nothing like what they did at Toms.

The MOST IMPORTANT point with TFT's, is try them out for yourself, in the flesh. Nothing beats that - even take your Q3 Time demo with you if you want a direct comparision. Insist on it ...