Best Size LCD for Gaming?

[LiquidFlame]

I'm looking into getting an LCD, but I?m not sure what size I want. Right now I have a 19" CRT so I know I don't want to go any lower then 19". I've read that the best size LCD for gaming is between 20"-24", anything lower or higher then that will just look and operate poorly. I also want to take full advantage of my GPU, and not limit its capability. Any advice would be great. Thanks.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

I think that 1680x1050 is a good size. Not too big, not small.

 

[ayabe]

I would say that 24" is the sweet spot right now since you can get a decent brand for around $300-600 bucks. Going higher than that and you really hit a pricing barrier, for instance the Dell 27" is almost twice as much as the 24".

Going above that to the 30" and you have to deal with getting a top tier videocard or two every round in order to be able to play newer releases at native resolution. If you upgrade very frequently then I guess this wouldn't be much of an issue.

Of course if you have the cash to spare this would be the way to go. Personally I just upgraded from a 20.1" to a 24" and I'm loving it.

 

[LiquidFlame]

ayabe

What LCD do you have?

 

[asdftt123]

I've been thinking about this too. Currently I'm leaning towards a 20" or 22" widescreen @ 1650*1050. A 24" would be nice, but I because there is a big price gap between 22" and 24", I doubt it would be worth it unless you have the money. Just wondering, between a 20" and 22" WS, which would you pick? They are about the same price but I'd imagine a 20" to look a bit sharper, but on the other hand a 22" would be a bit bigger obviously...

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: LiquidFlame
ayabe

What LCD do you have?

I went with the Dell 2407-FWP-HC which was on sale for $579, still might be. I previously had a Dell 2005FPW.

I guess I should add a disclaimer, my first one was defective and I should be getting my replacement today after work. There was serious image ghosting and banding when hooked up through VGA. Don't know if this is a general problem or only my monitor, the guy at Dell support seemed to know exactly what I was talking about, which is either good or bad. It also had a bad button on the front panel.

But running off my PC on DVI it's really a sight to behold.

 

[LiquidFlame]

I heard that the Dell had issues with ghosting. How big of an issue is it with the Dell. I just think it would really distract me while I'm playing my games

 

[Golgatha]

Here's my thoughts on it. A 20in screen will be a little sharper than a 22in screen, but my 22in monitor looks plenty sharp at 1680x1050. If you go to a 24in monitor, you'll have a 1920x1080 resolution and the stuff on the screen just looks smallish to me at the native resolution, so if I was going to go that high I would get a 27-30in.

If you're a heavy gamer, I definitely wouldn't get a 1920x1080 panel unless you're going to pair it with some serious graphics hardware. You'll get roughly 15-20% better performance (speaking in FPS) out of a 1680x1050 panel when running each at native resolution. On my 1900XTX 512MB card, this would make or break running at native resolution with AA and AF enabled for example. Of course, you have an 8800GTX so go for the 24in if you wish on that note .

 

[videopho]

If you can keep the viewing at least a 3ft or longer distance from your display then 24" is the best since I own both 22 & 24 displays myself.
The only penalty is you may need at least a mid hi-end or better v/c in order to display the 1920X1020 res.

 

[LiquidFlame]

videopho

I don't know if you looked at my sig of not, or if I just read your post wrong, but don't you think my 8800GTX would be fine.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: LiquidFlame
I heard that the Dell had issues with ghosting. How big of an issue is it with the Dell. I just think it would really distract me while I'm playing my games

I never noticed it over DVI and that's what I used for PC gaming. The VGA ghosting issue was with my 360 and it's extremely noticeable with lighter backgrounds when the HUD is up and the banding is very apparent on menus. At first I thought it was a 1080p thing but when I turned it down to 1080i I had the same problem. Didn't try hooking up to the components because that isn't going to get me 1080p. So if this second monitor is bad I will be looking elsewhere since running my 360 over VGA is a big part of why I got this monitor.

I have a 1900XT and it does ok at native resolution, I could definitely tell things were a little slower in a few games like CoH but it was still very playable with most settings turned up. MTW2 was playable in battles but the campaign map chugged big time. I'm building a new rig in the next few months so this isn't a big concern for me and you have a GTX so you should be good to go.

 

[LiquidFlame]

So it kind of sounds like 24" is the way to go. Now I have to figure out what to look at. I heard that some of the best brands right now are ViewSonic, LG, Samsung, and BenQ. Any recommendations. The one I was looking at and wouldn't go higher in price is the BenQ FP241W: http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16824014124

 

[ayabe]

I have heard good things about that BenQ and if this other Dell doesn't pan out that might be my choice.

 

[shiranai]

Originally posted by: LiquidFlame
So it kind of sounds like 24" is the way to go. Now I have to figure out what to look at. I heard that some of the best brands right now are ViewSonic, LG, Samsung, and BenQ. Any recommendations. The one I was looking at and wouldn't go higher in price is the BenQ FP241W: http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16824014124

Don't get the W; try to find the WZ, which has about 10ms less lag.

Which monitor you'll want to use depends on what is more important to you in gaming: speed or image quality. Most of the fastest monitors are 19" TN panels that generally don't look that great stacked next to their shiny 24" IPS/MVA brothers. That said, nearly all 24" panels feature >1f measured input lag. Bottom line, if ~20ms of lag isn't significant in the games you play, go for the bigger screen.

 

[LiquidFlame]

As to lag, I don't want it affecting my game play, how much would it hurt?

 

[shiranai]

The noticable effects of lag will depend on the types of games you play and your personal level of sensitivity. For example, you're more likely to notice lag in games that require "twitch" skill or timing, especially if you have fast reaction speed or you're very good at the game (and therefore have developed a distinct "feel" for it). Input lag below 2f is almost completely irrelevant in, for instance, RTS games. Also, internet games like MMOs typically have so much connection latency that display lag becomes insignificant - this is further emphasized by the fact that these games are actually designed with lag in mind, so timing is never very strict to begin with. That's not to say faster displays don't help - obviously, being able to react 20ms faster is still a (small) advantage whether you need it or not - just that it's probably not worth sacrificing image quality over.

If you're an average gamer, I think you should be okay with the 24"ers. But again, if you're going to get the BenQ, I'd try to find the WZ anyway, since it's 10ms faster without any technical disadvantages (that I am aware of).

 

[GEOrifle]

What's the minimum graphic card requirement for 24" LCD displays ?
I'm going to buy X1950PRO AGP version, should i choose it with higher 512mb RAM or
256mb will be good enough?

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: GEOrifle
What's the minimum graphic card requirement for 24" LCD displays ?
I'm going to buy X1950PRO AGP version, should i choose it with higher 512mb RAM or
256mb will be good enough?

Get the fastest one you can afford. I would guess 512MB would be better for you.

 

[GEOrifle]

Thanks, i was thinking the same .

 

[cyrusm]

IMO 20 - 22 is the sweet spot
any bigger, and you'll find yourself looking all over the screen to get what you want.

 

[n7]

30" @ 2560x1600 > *

Or for those not wanting to spend money, then 24" of course.

 

[postmortemIA]

Originally posted by: Golgatha
Here's my thoughts on it. A 20in screen will be a little sharper than a 22in screen, but my 22in monitor looks plenty sharp at 1680x1050. If you go to a 24in monitor, you'll have a 1920x1080 resolution and the stuff on the screen just looks smallish to me at the native resolution, so if I was going to go that high I would get a 27-30in.

If you're a heavy gamer, I definitely wouldn't get a 1920x1080 panel unless you're going to pair it with some serious graphics hardware. You'll get roughly 15-20% better performance (speaking in FPS) out of a 1680x1050 panel when running each at native resolution. On my 1900XTX 512MB card, this would make or break running at native resolution with AA and AF enabled for example. Of course, you have an 8800GTX so go for the 24in if you wish on that note .

24" has 1920x1200 native resolution, not the one you mentioned.