I have liked it for the most part, but having to upgrade vid cards sucked. My 800xtpe struggles at 1680*1050 on lots of games. Some games I have to use V-sync on as well, which sucks also. My only real regret though is going 20" instead of 24"
I have the Dell 2005 and its the best ws lcd for price. I picked mine up for $463 shipped, and now its $400 or less.
I love my ACER 24"..no regrets here
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductLi...ategoryCode=090205&SortBy=B&Brand=ACER
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductLi...ategoryCode=090205&SortBy=B&Brand=ACERWell I did regret it. Upgraded from a 1901FP to the 2005FPW and I didn't like it at all. But then again my eyes are not the greatest in the world and did not enjoy the higher resolution. I just downgraded again to a 1907FP but I'm happy with my 19". Also, games were a bother becasue I had to move my eyes clear across the screen to see different buttons and such. (WoW). Good luck though, it all depends on you. I'm also a person who does not like higher than 1024x768 on any laptop screen becasue I am squinting to see anything. For me higher resolutions = bad. But one thing is for sure...DVDs on the 2005FPW were incredible
There is no doubt.
LCDs are superior to CRTs. If for no reason else than they dont make CRTs anymore.
And widescreen is without question superior to square aspect ratios. It fits the human eye better (we see the majority of our vision horizontally, not vertically).
You can catch things coming towards you from the corner of your eye, but never will you catch a brick falling from the sky on your head out of the "corner" of your eye.
Widescreen just makes sense. Has been the Hollywood standard since the 50s and its long overdue that the squares are eliminated. Makes much more sense for fitting applications like web browsers or programming as well.
Rotate the LCD if you want to work on a ton of code at once on a widescreen. You have a much taller display than any CRT.
The interesting thing is that even if you match pixel count for pixel count.. in a 4:3 vs 16:10, the usable space is much more on the widescreen.
A 1680x1050 screen, while having less pixels than a 1600x1200.. is MUCH more usuable in practice due to fitting how applications are designed. In rotated portrait mode, an LCD fits most webpages perfect as they are usually designed for either a 600pixel width or 768px width to fit 800x600 displays.
1050x1680 is absolutely perfect for that, and has a tad extra for you too. And 1680px vertical length is amazing with the amount that can be fit of a page.
This will only get worse over time as Vista is designed for a length structure.
There is no debate.
CRTs are dead.
Square aspect ratios are dying and not the future, nor hardly even the present with every AAA blockbuster game natively supporting widescreen besides BF2 (which is just overall poorly coded anyway).
LCDs are superior to CRTs. If for no reason else than they dont make CRTs anymore.
And widescreen is without question superior to square aspect ratios. It fits the human eye better (we see the majority of our vision horizontally, not vertically).
You can catch things coming towards you from the corner of your eye, but never will you catch a brick falling from the sky on your head out of the "corner" of your eye.
Widescreen just makes sense. Has been the Hollywood standard since the 50s and its long overdue that the squares are eliminated. Makes much more sense for fitting applications like web browsers or programming as well.
Rotate the LCD if you want to work on a ton of code at once on a widescreen. You have a much taller display than any CRT.
The interesting thing is that even if you match pixel count for pixel count.. in a 4:3 vs 16:10, the usable space is much more on the widescreen.
A 1680x1050 screen, while having less pixels than a 1600x1200.. is MUCH more usuable in practice due to fitting how applications are designed. In rotated portrait mode, an LCD fits most webpages perfect as they are usually designed for either a 600pixel width or 768px width to fit 800x600 displays.
1050x1680 is absolutely perfect for that, and has a tad extra for you too. And 1680px vertical length is amazing with the amount that can be fit of a page.
This will only get worse over time as Vista is designed for a length structure.
There is no debate.
CRTs are dead.
Square aspect ratios are dying and not the future, nor hardly even the present with every AAA blockbuster game natively supporting widescreen besides BF2 (which is just overall poorly coded anyway).
So are you guys that are having to play at a lower resolution due to VC limitations, ok with that?
I realize LCD resolution scaling has improved, but there still is a significant decrease in quality, correct?
I realize LCD resolution scaling has improved, but there still is a significant decrease in quality, correct?
akugami
Diamond Member
- Feb 14, 2005
- 6,210
- 2,552
- 136
On the flip side, a ton of gamers have Dell LCD's. Backlight bleeding is not a Dell only problem, plenty of LCD's have it. However, gamers are much more demanding and stringent on how they rate their monitors. There are a lot of Dell LCD owners compared to other LCD brands on Anandtech.
Obviously it'll be like the ASUS products where there are more complaints because there are obviously more people using it. I remember how some people were afraid of the ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe because of all the complaints. In fairness, it did have some bugs that needed fixing and there are still a few quirks with it but it's a decent overall board with some nice features. It's certainly not bug ridden or unusable by any means and I'm satisfied being an owner of this board.
I bought a 19" widescreen, thinking I would use it and give my wife my current one. The one I tried was the Viewsonic. The monitor refused to scale properly in non-widescreen situations, and I ended up giving it to my wife for desktop usage. She actually likes the widescreen desktop better, so I don't regret buying it, but it didn't suit me very well.
I would buy a widescreen LCD again, but only if I know that it will scale (with black bars on the sides) when I need it to.
I would buy a widescreen LCD again, but only if I know that it will scale (with black bars on the sides) when I need it to.
I personally couldn't handle the scaling on my 2005FPW and upgraded vid cards to play at native res. There are only two resolutions other than native that provide acceptable IQ, and neither work in all situations, I find myself either changing res all the time or scooting my monitor back and forth on my desk to avoid squinting.
Overall I'm happy with the widescreen, but it did take some getting used to.
My Viewsonic 19" widescreen refused to do any scaling whatsoever. I tried using both a NVidia and ATI video cards, and tried using DVI and Analog. Everything was stretched to full screen no matter what resolution and timings setting I chose.
My video card was good enough to handle native resolution, but too many of my games did not support widescreen. Things would have been fine, if he LCD just allowed me to scale the resolution to 4:3. I'm hoping more expensive widescreens will have better scaling support.
My video card was good enough to handle native resolution, but too many of my games did not support widescreen. Things would have been fine, if he LCD just allowed me to scale the resolution to 4:3. I'm hoping more expensive widescreens will have better scaling support.
I ordered a NEC 20WMGX2, and...
IT'S NOT IN STOCK YET!!!!! DAMMIT I WANT MY MONITOR!!!
EDIT: I did see two 20" widescreens at CC the other day. Playing some WMV HD the only word to describe it was breathtaking. And theese monitors weren't even half of the 20WMGX2. I hope it comes soon.
IT'S NOT IN STOCK YET!!!!! DAMMIT I WANT MY MONITOR!!!
EDIT: I did see two 20" widescreens at CC the other day. Playing some WMV HD the only word to describe it was breathtaking. And theese monitors weren't even half of the 20WMGX2. I hope it comes soon.
I've got a 20 inch WS viewsonic coming in that I ordered for $349 shipped, I'll let you know how it goes.
Yes, I'm OK with that (not that I really have a choice unless I want a slideshow at native res in FEAR
). In my opinion the scaling is not bad at all...lower resolutions are very usable. Of course they're not 100% crisp as native, but very usable.I baught dells 2005fwp for my 7800GS and absolutly love it. I've been able to run all my games fine at the native res. Even oblivion runs on ultra high setting, although I disabled the grass because it was slothing around outside at 10-15 fps. But the colors are so vivid, graphics so crisp, BfmE2, oblivion, call of duty 2, all look absolutly dreamy on it, and I think I really like the widescreen aspect ratio, I dont even mind that height wise its actually no bigger then my old 19" crt. It definetly weighs a ton less and emits a less heat.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter