LCD + gaming = okay?

[JellyBaby]

Pixel response time is not the only issue with LCDs. Did you bother to read that article?

 

[LordMaul]

I have a NEC 1720M and its great. No ghosting.

RGN

 

[Keego]

Originally posted by: tart666

It basically confirmed what I already knew: avoid LCDs for another year or two.

Did you even read?? The new Hitachi has response time 12ms/4ms. 17", DVI, lotsa goodness for $699 retail. Shipping early november.

Instead of a year or two you just have to wait A WEEK OR TWO!

yeah, this looks really promising. I'm going to get a black one if possible

 

[tart666]

Pixel response time is not the only issue with LCDs.

As far as the gamer is concerned, yes it is. Color reproduction / accuracy, etc is of no value here.

 

[JellyBaby]

tart666, you assume you know what's best for everyone. Here's the truth bud: you don't. It's up to the individual to determine his requirements, research what's available and make a personal decision.

There's a reason many avid gamers don't choose LCDs: they're not ideal for gaming yet.

 

[Keego]

Originally posted by: JellyBaby
tart666, you assume you know what's best for everyone. Here's the truth bud: you don't. It's up to the individual to determine his requirements, research what's available and make a personal decision.

There's a reason many avid gamers don't choose LCDs: they're not ideal for gaming yet.

His points are valid.

 

[JellyBaby]

The reasons LCD technology is not good enough for me personally: limited screen size, high cost, inability to display true black, inability to render the full range of a 32-bit color palette (LCDs can't even reach 24-bit color), pixel response issues, fixed resolution (typically 1280 now) and relatively poor reliability vs. CRT technology.

I have plenty of desk space. I also don't care about power consumption.

As LCDs mature I will certainly consider them but for right now there are too many issues and vew few advantages over CRTs for how I use my PC.

 

[dszd0g]

Ghosting/Pixel response time is the main thing that has kept me away from LCDs for gaming.

If my understanding is correct a current 25ms response time LCD is the equivalent of: 1/25ms * (1000ms/s) = 40Hz

Unless someone gets the refresh rate down to:

1/85Hz = (1s/85)* (1000ms/1s) = 11.76ms

So until we see 11ms and less LCDs for a reasonable price, I won't be interested.

 

[LH]

I dont know why people are still harping on cost.

You can by a high end 20" LCD(equals a 22" CRT) for the same price or less as the highest end Sony 22" FD CRT. Which runs about $1400.

Furthermore you can by a high end 23" LCD(equal to a 26" CRT), for $500 more than that Sony 22" CRT.

The prices of LCD monitors have dropped dramatically and in most cases in various size ranges the LCD is only $50 or so more expensive to a comparable CRT.

A 60Hz LCD is ALOT better on the eyes than a 85Hz CRT. By far. Highend LCDs are getting their.

 

[LH]

To me LCDs are worth it. Theres now way in heck Id want to have 4 22" CRTs running at the same time. Not so much the power but a single 22" monitor and computer heats up a room enough in Texas(even with AC), I dont want to try 4 22" CRTs.

 

[Kartajan]

I would venture to say that if you are a discerning gamer with sufficient desk space, you should probably stick to CRT's for the short to medium term. I personally do not have any real ghosting issues on my LCD, but I am running off the DVI port- and I am not a 3D/ FPS addict. I do notice the difference between my LCD and my CRT (occasionally, when running 3d type games), but I mostly do RTS games- not a problem for me.

See link below for my H/W...

 

[adhoc]

I've got a Dell 2000fp.

I haven't noticed any negative issues regarding pixel responses (25ms average), color, or image scaling. Scaling is quite noticeable within the windows desktop, but who would ever use a resolution that is not native to an LCD when in the Windows GUI?

In games, the scaling does not have any effect that I can see (includes NWN, UT2003, NOLF2, etc), and there is no ghosting either. This monitor has replaced my Viewsonic PF815, which ~3 years ago was top of the line...

 

[blstriker]

My dad has the 1702 and I've played on it. No problems at all. I have dual nec 1850e lcd and game on these with no problems at all. I love dual lcd's!

 

[Kingofcomputer]

25ms = 40 fps, not 40Hz.
more than enough for movie (24 fps), ntsc (24 fps), and even pal (30 fps).

 

[Staz]

I went from a Princeton Graphics EO2010 21" CRT montior to a Viewsonic VG800 18" LCD screen, and I like it better. First of all, it's much easier on the eyes, no eye strain. My games run just fine, and even have better color depth. I even play UT-2003 on it at 1280x1024 with my ATI Radeon 8500 card and it does just fine, no noticeable ghosting. I only see a little ghosting when you have a fast moving dark foreground object again a light background. Specs are nice, see below for link. Only downside is no DVI, but most people couldn't tell the diff anyway. And for $569 at Newegg, you simply can't beat that price for an 18" LCD!!!

http://www.viewsonic.com/products/lcd_vg800.htm

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Kingofcomputer
25ms = 40 fps, not 40Hz.
more than enough for movie (24 fps), ntsc (24 fps), and even pal (30 fps).

Pixels on an LCD can be manipulated individually. What does that have to do with frames per second? Besides, 40hz would probably be a more accurate label. A particular pixel can cycle (turn on and off) 40 times a second, or 40hz.

You've proven your ignorance regarding FFD in the past, and it seems you've learned nothing since. FFD has absolutely nothing to do with PVA/MVA. I suggest you read the LCD review at Tech-Report. They bluntly state ghosting is still an issue, even with low-response monitors. FFD is a step in the right direction.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: zippy

Originally posted by: Keego
From that article's forum talk:

The latest word (from an NEC employee, in the ArsTechnica forums) is that it will be at least another year (!) before the technology is mainstream. Apparently it is quite expensive, and will be used initially in very high-end products.

I dunno, if you check my thread you'll see that I received a response from Envision that FFD would be available in November on an 18" LCD for only $699 (analog only). I suppose one or the other is wrong - only time will tell. Or a few more emails to LCD manufacturers.

zippy, I'm a skeptic by nature. Until I see a product link from NEC/Mitsubishi, I have no intention of believing an email from an employee that may or may not have the slightest clue what FFD is.

 

[Kingofcomputer]

read mitsubishi's FFD digest dated oct 2001:
http://www.mitsubishielectric.co.jp/service/tft_tech/new/img/sid_2001_29_03.pdf

read Fujitsu MVA doc:
http://www.fme.fujitsu.com/products/displays/pdf/LCD_Overview%20web.pdf

read PVA journal dated dec 2000:
http://www.k-ids.or.kr/jid/paper/jid_1/dsp-1_pva.pdf

read BenQ's "about LCD response time":
http://www.benq.com.tw/tw/products/lcd/recharge/tips/0806.htm

 

[SteelyKen]

For a serious gamer, LCDs are not "there" yet. As his jelliness stated above, there are several reasons to avoid LCDs besides the response time. I was in the market for a new monitor recently and after thorough research I knew that CRTs were the only choice I had. Of course there are issues with tubes also, but the advantages for the gamer make the choice a no-brainer.

 

[adhoc]

For a serious gamer, LCDs are not "there" yet. As his jelliness stated above, there are several reasons to avoid LCDs besides the response time. I was in the market for a new monitor recently and after thorough research I knew that CRTs were the only choice I had. Of course there are issues with tubes also, but the advantages for the gamer make the choice a no-brainer.

I don't believe that statement. It is too static in fact and I believe it is already false. I have proof right in front of me that my LCD is great for playing games and watching movies. I do consider myself extremely paranoid about the quality of anything I own (which is part of the reason I own a Nikon D100 ), and I researched long and hard about getting a $1000+ piece of hardware (Dell 2000fp). The end result is that I'm never going back to CRTs...

 

[DrDel]

I have a 19" ViewSonic VX900 LCD and haven't looked back since... ut2k3, nwn, rtxw, q3, and all the new demos in the past week have all looked sweet.... no regrets.. I am loving it

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Kingofcomputer
read mitsubishi's FFD digest dated oct 2001:
http://www.mitsubishielectric.co.jp/service/tft_tech/new/img/sid_2001_29_03.pdf

FFD will decrease overall response time for color and grayscale transitions.

read Fujitsu MVA doc:
http://www.fme.fujitsu.com/products/displays/pdf/LCD_Overview%20web.pdf

MVA increases visual quality at non-optimal angles. Meaning the display will look better for anybody watching the screen at an extreme angle.

read PVA journal dated dec 2000:
http://www.k-ids.or.kr/jid/paper/jid_1/dsp-1_pva.pdf

Same as MVA.

read BenQ's "about LCD response time":
http://www.benq.com.tw/tw/products/lcd/recharge/tips/0806.htm

Find me a link that isn't in Taiwanese.

Wonderful articles. A shame have yet to prove you understand a damn one of them.

 

[BFG10K]

CRTs are the still the kings for gaming, especially for FPSes.

You have higher refresh rates, no ghosting, the ability to run at any resolution you like, better colours and saturation and much lower costs for much bigger tube sizes.

 

[zippy]

To be honest, if you're a hard core gamer, you're still better off with a CRT. Being able to use other resolutions without it looking like crap is good and some people seem to notice ghosting more than others. Until LCDs get their response times down to 15ms or lower, it probably won't be THE BEST thing for everyone. Another big thing that holds people back is, with 17"+ LCDs, using the native resolution in games. Not everyone has a GF4 Ti4200 or better, so more recent games don't look as good at 1280x1024.

I'm very pleased with my Planar CT1904Z with UT2k3 - I get good frame rates from my GF4 Ti4600 and using the DVI connector, I'm very happy. It looks good, no real noticeable ghosting, and this GF4 can handle 1280x1024, so I'm set.

 

[JellyBaby]

Looks like LCD volumes won't surpass CRT sales until 2004.