8800GTS 320MB - New Monitor

[Cheex]

I currently have a 17" CRT monitor and and eVGA 8800GTS 320MB video card.
I currently play my games at 1024x768.

Considering that I would be changing my monitor before my next video card purchase...
What size monitor (resolution) should I be looking at getting?
Widescreen or not?

Any other thoughts?

 

[will889]

Definitely widescreen, and with that card no bigger than 20-22" with a res of 1680*1050. Your card will handle slightly older games with ease and new ones pretty easy too with AA-AF lowered a bit.

 

[Cheex]

So a 19" would be a royal waste of money then.

So....20", 20.1" or 22"...??

 

[superbooga]

Get whatever is within your budget; remember that you can always upgrade the card and you have the 90-day stepup.

I'm using a 2407wfp an 8800GTS 320 and I think it's great. Then again I'm playing mostly WoW and other games with 2-3 years old technology.

Just remember this: Your monitor is going to be far more future-proof than your video card. Games like the Lost Planet demo are already slow at 1680x1050 with max settings.

 

[Cheex]

Budget = 19" (MAYBE a 20")

Future-proof = 22"

Sweet but way out of my league right now.

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: Cheex
Budget = 19" (MAYBE a 20")

Future-proof = 22"

Sweet but way out of my league right now.

Not sweet at all unless you like terrifyingly bad viewing angles & poor color accuracy! :Q
(okay, slight exaggeration )

Don't buy into the marketing hype surrounding response times & contrast ratios.
Read up, & learn what really matters regarding LCDs
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2049206&enterthread=y

Then buy this LCD:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...p?Item=N82E16824009105

 

[Cheex]

Okay I might be a sucker for the response time....

This Acer is 8ms...doesn't that ghost during games?

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: Cheex
Budget = 19" (MAYBE a 20")

Future-proof = 22"

Sweet but way out of my league right now.

Not sweet at all unless you like terrifyingly bad viewing angles & poor color accuracy! :Q
(okay, slight exaggeration )

Don't buy into the marketing hype surrounding response times & contrast ratios.
Read up, & learn what really matters regarding LCDs
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2049206&enterthread=y

Then buy this LCD:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...p?Item=N82E16824009105

Wow your going to need one of those next generation nvidia video cards for your 30 inch lcd monitor to be able to play at the native resolution. Thats if you want all high settings in your DX9 and DX10 games. With maximum FSAA and AF.

 

[Cheex]

What should I do then?

I'm confused.

 

[RussianSensation]

Your monitor could last 5+ years and I am sure you dont only play games on it. Your eyes will love you for movie watching and regular browsing.

Since right now the price increases significantly at 24 inches, I'd get the largest monitor you can afford up to 24 inches. In fact, this should completely solve your issue about getting extra 2 gigs of ram. Just get 1 extra stick and dump the rest into a new monitor. This should let you move closer to 22 inches

You can't stop your graphics card from becoming obsolete. Either way 8800GTS 320 can handle games at 1600x1200 just fine. But if you are worried about constantly upgrading your graphics card, maybe you should get a console or stick to playing at 1024x768. Either way you are doing yourself an injustice by playing at 1024x768. 7600GT is good for that.

Owning a gaming PC is expensive.

 

[superbooga]

If you're going to stick to playing games and office productivity, then I would just get a 20" - 22" screen. Affordable monitors with that size usually use TN panels, but I wouldn't worry too much about the quality, and there are planety of users satisfied with the Samsung xx6BW.

If you watch tv/movies with your screen, then I think the jump to 24" is worth it. Bigger screen, and ability to display 1080p without scaling the image.

 

[ND40oz]

Originally posted by: superbooga
If you're going to stick to playing games and office productivity, then I would just get a 20" - 22" screen. Affordable monitors with that size usually use TN panels, but I wouldn't worry too much about the quality, and there are planety of users satisfied with the Samsung xx6BW.

If you watch tv/movies with your screen, then I think the jump to 24" is worth it. Bigger screen, and ability to display 1080p without scaling the image.

I concur, I have a Dell 2007, Gateway 2275 and Dell 2407, 2407 is head and shoulders better just do to the real estate. I'd definitely go for the 24" if you can. Costco has the Westy 37" for 799, if you want to go really big.

 

[Cheex]

I'm constantly restricted by my limited budget. So whenever I do spend, I want my money's worth big time!!

I think I see where the prices REALLY jump after passing 22". The 24" monitors I see are way more expensive.

If I could get a GREAT 24" for less than $400, then there would be absolutely no question as to what to get.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: Cheex
I'm constantly restricted by my limited budget. So whenever I do spend, I want my money's worth big time!!

I think I see where the prices REALLY jump after passing 22". The 24" monitors I see are way more expensive.

If I could get a GREAT 24" for less than $400, then there would be absolutely no question as to what to get.

A Great 24" cost well over $1000. A good one you can get for $500 to $750 but its not nearly as good.

 

[imaheadcase]

The dell 24inchs get good reviews on theres site, they are about $669 now, but they do have $100 off every once in awhile. They were $559 for a few weeks last month.

I heard they are replacing them with a newer one though, could get cheaper.

 

[n7]

22" = crap
24" = good (save for the TN infestation Samsung has started)

The 20" Acer i already mentioned is very good for the price, & better than your average crappy 22"

 

[lopri]

24" Dell. (Wait and look around for deals. They are frequent)

 

[Cheex]

Exactly my point...24" is just simply out of my range at this point.

According to n7: The 20" Acer is very good but...
8ms??!! Doesn't that ghost in games??? FIFA is a big thing for me (ghost in anything else not in my tournaments).
I used an Acer 17" recently with 8ms and that ghosted FIFA like nobody's business.

What makes this 20" Acer better than other monitors (aside from being cheaper) and also better than "your average crappy 22" monitor???

 

[n7]

Every single WS 22" LCD is a TN!

IOW, they're okay at best, or poor on average.

I already linked to what is on the top of this forum stickied!
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2049206&enterthread=y
Please read thru that to at least start to understand why i consider that Acer better than most 20/22" WS...

If you really don't care to research your purchase, i can only help so much.

8 ms ghosting?

I doubt it, unless the 8 ms LCD you had wasn't actually anywhere close to 8 ms.

I game on a 14 ms LCD, previously to that, a 16 ms, & previous to that, a 20 ms LCD.

Never saw ghosting on any of them.

I'm not as sensitive to that, so i'm not the best person to ask, but still, i don't think i've heard too many people actually complain of ghosting with newer LCDs.

 

[lopri]

I really think it's OK even if you go a bit over the original budget, when it comes to monitors. I bought a Samsung 213T like 5 years ago and it's still hanging by my desk. (wall-mounting arm) Monitors are, IMO, a long-term investment. Skip a couple lunches/dinners!

 

[Cheex]

Thanks for the great advice guys. I'll do a bit of reading (at work if I can) and maybe do a couple replies during the day today.

I will genuinely look into that Acer 20" now though.

 

[Modular]

Originally posted by: n7
Then buy this LCD:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...p?Item=N82E16824009105

Seconded, thirded, and fourthed

I have owned the AL2051W for 3 weeks or so now and I couldn't be happier. I notice no ghosting on the screen. Read about response times and you will find that generally a P-MVA panel actually has better true response times than a TN that claims to be 3 ms faster.

I'm thoroughly impressed with the build quality, look, and feel of the monitor and the 3 year warranty at this price point can't be beat.

As far as the difference between TN and P-MVA (the Acer panel) I can tell you that the Acer blows away any TN in color reproduction and picture quality. I can't take the time to explain the specifics at this point, but I can give an example. At the Windows XP login screen, at the top left of the screen there's a white circle. The center of the circle is supposed to be brighter than the outside of it. On a TN, each change in the "strength" of the color will appear as a distinct block of color. So instead of looking like one ball of light, the circle will appear as multiple rings around a ball in the middle, each ring being a slightly less vibrant color than the one before it.

On an MVA or better (IPS panels, etc), there will be no noticeable change in the color, only a slight, natural migration in it's color strength. A TN will have this problem on whatever color it is that's being represented. Late tonight (or more likely tomorrow) I'll try and post screenshots of what I mean.

 

[Cheex]

Thanks a LOT.

I'm really starting to look at this monitor as an upgrade to my 17" CRT at this point.

 

[Cheex]

I know they are expensive but what type of LCD panel does the Apple Cinema displays use?
They are gorgeous!!

 

[n7]

S-IPS.