Monitor is going bad and need help in choosing a new monitor?

[pitupepito2000]

Hi guys,

The monitor that I am using right now is a pretty old one. It is a Nec MultiSync 50, a little older than 10 years, it is a 15-inch . After a lot of loyal service it is now time to put it down, since it flickers a lot all of the sudden when I turn it on or off or whenever I logout, It is now starting to flicker and do this weird ticking out of the blue.

I have been trying to decide between these two monitors:
monitor 1
monitor 2

So Anandtechers, what would you suggest me? If you have used a Samsung monitor what was your impression. Please don't give me links to do RTFM. I have spent a lot of time reading material onine.

Thanks,
pitupepito

 

[ThisIsMatt]

Well, I'd say either spend the extra money on a nice 19" (one that can do 1600x1200 at 85hz or higher), or just get a really good 17". However, I seem to be affected by refresh rates a lot more than other people I know. I picked up a Mitsubishi diamond pro 930SB for $266 shipped from dell not too long ago.

 

[pitupepito2000]

ThisIsMatt: thanks for the comment. Yeah I agree with you if I had the money I would spend in a better monitor, right now I am unemployed, and I don't want to tap too much into my savings, I just want to get something that will do a large screen and still be a good monitor, but I was looking at reviews, and they all semmed good.

Any more opinions.

 

[boyRacer]

Out of those two... 955DF... i was going to buy that around 2 years ago... ended up buying a Sony G400 because those guys at mwave were being stupid. :frown:

 

[pitupepito2000]

thanks for the options,
please keep them coming

 

[nsafreak]

Definitely go with the 955DF. Samsung's monitor's are pretty inexpensive but they have a great picture. In fact I'd say that the Samsung my parent's bought rivals my FD Trinitron.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

If I had to buy a monitor in the $200 range right now, it would definitely be the 955DF. There are better 19 inchers, but they're more like $250-$300 and up. You're not likely to find anything as good as the 955DF for $200 delivered unless there's a rebate on one of the $250 models.

 

[ViRGE]

Another vote for the 955; I have its little brother, the 757, and it's great.

 

[pitupepito2000]

keep the opinions coming,
pitupepito

 

[UglyCasanova]

I used to have the 955df and it is a nice little monitor, but I would suggest you hunt down some kind of deal on the 900nf if you can.

 

[Hubris]

I'd stay away from the 995 IF you plan on running it at 1600X1200. The refresh rate on it at that resolution is horrible and kept giving me headaches, so I was stuck using 1280X1024. Thank god I've got a 2001FP now. 16x12 LCD goodness.

 

[OrganizedChaos]

Originally posted by: UglyCassanova
I used to have the 955df and it is a nice little monitor, but I would suggest you hunt down some kind of deal on the 900nf if you can.

what he said, i have a 900nf and a 955df running dualhead next to each other. 900nf makes the 955df look silly

 

[pitupepito2000]

UglyCassanova, OrganizedChaos as I stated above if I could afford it I would get a better monitor, but right now I am in a tight budget. I can only afford something in between these two monitors, and I am trying to go with a good online compnay like newegg, because if I know that they have good customer support. As I stated above my monitor is going bad, and I use the computer a lot while I am at home, I would say that I use the computer between 40 to 50 hours per week.

So, I am trying to decide between these two monitors, do you guys think these two monitors are good and if so which one, or should I go with a better 17 inch monitor.

Thanks,
pitupepito

 

[Blastman]

I have a Viewsonic E70f which is basically the 17? version of the E90f (19?). They are $121 at Newegg. So if you really want to stay under budget I heartily recommend this monitor.

The color saturation (graphics) and text quality I would rate as excellent. It has a very good 0.21 dot pitch which is the same dot pitch on Viewsonics higher priced monitors. When I bought it I compared it to a lot of other monitors and it was even better overall than a much more expensive Sony.

You?d be limited to a resolution of 1024x768 at 87Hz because the refresh rates at 1280x1024 are only 66Hz ?too slow. But if that is ok it?s a very good monitor.