8-bit LCDs (1905FP & VP191b) and ghosting

[Feral]

I have an older computer (850 mhz P3, Geforce 3 Ti) that I use for office work, graphics, and some games (yes, it actually plays City of Heroes and Warcraft III just fine thankyouverymuch).

Recently my 17" CRT died on me so I decided to give an LCD a try... Since I do some graphics work on my PC an 8-bit panel was a must. I was afraid of pixel latency so I read some reviews of 19" 8-bit LCDs and found some that are favorable for gaming.

First, I tried a Dell 1905FP. The ghosting was completely intolerable. If I had a red or orange character against a green or blue background, there would be a visible trail 1-2 inches long, and the entire background was a blurry mess. So I sent it back and ordered a Viewsonic VP191b instead. The Viewsonic is slightly better - still crappy, though, now there are visible trails 0.5-1 inch long, and scrolling backgrounds are still blurry messes. When running around in City of Heroes in third-person mode, my character's legs look like the running blur from an old Flintstones cartoon.

On either monitor, if I'm reading a web page with white text on a black background and scroll using my mouse wheel, the entire page seems to blink out for a half-second.

Now, I'd just give up LCDs in general but here's what confuses me... I do a lot of the same things on my laptop (a Dell Latitude C640 with a 14" SXGA+ LCD with a supposed refresh of 20ms) and I don't have even remotely the same streakiness. Running the same games results in no visible blurriness at all.

(By the way, I really want an LCD... my monitor rests on a glass desk with a maximum weight rating of 40 lbs, so the biggest CRT I can get is 17").

How can my three year old laptop have this magical LCD that displays 16 million colors without ghosting when I can't find anything remotely comparable in some of the best-rated LCDs on the market? (By the way, I hooked my laptop up via VGA to the 191b... same issues.) Do the extra 4 inches really make that much of a difference? I'd happily drop down to a 17" LCD if it meant having less streaking. I don't necessarily want NO streaking - I'm fine with a little bit, but this is ridiculous.

Now, I'm planning on upgrading my PC anyway within the next couple of months. Could the fact that I'm using a VGA rather than DVI connection be causing this at all? Or can I expect the same streakiness on a DVI connection?

 

[xtknight]

"yet another" LCD thread is right... ghosting is part of LCDs. people need to realize this. just wait until they come out with faster LCDs if you're unhappy. there's nothing this forum can do about it to be frank with you. I don't find any exorbitantly big trails with my LCD. it just angers me a little when people complain about ghosting. it exists, and it's part of LCDs, and they know that when they bought them. maybe I'm just used to it, but to be honest, ghosting doesn't bother me at all. text scrolling can be a little rough. games? no sweat. and by no means do I have bad eyes...

as to why your laptop produces less ghosting: colors vary and can affect response time in a number of ways. response time varies across the LCD's color spectrum. panels that are rated 20ms. may be the same as the latest and greatest 4ms. panel, because manufacturers use different rating schemes.

the reason things blink is because previous pixels that were set to a different color have to change, and that makes it look like they're blinking. I agree that's annoying for me, but it doesn't irritate me to the point where I want to throw this thing out the window, that's for sure. it's not a big deal... 4ms. (hopefully 4ms. maximum) LCDs are coming soon. if you don't want any semblance of ghosting, you're just going to have to wait. that's the hard and honest truth.

no, smaller LCDs will not decrease response time. conversely, it's easier to bend substrate in larger LCDs so that the lowest response times (~15ms. max) are found in big LCD TVs. according to Tom's Hardware Guide, anyway.

by the way, 8-bit means the LCD panel can natively display 16.7M colors. that doesn't necessarily affect ghosting. in other words, a 6-bit panel will be little different. I'm not sure if that was what you were implying or not. like I said earlier though, colors can make a difference in response time, but chances are the dithered colors are close enough as to not affect response time versus a native 8-bit panel.

p.s. welcome to the forums.

 

[tren001]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think the 1905FP uses a PVA panel, which had good contrast, huge viewing angles, but ghosts like crazy. The 2001FP/2005FPW are IPS panels I believe, which are faster (better for games), but don't have as good viewing angles. So unless you only work with static graphics, definitely go for the IPS panels.

As for your laptop screen, it is most likely a old TN technology panel, which are fairly fast for gaming but have horrible viewing angles. You can probably notice that most laptop screens have to be viewed from straight on to look right.

 

[Feral]

Originally posted by: tren001
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think the 1905FP uses a PVA panel, which had good contrast, huge viewing angles, but ghosts like crazy. The 2001FP/2005FPW are IPS panels I believe, which are faster (better for games), but don't have as good viewing angles. So unless you only work with static graphics, definitely go for the IPS panels.

As for your laptop screen, it is most likely a old TN technology panel, which are fairly fast for gaming but have horrible viewing angles. You can probably notice that most laptop screens have to be viewed from straight on to look right.

That's exactly the kind of information I was looking for, and I appreciate it.

 

[Demoth]

I, for one, am simply using my good 19 inch CRT until LCD technology reaches the same type of cap CRT did when CRT reached 1600 X 1200, .20 DP, 85 refresh in the sub $250 range.

LCD is still in it's middle advancement stage where better technology and more demand is driving producers to constantly advance for gaming while keeping costs down. In another year, 1000:1 8ms response will be a low priced standard and you'll start to finally see low cost LCDs that compare well to CRTs for fast paced gaming.

As it stands now, many people will tell you their LCD owns and they have no ghosting in games. Keep in mind this is very subjective. Other people playing on their system would be annoyed by the slight ghosting that is inherent in all LCDs currently.

People percieve things differently. Studies have shown this. Some people are more sensitive and processess information differently then others. That is why many people will say they notice no difference between 40 FPS and 60 FPS while others will say they notice big differences between 60 FPS and 100 FPS.

This is why it is recommended that you try to look at a monitor in action before buying the same model.

 

[tren001]

Originally posted by: Demoth
I, for one, am simply using my good 19 inch CRT until LCD technology reaches the same type of cap CRT did when CRT reached 1600 X 1200, .20 DP, 85 refresh in the sub $250 range.

LCD is still in it's middle advancement stage where better technology and more demand is driving producers to constantly advance for gaming while keeping costs down. In another year, 1000:1 8ms response will be a low priced standard and you'll start to finally see low cost LCDs that compare well to CRTs for fast paced gaming.

As it stands now, many people will tell you their LCD owns and they have no ghosting in games. Keep in mind this is very subjective. Other people playing on their system would be annoyed by the slight ghosting that is inherent in all LCDs currently.

People percieve things differently. Studies have shown this. Some people are more sensitive and processess information differently then others. That is why many people will say they notice no difference between 40 FPS and 60 FPS while others will say they notice big differences between 60 FPS and 100 FPS.

This is why it is recommended that you try to look at a monitor in action before buying the same model.

You make some good points, but LCDs of today, because of their size, sharpness, and brightness, and now price, are already far superior to CRTs. I mean sure, my 2005FPW have some ghosting, and the backlight leakage is annoying, but no way would I go back to some clunky 20" CRT behemoth after using a widescreen lcd panel for a few weeks. I might upgrade to the newer LCD/OLED or whatever technology when that time comes, but I would stick with CRTs for the time being.

 

[uOpt]

Isn't the OP confusing the ghosting as in ghosting when moving with "shadowing" of close pixels with standing picture?

In any case, the symptoms in the original post sounds to me like they are caused by a crappy analog VGA connection, probably the cable but maybe the GeForce 3 card. That would also explain why he is happier with the notebook.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: MartinCracauer
Isn't the OP confusing the ghosting as in ghosting when moving with "shadowing" of close pixels with standing picture?

In any case, the symptoms in the original post sounds to me like they are caused by a crappy analog VGA connection, probably the cable but maybe the GeForce 3 card. That would also explain why he is happier with the notebook.

hmmm...interesting...

Yes, Feral, try DVI...or try another VGA cable. VGA in and of itself will not induce ghosting. It could introduce "shadowing" though, as MartinCracauer says, if the cable isn't of decent quality.

 

[felix5]

no, it's the newer LCD's that are causing this problem. What you want is the older type with lower response rates. The newer ones have more vivid colours and such, but very bad for games, esp. FPS due to ghosting. Also with text scrolling as the OP mentioned. Also heard about them not being able to turn down the brightness WITHOUT sacrificing contrast.

 

[HeatMiser]

Originally posted by: tren001
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think the 1905FP uses a PVA panel, which had good contrast, huge viewing angles, but ghosts like crazy. The 2001FP/2005FPW are IPS panels I believe, which are faster (better for games), but don't have as good viewing angles. So unless you only work with static graphics, definitely go for the IPS panels.

As for your laptop screen, it is most likely a old TN technology panel, which are fairly fast for gaming but have horrible viewing angles. You can probably notice that most laptop screens have to be viewed from straight on to look right.

I also agree with tren001. I did a ton of research and testing before buying a 19" LCD. As said above, the PVA/MVA (Samsung/other manufacturers) produce the best color but can exhibit unacceptable ghosting for many people. TFT/TN panels typically have the best response times, but the fastest are usually 6-bit panels (dithered to 8-bit)...that is, the colors are not as good. IPS panels (the Dells mentioned above) are in between, and according to many users, acceptable levels of ghosting.

IMHO, this article is one of the best, if maybe a little too detailed, articles on LCDs out there. Sounds like you already have a decent idea of what you are doing. It will give you a good sense for which kind of panel (PVA/MVA or TFT/TN or IPS) you want. Then, you can do your research and find which LCDs use the panels you like. I found this remarkable list as a good place to help figure out which OEM panels are in the LCDs you are interested in. Good luck.

I also agree with the post about the possibility that your G3 or analog connection may be contributing to the problem.

 

[Tester]

I'm comparing the Viewsonic VP191b 16ms (my supplier does not have the 8ms yet) and the LG L1910P.. And I'm really not sure which one I'll buy... The LG L1910P is a 25ms S-IPS (which shoul dbe comparable to a 16-ms TN some people say).. while the VP191b is a Premium-MVA.... but the new ones utilise so-called overdrive technology (viewsonic calls it ClearMotiv)... which should improve gray-to-gray response rate.. Has anyone compared both ? I know the case of the LG has an horrible case.. And the premium MVA should have better contrast. But I dont know how is the black to dark gray response times. In the xbitlabs tests that I read, the MVA/PVA are very bad in that case... but I wonder if this is still true with the new technologies.. Any user experiences? and how do they compare to the TN panels ?