Trust Ebay for an LCD Monitor?

[ccubed]

I'm looking into buying a new gaming system and will need to upgrade my old 19" CRT (yes it's very sad here these days.) I've been looking at the 22" LG L227WT and the Samsung 24" 245BW. In the brick and mortar world it looks like I'd be spending $300+tax on the LG and $420+tax on the Samsung. But if I go Ebay and take advantage of some deals, I can get the LG for about $250 or the Samsung for about $390 total (including taxes and/or shipping.)

I'm worried about dead pixels and other LCD problems with the Ebay purchases since it will be a major hassle to deal with any kinds of returns. With local stores I can at least drag the thing back myself. But with my budget right now those savings are really hard to pass up (and pretty much mean the 24" is out of the question.)

So what are your opinions and/or experiences with Ebay monitors?

Also, with a Radeon HD 4870, will I see a big difference between 22" and 24"? I know that means a resolution jump (and one the GPU can handle) but that's a lot of money for me right now.

Thanks for your help.

 

[lopri]

If it's an individual, I'd say no. If it's some middle man with a big and/or consistent inventory, I'd think about it depends on the price and the seller's reputation. I've got my HP 3065 from eBay and thankfully no defect.

 

[ccubed]

And would the resolution difference between a 24" and a 22" be worth the $150+? I've never really checked them out in person.

 

[Blazer7]

I would say yes. It's not just the higher res but the size of the dot too. Most 22" have a native res of 1680x1050 with a dot size of .282 while most 24" have a native res of 1920x1200 with a dot size of .270

The smaller dot size means that the 24? are harder to manufacture and thus more expensive. Speaking purely of res the difference is half a mil pixels and that means that you?ll need more power from your graphics board(s) to hit the same frame rates on the 24?.

 

[Candymancan]

Originally posted by: Blazer7
I would say yes. It's not just the higher res but the size of the dot too. Most 22" have a native res of 1680x1050 with a dot size of .282 while most 24" have a native res of 1920x1200 with a dot size of .270

The smaller dot size means that the 24? are harder to manufacture and thus more expensive. Speaking purely of res the difference is half a mil pixels and that means that you?ll need more power from your graphics board(s) to hit the same frame rates on the 24?.

Maybe im ignorant on this response, but how would a bigger monitor have a lower Dot pitch or pixel pitch then a smaller sized monitor ? The resolution is bigger but only because the screen is bigger.

Do you have proof of this ?

I know 19 inchs widescreen that use 1680x1050 resolutions which is a 22 inch resolution have a very small dot pitch around .22 or .23 and the same amount of pixel's that a 22 inch has, the picture on them is far superior to any 22-24 inch monitor cuss of that. Screen size tho is what most people go for and TBH i cant stand playing video games with huge dot pitch's like these 22-24 inch monitor's have it makes my games look terrible maybe cuss i have 20/10 vision and i can littery count the dots. I almost puked going from a CRT to a LCD along time ago when i saw this.

 

[GrJohnso]

Trusting eBay always depends on who's selling... Big volume isn't always a safe bet, but is the best indicator you can go by. I picked up a used HP 2335 from a middle-man on eBay and the packing job was better than most new monitors, and the quality was exactly as stated.

Regarding pixel size, yah, going up in size and resolution you can sometimes get a better pixel size. My 23" is 1900-1200 native, which definitely is better than the 22" 1680x1050 dp/pixel size. It's easy to check, as most manufacturers list this in their specs.. This one is a .256mm PP, compared to the normal .280~ size of most 24" of the same resolution. Average 22" 1650 monitors run around .282 or so... Love this thing, if if it's pretty old now...

Now if I can just win the lottery so I can afford a new HP DreamColor monitor.... Ah well... There's a reason it's called "Dream....."

 

[Aberforth]

Don't buy LCD's from ebay, I got one long back with 20 to 30 dead pixels, fortunately I got my money back.

 

[Blazer7]

Originally posted by: Candymancan

Originally posted by: Blazer7
I would say yes. It's not just the higher res but the size of the dot too. Most 22" have a native res of 1680x1050 with a dot size of .282 while most 24" have a native res of 1920x1200 with a dot size of .270

The smaller dot size means that the 24? are harder to manufacture and thus more expensive. Speaking purely of res the difference is half a mil pixels and that means that you?ll need more power from your graphics board(s) to hit the same frame rates on the 24?.

Maybe im ignorant on this response, but how would a bigger monitor have a lower Dot pitch or pixel pitch then a smaller sized monitor ? The resolution is bigger but only because the screen is bigger.

Do you have proof of this ?

I know 19 inchs widescreen that use 1680x1050 resolutions which is a 22 inch resolution have a very small dot pitch around .22 or .23 and the same amount of pixel's that a 22 inch has, the picture on them is far superior to any 22-24 inch monitor cuss of that. Screen size tho is what most people go for and TBH i cant stand playing video games with huge dot pitch's like these 22-24 inch monitor's have it makes my games look terrible maybe cuss i have 20/10 vision and i can littery count the dots. I almost puked going from a CRT to a LCD along time ago when i saw this.

Hello Mr Candymancan,

All you have to do is have a look at newegg or some other on-line shop.

Newegg 22? LCDs - Pixel pitch .282

Newegg 24? LCDs - Pixel Pitch .270

PS
There are always exceptions to the rule. That said there're 24" LCDs that feature bigger pixel pitch and there're also a couple of 22" LCDs that have even smaller pixel pitch than .270 (22" with res of 1920x1200).

 

[themisfit610]

And there are also 17" laptop LCDs from Dell (alienware) that are 1920x1200. God help the poor sod who buys one of those and has to tape a magnifying glass to the screen to have any chance of reading text on there!

~MiSfit

 

[Blazer7]

I agree. Some monitors offer ridiculous resolutions. IMO 1920X1200 is too much even for a 22? and it's utterly ridiculous for anything smaller than that. IMO pixel pitch should be at least .264. Anything smaller can really turn some simple things like reading into a very painful experience.