NEC/Mitsubishi 18.1 in 1860NX vs. Samsung 172T

[kornermi]

172T has advantages in pixel size, response time, and viewing angle. 1860 NX is bigger. Both look cool. Both has DVI inputs. Price is comparable around $ 500. Which one should I get? I appreciate any inputs from users who have experiences on either one of them. Thanks.

 

[Jadow]

my friend has an 1860NX. Star Wars Galaxies plays great with no ghosting (but its not the fastest moving game) and Windows looks AWESOME!

 

[kornermi]

That's good to know, because right now I am leaning toward 1860NX. I heard from someone 172T is too bright, which causes some eye strain. On paper, 172T should be technologically superior, but I think at natural resolution of 1280X1028 (did I get it right?) the text size may be too small in 17 inch monitor. Size does matter in this case, doesn't it?

 

[egale]

1280x1024 is borderline too small on a 17" crt but not a 17" lcd. A 17" lcd is almost like a 19" crt.

 

[GaryShandling]

The 172T is superior on all specifications over the 1860nx and is a better quality monitor, I wouldnt go with that nec, but rather the 17" 16ms response, its pointless to go for 1 inch extra while sacrificing major specs.

 

[Oblivious]

I have a 172t and it is awesome. Brilliant colors (500:1 contrast ratio) but not too bright and excellent response time. Don't settle. The 172t is the top of the line.