Please recommend 20+ inch LCD monitor for GAMING

[dredd2929]

I'm shopping around for a good LCD monitor that won't ghost when I'm playing games. I'd like one that is at least 20 inches diagonal. I've had my eye on the 2405FPW, but I've seen some issues people have had with widescreen displays and I'm wondering if it's worth the hassle. My video card is a 7800GTX.

Thanks,
J. J.

 

[bdoople]

Not to be rude.. but use the Search feature. There was actually a very well written and very informative review on the 2405 I just read that can't be that hard to locate.

 

[dredd2929]

Oh I understand, I don't think you're being rude. I just wanted some other opinions, that's all. I don't have the cash to impulsively buy a $500+ piece of computer equipment...

J. J.

 

[SickBeast]

I have the 2405 and it's absolutely beautiful for gaming.

The one caveat is that it requires massive GPU power to run it at 1920x1200. My X800Pro can only cut it in HL2 and Far Cry. For other games I need to turn down settings. I'd say you'd need AT LEAST a 512mb GTX to push this thing.

 

[dredd2929]

Is the 2405FPW as tall as it is wide? I mean from the bottom of the base to the top of the screen. The specs on Dell's website say it's 22" wide and 22" tall compressed, but from the picture this doesn't seem accurate. The space I have has enough room for a monitor that's 22" wide, but not 22" tall, so I'm hoping this isn't the case.

J. J.

 

[liquid51]

well, even if it is, there are alternative mounting options available. http://www.ergotron.com/3_products/default.asp for example
I have plenty of room on my desk, but I plan on using one of the desk mount arms anyway.

 

[videoclone]

I have a 2405FPW and I wish I got one of these sooner! It?s the best computer related hardware money can buy! ^___^ Video cards and CPU?s come and go but the 2405FPW will last "longer"

 

[imported_Doughboy]

If you are the type to play the latest games that comes out and buy all the latest video cards every year to run those latest games at 1920x1200 then go ahead and buy the 2405. I'm sure it's super. I wish I could afford these luxuries in life. My purchases are a little more careful because they are a little more infrequent. I like my 1600x1200 res. just fine for gaming if you need more screen for applications add another monitor and have 3200x1200...just a thought... I like mine a lot. It's a pity to waste that 2nd DVI port on your 7800GTX isn't it. Dual view is great. Don't get me wrong, if I could afford the 2405 I'd be all smiles but for gaming it tends to be a bit of a ball & chain driving 1920x1200 all the time. Think about the future, not about having the best of the best for you signature. It's your money and you have to think about what it's worth to you personally. Good luck and may you spend your $$$ wisely.

 

[dredd2929]

Why would I have to drive 1920x1200 in order to fill the screen? Aren't there lower resolutions that are 16:9 ratio?

 

[Aznguy1872]

If you go with a monitor that size, be sure to have a graphics card to handle the large resolution.

 

[dredd2929]

OK help me out here. Why is it necessary to buy the best graphics card every 6 months when I have the 2405FPW...what's wrong with running it at something with a 16:9 ratio, but lower than 1920x1200?

While we're on the subject, any recommendations for a 20+ inch LCD that is NOT widescreen that is suitable for gaming?

 

[Eureka]

Originally posted by: dredd2929
OK help me out here. Why is it necessary to buy the best graphics card every 6 months when I have the 2405FPW...what's wrong with running it at something with a 16:9 ratio, but lower than 1920x1200?

While we're on the subject, any recommendations for a 20+ inch LCD that is NOT widescreen that is suitable for gaming?

Bad stretching and image distortion I believe...

Norm

 

[dredd2929]

Originally posted by: cevilgenius

Bad stretching and image distortion I believe...

Norm

If the aspect ratio is 16:9, why would the display be stretched? And for that matter why would there be image distortion? Is it because the 2405 is simply not designed to run at resolutions any lower than 1920x1200?

 

[phaxmohdem]

Um Dell 2001FP Dell Monitors rule for their prices Too bad you can't say the same about their Comps in general.

Dell 2001FP = 1600x1200 res && cheaper than 2405FPW Propbably going to be slightly taller though

 

[Eureka]

I'm guessing that's exactly the problem with LCDs... the pixels are solid, rather than being 'drawn' like on a CRT.

Norm

 

[dredd2929]

Originally posted by: cevilgenius
I'm guessing that's exactly the problem with LCDs... the pixels are solid, rather than being 'drawn' like on a CRT.

Norm

OK, that makes sense. I'm totally new to LCDs guys, so I appreciate your patience with me. I have no qualms with the 2001FP, as long as there isn't any horrendous ghosting in games. If I buy it and my games ghost a lot...I will cry.

 

[Keeir]

There are a few reasons why a 2405 needs alot of graphics power

#1. 1920 by 1200 is ALOT of pixels. In comparison, its around 20% more pixels than 1600 by 1200.

#2. Alot of games aren't optimized for widescreen. If a game is able to support widescreen, there -might- be a small performance hit for going widescreen. Would be nice to see a quality article on this...

#3. LCDs look best at resolutions such that a single pixel on the screen can be matched with a single output area. In the 2405's case, that means 1920 by 1200 or 910 by 600 (2 display pixels for each signal pixel). Other resolutions won't look as good. Since your probably not going to want to play in 910 by 600 (if the game can even support this) then your "stuck" with the higher resolution.


Some points in favour of the 2405.

#1. You can do 1:1 pixel scaling. This means that you can do different resolutions, but with black filler around the edges. Note, this is LCD black, not off, so some light leakage from these sections may happen.

#2. It has alot of connections

#3. It has been widely reported to be a "better" resolution scalar. This means that non-native resolutions are generally better than other monitors. Its a personal tolerance issue mainly.


As to the 2001FP, it has a pretty poor viewing angles and black levels that are for me unacceptable. Otherwise, it is a servicable monitor and depending on your level of sensitivity to black levels could be a good choice.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: dredd2929

Originally posted by: cevilgenius

Bad stretching and image distortion I believe...

Norm

If the aspect ratio is 16:9, why would the display be stretched? And for that matter why would there be image distortion? Is it because the 2405 is simply not designed to run at resolutions any lower than 1920x1200?

Even if 1920x1200 is 16:10 as is 1680x1050, you still have to scale it. The LCD has 2304000 pixels; the pixels don't magically enlarge.

The same thing happens with CRTs, SEDs, and OLEDs. CRTs have the best analog scaling. LCDs, SEDs, and OLEDs have to do it digitally since all of the aforementioned have individually-addressable pixels. Think of it like analog zoom and digital zoom on your digicam. The analog is better quality 99.9% of the time. Usually the effects with analog scaling are blurriness, versus digital which usually yields blockiness.

When you compare the scaling of two monitors you'll want to make sure both are in monitor-scaling mode, rather than graphics card-scaling mode.

 

[dredd2929]

Originally posted by: xtknight

The same thing happens with CRTs, SEDs, and OLEDs. CRTs have the best analog scaling. LCDs, SEDs, and OLEDs have to do it digitally since all of the aforementioned have individually-addressable pixels. Think of it like analog zoom and digital zoom on your digicam.

OK, I see now, thanks.

I'm still open to other suggestions for a 20+ inch LCD that isn't widescreen...

 

[Hikari]

As long as you run at 16:10 ratio, things look fine. If my 2005fpw can scale to the next res below 1680x1050 and not look bad, I'm sure the 2405fpw can do 1680x1050 and look fine. Older LCDs weren't as good at this. Even my work laptop can go from 1400x1050 to 1024x768 and look fine (same ratio again).

 

[dredd2929]

Well this is getting interesting. I guess I should have stated from the outset that I'm not picky about image sharpness...I'm currently using a 10 year old Viewsonic P815 CRT (not even flatscreen) and I like it just fine. It still works well, it's just that the thing goes back pretty far...with my new desk, my face sits about 6 inches from screen and that's no good, even though this display produces very little eyestrain even after long consistent use. Plus, it heats up my room quite a bit--which is nice in the winter time, but where I live there's little need for secondary heating

Bearing that in mind, I still would like a high quality display that has very little ghosting in fast-paced games. I feel that the display is one component of a computer system that is worth investing a lot of $$$ into, and for that reason I want to make sure I make the best choice.