Help me pick a new monitor!

[Edge3D]

I'm building a new system with probably a A64 on NF3-250 and a PCX Geforce 6800 Ultra.. before I do this I need a monitor upgrade from my 17" Viewsonic I have currently because it maxes out at 1280x1024x60hz. I game at 1024x768 on my current monitor at 85hz.

Its fine with my GF4 and 1700+ but I dont see it doing my new system justice as far as resolution is concerned. I want to game in 1600x1200 or higher. I'm more interested in resolution than AA/AF (but maybe I'll get to use both)!

Anyway, now that the groundwork is laid down.. what I'm looking at are the two models listed in the summary.
I came down to those two because the 19" is only $240 and all the 21" monitors are within $100 of the price on that 22", PLUS it does 2048x1536 @ 88Hz!!! It is $530. I dont upgrade monitors often so I dont mind spending the money, but SAVING the money doesnt hurt me either as I'm on a budget.
And the 19" does my required resolution for my new system with a good refresh rate.

Any comments on what one to go with? Or notes about the brands? I've had great luck with my Viewsonic but maybe that model I'm looking at is not as good.
The only game I really play is Unreal Tournament 2004 (best game ever).. and I replay a lot of OLD games that I wont even mention due to me probably getting laughed out of here. Thats why I am not going with a high quality LCD, I run a few games with sub 640x480 resolution and run custom resolutions for arcade emus.

Thanks in advance for taking the time to read this and help me pick one. Its pre-game preparation time to my 6800 Ultra destruction!

 

[Swanny]

I have no personal experience, but I've only heard good things about the Iiyama brand.

 

[Edge3D]

I'm actually leaning towards the 22".. thanks for the info on the brand.. I'd never heard about it before and that bugs me.

Both have their merits, but the kicker for me is that the 22" weighs 64lbs and the 19" 52lbs.
If the 22" was drastically heavier I'd probably be more tending to get the Viewsonic.

But the Iiyama looks like I could pump it up to 2048x1536 and (hopefully) bring my 6800 Ultra to its knees with any luck. I want to make that new system force me to lower the res! 😀

 

[SickBeast]

You should have added a "niether" option because I don't like either of those screens. 🙂

I would personally go for a 19"LCD if you're going to drop over $500 on a monitor. The image quality on them annihilates those on CRTs unless you're REALLY fussy about pixel response time. 19"LCD w/ DVI is the cat's meow right now.

 

[Edge3D]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
You should have added a "niether" option because I don't like either of those screens. 🙂

I would personally go for a 19"LCD if you're going to drop over $500 on a monitor. The image quality on them annihilates those on CRTs unless you're REALLY fussy about pixel response time. 19"LCD w/ DVI is the cat's meow right now.

That is a good point. To drop $500 makes one wonder if a LCD should be bought instead. They do have their benefits as well.. but I dont know if for me if thats the way to go considering my situation and needs. I dont like "native" resolutions and the looks when scaling down from those.
Certainly is something to think about, like you said, kind of a shame to spend $500+ and not get a killer LCD.

Hmmm....

edit- If anyone has specific options that they'd recommend instead.. PLEASE shoot!
One other thing I never dug to much on LCDs are dead pixels..

Added a cheaper 19" LCD though in case popular opinion does indeed lean that way.
Link to its specs

 

[SickBeast]

Yeah that LCD looks excellent actually.

Dead pixels are the achille's heel of LCDs. On mine I have 1 dead pixel and honestly I never even notice it.

The warranty should cover 5-10 dead pixels, or if you have a "cluster" of them. The best way to guarantee that you're not getting dead pixels is to physically go to the store, and ask them if you can have a look at the screen before you buy it. Make sure you set the wallpaper colour to red, then green, then blue, then black, then white to make sure that there are no dead pixels (they are usually one of a few colours).

As for the "native resolution", I've never had to run at anything lower than the default 1280x1024 with my R9700, and I would expect that you would never have to either with a 6800U. 1600x1200 would be nice tho. 🙂

 

[mwalt2]

IMO, that LCD would be horrible for gaming. The response time is 25ms. You would probably end up with a lot of ghosting if you play any fast-paced game. If you are going to get an LCD, you'll want the lowest response time you can find (I think the lowest now is somewhere around 12-15ms). If you're a serious gamer, you should get a CRT. Both of the ones you listed look pretty nice - probably just depends on how big you want to go.

 

[Johnbear007]

Personally I think LCD's still suck compared to CRT's unless you are talking ultra high end, but then you could get an ultra high end CRT that would still beat it.


the IIYAMA HM204DT looks good on paper but i've never used one. Diamondtron tubes are nice though. They are made by mitsubishi. However, I liek the a90f+ for the price. It's a great monitor. I use one myself, and i've never seen anything but happy customers with them.


The LCD is definitley out though in my opinion. I have known peopel that say "oh I see no ghosting" then I go look at their setup and I notice a ton of ghosting. I think that some people just love the idea of an LCD so much that the convince themselves there isn't any ghosting.

I've heard good things about IIYAMA, and if it really uses a diamondtron screen, that's great. I bought my 19inch on a budget, and have been very happy with it, however if you have the extra cash I would grab the IIYAMA maybe. The only problem is, I couldn't find any reviews on it.

Also keep in mind that just like a trinitron monitor, a diamondtron monitor is aperture grille. This means that it will have 2 or 3 stabilizer wires that run across the screen. You should try to look at an aperture grille monitor first and see if they bother you. Some people HATE them. However, I think they are great. I have a 17inch sony trinitron that I really like.

The only thing that would hold me back from the IIYAMA is lack of reviews. I would look around at some other diamondtron and trinitron monitors as well.

Good luck!

 

[Edge3D]

Cool. Thanks. I have a Sony 32" WEGA Trinitron tv and I love it. It wouldnt bother me to have one on my desktop. Currently I'm on a Viewsonic Q17 and I have no problems with the IQ here either.
I wonder if that makes me not picky? I actually find my old monitor to be great.
Probably sad to most of the "monitor experts" but hey, thats why I came here to seek out people who know more than I do!

The Iiyama would rock.. but then again I kind of agree with that other guy on that pretty killer lower response time LCD would be feasible at that price (maybe not the one I put in my poll exactly), the lowered weight would be nice for traveling to LAN tournaments.
The 19" looks appealing the more I listen to you guys. I am on a budget and another system with that stuff is going to run me a good amount.
1600x1200 with maxed AA/AF should be able to bring down a A64/6800 Ultra setup on most any game. And I would still have access to 2048x1536 is still available for testing.. and maybe even playable at 68hz. But also, that Iiyama would ROCK at 2048 and 85hz... hehe. Nothing can really touch that especially for the price. I could only imagine how beautiful is. And I'm completely WILLING to blow the dough considering it will last me years. But I am on a budget, yet I have the $$$.
I gotta have 85hz though usually so I dont get headaches from flickering (sensitive eyes) . :brokenheart::music:

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: mwalt2
IMO, that LCD would be horrible for gaming. The response time is 25ms. You would probably end up with a lot of ghosting if you play any fast-paced game. If you are going to get an LCD, you'll want the lowest response time you can find (I think the lowest now is somewhere around 12-15ms). If you're a serious gamer, you should get a CRT. Both of the ones you listed look pretty nice - probably just depends on how big you want to go.

Sorry but I disagree; I have a 25ms screen and I can't notice any ghosting whatsoever.

 

[ponyo]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: mwalt2
IMO, that LCD would be horrible for gaming. The response time is 25ms. You would probably end up with a lot of ghosting if you play any fast-paced game. If you are going to get an LCD, you'll want the lowest response time you can find (I think the lowest now is somewhere around 12-15ms). If you're a serious gamer, you should get a CRT. Both of the ones you listed look pretty nice - probably just depends on how big you want to go.

Sorry but I disagree; I have a 25ms screen and I can't notice any ghosting whatsoever.

Cause maybe you're only playing certain games that don't ghost too much or maybe you're in denial. All consumer LCDs ghost. 25ms panels more so than 16ms. But depending on the person they can learn to block out the ghosting completely or most of it so it doesn't bother them. Some people can't and ghosting will be unbearable to them. Same way some people can't get over the two thin lines on AG screen.

OP, if your main interest is gaming, I would recommend picking up a nice 21"+ CRT. CRT is still the preferred screen for gaming. You don't want to pick up $500 LCD since the max res is only 1280x1024. Kind of defeats the purpose of getting 6800U doesn't it? If you want to play at that res a good 17" or average 19" CRT would suffice as would 17-19" LCD. Since 6800U allows you to game pretty much all present games at 1600x1200 and above, you want 21"+ CRT. Anything less would bottleneck 6800U.

I only play 2 old games at 2048x1536: Quake 3 and GTA: Vice City. Both are extremely beautiful at that res even though both are old games. I just bought Mafia last night and that game also supports 2048x1536 although I haven't had chance to game at that res.

 

[Johnbear007]

Originally posted by: Edge3D
Cool. Thanks. I have a Sony 32" WEGA Trinitron tv and I love it. It wouldnt bother me to have one on my desktop. Currently I'm on a Viewsonic Q17 and I have no problems with the IQ here either.
I wonder if that makes me not picky? I actually find my old monitor to be great.
Probably sad to most of the "monitor experts" but hey, thats why I came here to seek out people who know more than I do!

The Iiyama would rock.. but then again I kind of agree with that other guy on that pretty killer lower response time LCD would be feasible at that price (maybe not the one I put in my poll exactly), the lowered weight would be nice for traveling to LAN tournaments.
The 19" looks appealing the more I listen to you guys. I am on a budget and another system with that stuff is going to run me a good amount.
1600x1200 with maxed AA/AF should be able to bring down a A64/6800 Ultra setup on most any game. And I would still have access to 2048x1536 is still available for testing.. and maybe even playable at 68hz. But also, that Iiyama would ROCK at 2048 and 85hz... hehe. Nothing can really touch that especially for the price. I could only imagine how beautiful is. And I'm completely WILLING to blow the dough considering it will last me years. But I am on a budget, yet I have the $$$.
I gotta have 85hz though usually so I dont get headaches from flickering (sensitive eyes) . :brokenheart::music:

The TV's are different than the monitors, they don't have the lines. Personally I don't think the lines are noticeable on a monitor, bit it's good to try it first anyway. Well, first of all you like your Viewsonic, because vuewsonic makes very nice monitors 🙂 Outside of that i'd go for the illyama if you can afford to, the refresh rates are great at high resolutions.

 

[mitchafi]

Just how much can having a crappy monitor hurt your performance in 3D Gaming. I mean, my monitor can run at 1600 x 1200 (that's max though) and the image seems pretty good (although I have nothing to compare it to). Could having a crappy monitor potentially bottleneck a system?

 

[Edge3D]

Originally posted by: mitchafi
Just how much can having a crappy monitor hurt your performance in 3D Gaming. I mean, my monitor can run at 1600 x 1200 (that's max though) and the image seems pretty good (although I have nothing to compare it to). Could having a crappy monitor potentially bottleneck a system?

Because with a 4ghz P4 or 2.6Ghz A64 and a 6800 Ultra, with my current monitor only able to do 1280x1024x60hz max thats not nearly high enough compared to what my system will be able to handle.. even in new games.
If I could do 1600x1200x75+hz I wouldnt be getting a new monitor. But I want 1600x1200 and 2048x1538 as well.. since I'll be using this monitor for multiple hardware generations probably until they perfect something flat like LCDs and make it affordable.

But 2048x1538 at 85hz with no ghosting worries or dead pixels is about the ultimate IMO. Thanks for everyones help.

 

[Edge3D]

Looks like the 6800 Ultra would be perfectly matched with this Iiyama. NVs site states that the

Dual 400MHz RAMDACs
Blazing-fast RAMDACs support dual QXGA displays with ultra-high, ergonomic refresh rates?up to 2048x1536@85Hz.

Exactly what the Iiyama is setup to do. But I will probably be running 1600x1200 in most games and 2048 in only games that even allow such resolution. Hopefully by this summer we'll be seeing some faster A64s than the 3400+..
it will be nice to run my desktop at 2048 whatever games allow me to.