Need 19" monitor that can do 1600x1200 at 85hz any suggestions?

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: CarrotStick
So aperture grille monitors are better than shadow mask?

Aperture grill is better for color purity/photos
Shadow mask is better for fine details/text 0.24mm aperture grill has about the same detail level/text readability as 0.26mm shadow mask.

If you get a refurb, I would stay away from aperture grill. In my experience they are far more likely to develop convergence problems over time, particularly in the corners of the screen.

 

[Tostada]

Originally posted by: glugglug

Originally posted by: CarrotStick
So aperture grille monitors are better than shadow mask?

Aperture grill is better for color purity/photos
Shadow mask is better for fine details/text 0.24mm aperture grill has about the same detail level/text readability as 0.26mm shadow mask.

With all other things being equal, that would be true. The fact, however, is that shadow mask monitors are made more for the budget market, and high-end CRT's are all aperture grille these days.

A few years ago, you could put an old Trinitron next to a good Hitachi SuperScan shadow mask and you would see that the shadow mask had noticably better text clarity. Trinitron/Diamondtron screens have gotten better, though, and I don't see anybody making high-end shadow mask displays.

If you want the clearest text, you get LCD. If you want the best color, you get aperture grille. If you want something cheap, you get shadow mask. That's really the only market for shadow mask screens these days.

While you can point to advantages of each technology, I would say that currently it is very easy to justify the blanket statement that aperture grille is better than shadow mask.

 

[glugglug]

The iiyama is shadow mask. I'd hardly call it budget...

If you want decent resolutions, you don't consider LCDs.

 

[jjyiz28]

Originally posted by: Kingofcomputer
Eizo.

eizo, its the most priciest 19incher, but the only on ethat i know of that could do the highest refresh rates at 1600x1200, or wutever. i myself own a sony g420.

 

[Lyfer]

You can save a ton of cash if you opt for a cheaper KDS 19inch Xtreme Flat which will do 1600x1200@75HZ for $99 ($199-$99 MIR). The KDS is easily available at any local OfficeMax/OfficeDepot. My buddy has a Viewsonic P90 and he plays BF:Vietnam at 1600x1200@85HZ and I can barely tell the difference with mines running at 75HZ. Save the cash on something else!

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Tostada
If you want the clearest text, you get LCD. If you want the best color, you get aperture grille. If you want something cheap, you get shadow mask. That's really the only market for shadow mask screens these days.

That's probably the most succinct description that I've seen yet for the current display market. Cheers! :beer:

 

[So]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Tostada
If you want the clearest text, you get LCD. If you want the best color, you get aperture grille. If you want something cheap, you get shadow mask. That's really the only market for shadow mask screens these days.

That's probably the most succinct description that I've seen yet for the current display market. Cheers! :beer:

Agreed.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42
My Viewsonic P95f can do it. It can actually do 1600x1200@92Hz, but my card doesn't like that.

Edit: Here is a picture, just so you have proof.

Proof? Hah. My monitor does even better.

I think it's pretty funny that 75 Hz was seen as ideal a few years ago, but now it's just not good enough.

Yeah, now I can see flicker at 85Hz. I've been spoiled by 120Hz@ 1024x768. That's on a 21" Nokia 445Pro by the way.
Just checked - for the record, it can do 1600x1200@85Hz. The flicker is noticable, but not serious. It is pretty sharp though; text is still quite readable. Just tiny.
445Pro's show up occasionally on the FS/T forum for under $250 sometimes; mine was $235 shipped.

 

[beatle]

Too bad Hitachi all but stopped production of CRTs. They were the best, IMO. The CM772 does 1600x1200 @ 85Hz and is also a flat shadow mask (no retention wire shadows like on aperture grill monitors).

 

[ITinerant]

http://www.sel.sony.com/SEL/consumer/ss5/home/displaymonitors/corporateseries/cpd-g400_specs.shtml

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

I think it's pretty funny that 75 Hz was seen as ideal a few years ago, but now it's just not good enough.

Yeah, now I can see flicker at 85Hz. I've been spoiled by 120Hz@ 1024x768. That's on a 21" Nokia 445Pro by the way. Just checked - for the record, it can do 1600x1200@85Hz. The flicker is noticable, but not serious.

That's part of the problem though, ironically enough. Those high-end monitors with enough video bandwidth to do extremely high refresh rates at lower resolutions, often also have a shorter-persistance phosphor coating to match, so that you don't have "CRT ghosting". Yet therefore, if you run at a really high resolution, at a necessarily lower refresh rate, then the refresh becomes more noticable than it would be otherwise. Also, any potential "flicker" on larger screens tends to be more noticable, simply because no matter what part of the screen you are focused on, generally some other portion of the screen is in your peripheral vision, and that tends to amplify the perception of flicker. (If you can understand that, I know I didn't word it very well, sorry.)

I used to play spaceship shoot-em-up games on my games consoles, on a nice little monochrome composite display when I was younger. For one, the display was small and easy to fit in the space that I had for it, and two, it probably actually improved my gameplay, because of the phosphor trails streaming off of the moving pixels. (Mentioned as an example of CRT ghosting, due to long-persistance phosphors.)