• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Looking for WS 22" Monitor

E

Evacide

Member
I'm looking to upgrade from my 19" Samsung 940BF and want it to be good for gaming and movies. I've read some bad things about the Samsung 226BW so I'm not sure if I want to get that. After researching different monitors, I'm more confused than ever. I'm kind of leaning towards getting this one because of all the good reviews, but I've never even heard of the brand before.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16824252008
Anyone happy with their 22" monitor? I'm looking to spend <$450 but might spend up to $500 if it's really good.
 
Yes, HP 22'', i saw it in the store and ... forget all SAMSUNGS or DELL, SKY CLEAR and
glossy screen, only thing i don't like how it's build.
 
Originally posted by: GEOrifle
Yes, HP 22'', i saw it in the store and ... forget all SAMSUNGS or DELL, SKY CLEAR and
glossy screen, only thing i don't like how it's build.
Click to expand...

i've seen some of the glossy screens in the store and it seems like it's hard to actually concentrate on the screen since they reflected everything. is it really a good feature?
 
I personally loathe these glossy screen things. Looks nice and sexy in the store, but actual usage? No thanks.

My 22" is a ViewSonic. It's an el-cheapo TN panel that costed me about $300. You can probably get it for less now.

It's okay for gaming and movies, just be aware that TN panels are all (AFAIK) 6-bit panels and thus can't show 16M 'true' colors, only via dithering.

And that ChiMei you linked is okay. It's also a TN panel. In fact ChiMei provides the panels for many OEMs like Dell, so chances are you'll get the same panel regardless of brand.
 
Supposedly the LG Flatron L226 models are the best 22" LCDs. At least I havent seen it dethroned from Xknight's list yet.
 
Eh, 22" = TNfest 🙁

If you cannot go with a 20" like the Acer AL2051W (P-MVA), or perhaps a good cheaper 24" like the LG L246W or Dell's offering, then i'd suggest the HP W2207.

Though the W2207 is indeed a TN, due to the gloss finish it uses, viewing angles issues are lessened, & contrast is far superior to anything w/o a gloss finish.

Unless you work in extremely bright lights, i very much like glossy finish LCDs, as they simply cannot be beat.
 
What exactly is TN and what's so bad about it? And I wanted a widescreen so that I could have more screen space. I'm thinking about getting the W2207 as it seems to be the best 22" within what I'm willing to spend.
 
The basics on TNs is that they're fast, but don't look as good. Most TNs (maybe all? not quite sure on this point) don't have true 8-bit panels, so true color range isn't on par with the better types of panels.

EDIT: TN is a type of panel that an LCD can use. For more (and really really detailed) information, check the LCD thread, stickied at the top of this forum.

Do you really want a 22"? If you just want the resolution, Acer has a really nice 8-bit P-MVA (I believe) for a really nice price, except it's a 20"er.
 
Originally posted by: Aflac
The basics on TNs is that they're fast, but don't look as good. Most TNs (maybe all? not quite sure on this point) don't have true 8-bit panels, so true color range isn't on par with the better types of panels.

EDIT: TN is a type of panel that an LCD can use. For more (and really really detailed) information, check the LCD thread, stickied at the top of this forum.

Do you really want a 22"? If you just want the resolution, Acer has a really nice 8-bit P-MVA (I believe) for a really nice price, except it's a 20"er.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
Originally posted by: n7
If you cannot go with a 20" like the Acer AL2051W (P-MVA)...
Click to expand...

Evacide, want to really start understanding what's important in LCDs?
Read.
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2049206&enterthread=y

 
I hope I don't regret this 😛. I took your advice and ordered one. Looks like a great deal and just what I need (my 19" LCD will be replacing my mom's ancient 17" CRT anyway so it's not like I'm throwing away this monitor).
 
You won't.

Is that Acer great? No.

But great costs well over $500, so getting good is a hell of a lot better than just okay.

TN = terrible to okay
VA = good to excellent
IPS = superb

Just my primitive rating system, that simple as it is, is still very accurate overall.

Using my Samsung 204T & 204B as examples:
I paid ~ $900 to get the 204T (was quite high end at the time).
I paid ~ $320 for my 204B.

Guess which one i'd buy again if i had to pick from those two...yeah, the 204T for three times as much.

I feel that the monitor is one of the most important components on a PC, since what do you spend the most time focused on?
 
Oh god.

I hate you for showing me that link.

I canceled my previous order, which included a 216BW, this morning.

Now this shows up...

AHHHHH.

EDIT: oh wait. This screen has a glossy coating. count me out.
 
I wasn't looking for top of the line stuff. I just wanted something that could give me good picture in games and desktop without problems. This seems to be exactly what I'm looking for. Thanks for the help and advice.
 
Originally posted by: Aflac
Oh god.

I hate you for showing me that link.

I canceled my previous order, which included a 216BW, this morning.

Now this shows up...

AHHHHH.

EDIT: oh wait. This screen has a glossy coating. count me out.
Click to expand...

Glossy = 😀

Dunno why people dislike it, since seriously, if you work under florescent lighting, well, maybe you should try reworking your lighting setup (unless it's at work etc.).

The glare/reflection complaints are usually all mental issues, since once you've used the glossy displays for a bit, you don't look for that, your eyes see the brilliant picture, not a slight reflection.

I realize it's preference, but it really is largely mental.

When glossy screen notebooks started coming a few years ago, my first reaction was not postive.

But then i actually started using them & glossy desktop displays, & in no time, my opinion had completely reversed.

Also, the thing i find really funny about the objection to glossy displays is this: how in the world did you guys survive on CRTs so long?!
CRTs are a glaring reflection-fest, so how is it you could tolerate those? 😕
 
Originally posted by: Evacide
I wasn't looking for top of the line stuff. I just wanted something that could give me good picture in games and desktop without problems. This seems to be exactly what I'm looking for. Thanks for the help and advice.
Click to expand...

You're welcome!!

I'm just really glad I could help...😀
 
Originally posted by: n7
Glossy = 😀
Click to expand...

😀

Originally posted by: n7
Also, the thing i find really funny about the objection to glossy displays is this: how in the world did you guys survive on CRTs so long?!
CRTs are a glaring reflection-fest, so how is it you could tolerate those? 😕
Click to expand...

That is SO true! I guess many of them didn't really think about it until you said it.
Now the cats got their tongues...😛
 
I have been using my W2207 for 3 months now. Overall it's a good monitor. The thing I don't like the most is the vertical viewing angle. It's not as good as my old viewsonic VP912. And sometimes when surfing the web, some text looks like it has shadows. I have used Monaco Optix to calibrate the monitor. I would say it looks a little "yellower" after calibration. For example. the gray background of this forum looks more brownish than before. I bought it because it's the only 22" glossy monitor. Glossy really improve the contrast, esp the black.

Anantech just did a review
http://anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=3054
 
Yesterday I returned my brand new Samsung 226BW. It was a fine monitor but the overall feeling is that LCD is (still) not as good as a good CRT (for gaming).

The main point in my decision was finding out that I can't live without pixel mapping and aspect ratio scaling.

I know, I know, the nVidia cards can do that on any monitor. But I won't/can't spend the money on the monitor and on a new card.

And then other little things started to annoy me in this monitor/technology.

- The 60 fps limit if I activate VSync. I'm used to a 100Hz/100fps experience with my CRT (at 1600:1200 I'm able to go to 75Hz/75fps with VSync). I could deactivate VSync but I don't like image tearing and what's the point of having a card that, amongst other things, can give me 100+ fps on most games if I can't use it?

- Less true colors than a CRT. Maybe it's all in my mind but I think I really notice the dithering and banding (maybe the fact that I got a C panel helped...).

On the end I started thinking that I was making a downgrade instead of a upgrade. I hope LCDs advance and become really better than CRTs because I really like the 16:10 view area (as long as it can give me a 4:3 image as well). Now, they're only just as good or even not as good in some areas.

When we have affordable 100Hz LCDs with 8bit color, then I'll make the jump. I only hope my fateful CRT lasts that long 🙂

ps: I'm talking from a gamer's perspective. For some other uses, I think LCDs are already better than CRTs. But I'm first a gamer, then the other boring stuff 😀
 
There are several LCDs that are capable of hardware pixel mapping and scaling. In general, almost all of the monitors with "multimedia"-style connectivity have native mapping and scaling for all of the inputs (e.g., NEC 20WMGX2, BenQ FP241(V)W(Z), several Dells, etc.).

IMO, image tearing is a complete non-issue at high-enough framerates. Your eyes are barely capable of resolving motion artifacts/effects at 60 frames; double the framerate and there's very little you'll be able to notice, even if you look for it. Ergo, if you have a card that can put out 100+ frames in the games you play, you should be able to turn off vsync without issue.

I think color reproduction and display lag are the two major issues remaining with LCD technology, and they're both insignificant or even irrelevant to the general consumer. I actually care quite a bit about both issues, so I still have CRT TVs and CRT monitors hooked up for gaming and whatnot, but I still use LCDs for everyday computing.
 
Originally posted by: shiranai
There are several LCDs that are capable of hardware pixel mapping and scaling. In general, almost all of the monitors with "multimedia"-style connectivity have native mapping and scaling for all of the inputs (e.g., NEC 20WMGX2, BenQ FP241(V)W(Z), several Dells, etc.).

IMO, image tearing is a complete non-issue at high-enough framerates. Your eyes are barely capable of resolving motion artifacts/effects at 60 frames; double the framerate and there's very little you'll be able to notice, even if you look for it. Ergo, if you have a card that can put out 100+ frames in the games you play, you should be able to turn off vsync without issue.

I think color reproduction and display lag are the two major issues remaining with LCD technology, and they're both insignificant or even irrelevant to the general consumer. I actually care quite a bit about both issues, so I still have CRT TVs and CRT monitors hooked up for gaming and whatnot, but I still use LCDs for everyday computing.
Click to expand...


The Nec doesn't have hardware scalling, I think. The BenQ and the Dells were outside of my budget.

As for tearing, you're right but, in those games where my card can't put the 100+ fps (almost all of the new releases), I notice the tearing 🙁🙁

Finally, the color reproduction issue. I totally agree with you. I also prefer a CRT for gaming. That's why I decided to stay with a CRT 🙂
 
Originally posted by: SuinusLatinus
Originally posted by: shiranai
There are several LCDs that are capable of hardware pixel mapping and scaling. In general, almost all of the monitors with "multimedia"-style connectivity have native mapping and scaling for all of the inputs (e.g., NEC 20WMGX2, BenQ FP241(V)W(Z), several Dells, etc.).

IMO, image tearing is a complete non-issue at high-enough framerates. Your eyes are barely capable of resolving motion artifacts/effects at 60 frames; double the framerate and there's very little you'll be able to notice, even if you look for it. Ergo, if you have a card that can put out 100+ frames in the games you play, you should be able to turn off vsync without issue.

I think color reproduction and display lag are the two major issues remaining with LCD technology, and they're both insignificant or even irrelevant to the general consumer. I actually care quite a bit about both issues, so I still have CRT TVs and CRT monitors hooked up for gaming and whatnot, but I still use LCDs for everyday computing.
Click to expand...


The Nec doesn't have hardware scalling, I think. The BenQ and the Dells were outside of my budget.

As for tearing, you're right but, in those games where my card can't put the 100+ fps (almost all of the new releases), I notice the tearing 🙁🙁

Finally, the color reproduction issue. I totally agree with you. I also prefer a CRT for gaming. That's why I decided to stay with a CRT 🙂
Click to expand...

The NEC has hardware scaling. I own one, and I have my computer and PS2 plugged into it. I can scale the resolutions to whatever I want, including tiny 1:1 for the 480i PS2 ^^.

Actually, I'm not right about image tearing; must have had a brainfart when I posted that. Image tearing is based on the refresh rate of the monitor, not the framerate of the video buffer; the entire problem of tearing arises from a mismatch between the refresh rate and the buffer fill rate. And there's actually more to the overall issue than that - framerate above your monitor's refresh rate is wasted, because you'll never be able to see it; the monitor drops all of the extra "in-between" frames no matter how many there are.

So the actual issue between LCDs and CRTs isn't vsync - there's no reason (I know of) to disable vsync unless it's somehow dropping your framerate below the monitor refresh. Whether you have a CRT or an LCD, 200fps from your video card doesn't matter a damn bit if your monitor isn't 200Hz also. A 60Hz CRT isn't any better, from a refresh/vsync standpoint, than a 60Hz LCD (ignoring response time/display lag issues). In both cases, you only see 60fps, even if your video card is doing 200fps.

So really, what we're looking at here is a CRT @75Hz, or an LCD @60Hz. I'm willing to bet that most people can't even feel, let alone see, a 15Hz difference at those refresh rates. That said, a higher (and adjustable) refresh rate is definitely another plus in favor of CRTs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top