ViewSonic coming out with 120HZ 22" computer LCD??

[shangshang]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: gregoryvg

Why the hate? I'd hardly call it useless.

Of course it's useless. I was running 1600x1200 seven years ago on my 19" CRT which is still a higher resolution than this device.

7 years ago you could only run Ping Pong and Pacman at 1600x1200

 

[HannibalX]

For a 22" wide screen LCD monitor 1680 is the ideal desktop/productivity resolution in my opinion. Perhaps gamers would like a higher resolution but they are the minority of computer users. Being a gamer myself I am quite happy with 1680.

 

[darXoul]

What I would like to see, as a demanding gamer and general user, would be more input lag-free 24"+ monitors based on fast non-TN panels. Given the current performance of video cards and a wave of 26-28" 1920*1200 monitors with nicely readable 0.28x mm pixel pitch, I think that innovations in the area of 22-inchers are not exactly thrilling news anymore.

 

[martinblank64]

Damn it most likely will be that stereoscopic crap if it is labeled as dual link DVI.

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: solog

Just because you don't want it doesn't mean it is useless.

You're right. I mean if someone wants to regress to resolutions pre-dating 2001 then this device may well be for them. :roll:

This is a classic example of why LCD technology has been accepted. People will accept just about any rubbish as long as the device looks ?futuristic?.

Originally posted by: shangshang

7 years ago you could only run Ping Pong and Pacman at 1600x1200

This is a load of nonsense. Provided you had Ti4600 or 9700 Pro then modern titles at the time were quite playable at 1600x1200. I know because I was running 2001/2002 titles like Undying, Serious Sam TFE/TSE,JK2, Command & Conquer Renegade, MoH:AA, SoF 2 and RTCW at said resolution.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

i dont see a problem with 1680x1050, it is a very popular resolution and most desktop users are still using 1280x1024. 1680x1050 is where viewsonic believes the money is, hence their decision.

many people either dont have the desk space and/or the money for a 19x12 or 25x16 monitor

 

[NYHoustonman]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: solog

Just because you don't want it doesn't mean it is useless.

You're right. I mean if someone wants to regress to resolutions pre-dating 2001 then this device may well be for them. :roll:

This is a classic example of why LCD technology has been accepted. People will accept just about any rubbish as long as the device looks ?futuristic?.

Originally posted by: shangshang

7 years ago you could only run Ping Pong and Pacman at 1600x1200

This is a load of nonsense. Provided you had Ti4600 or 9700 Pro then modern titles at the time were quite playable at 1600x1200. I know because I was running 2001/2002 titles like Undying, Serious Sam TFE/TSE,JK2, Command & Conquer Renegade, MoH:AA, SoF 2 and RTCW at said resolution.

I just don't have the hardware. If you don't have a post-G80 top-of-the-line graphics card, any higher resolution than 1680x1050 ends up meaning a degradation in image quality at this point, even on my 8800GTX. If I a 24" at 1920x1200 for free I'd probably still use what I have for gaming (20", 1680x1050).

EDIT - replied to the wrong post :-X

 

[CP5670]

Originally posted by: natty1

Originally posted by: CP5670
I don't see anything about dual link DVI on the Viewsonic either. It just says dual DVI, which most likely means it supports two inputs like many other LCDs.

From the official press release

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/080825/ny31251.html?.v=1

"Features, such as integrated 2Wx2 stereo speakers and Dual Link DVI digital input, combine to expand entertainment options and make the monitor the must-have display for 3D gaming."

Very interesting. The article in the OP doesn't mention this. If it uses dual link DVI and not just dual DVI, it may well be genuinely 120hz.

Although the fact that they talk about stereoscopic support may indicate that it's another two-layer panel like the one I talked about earlier, on which you could only take advantage of the 120hz support when using 3D glasses.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

Originally posted by: NYHoustonman

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
i dont see a problem with 1680x1050, it is a very popular resolution and most desktop users are still using 1280x1024. 1680x1050 is where viewsonic believes the money is, hence their decision.

many people either dont have the desk space and/or the money for a 19x12 or 25x16 monitor

I just don't have the hardware. If you don't have a post-G80 top-of-the-line graphics card, any higher resolution than 1680x1050 ends up meaning a degradation in image quality at this point, even on my 8800GTX. If I a 24" at 1920x1200 for free I'd probably still use what I have for gaming (20", 1680x1050).

isn't that what i said? some people dont have the money to purchase stuff that can power a 19x12 monitor OR the money to buy the monitor itself, nevermind buying a 19x12 monitor with new 120hz technology

 

[shangshang]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: solog

Just because you don't want it doesn't mean it is useless.

You're right. I mean if someone wants to regress to resolutions pre-dating 2001 then this device may well be for them. :roll:

This is a classic example of why LCD technology has been accepted. People will accept just about any rubbish as long as the device looks ?futuristic?.

Originally posted by: shangshang

7 years ago you could only run Ping Pong and Pacman at 1600x1200

This is a load of nonsense. Provided you had Ti4600 or 9700 Pro then modern titles at the time were quite playable at 1600x1200. I know because I was running 2001/2002 titles like Undying, Serious Sam TFE/TSE,JK2, Command & Conquer Renegade, MoH:AA, SoF 2 and RTCW at said resolution.

don't believe the ATI 9700 Pro exist 7 years ago. I have one in my room with a busted fan and I don't recall this thing has aged 7 years.

 

[HannibalX]

The Radeon 9700 Pro was released in July of 2002 so about six years.

In 2001 the 7 and 8 series Radeons were in full swing.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: martinblank64
http://www.tcmagazine.com/comm...shownews=21438&catid=2

Can it really be a true 120Hz LCD and not be using black frame insertion or whatever it's called? I thought viewsonic was pretty bad and all about advertising, like monster cable.

i saw it at Nvision

it is for 3D

you use it with 3-D glasses

there are 350 games that support it .. actually all DX games do

and they have a 19x12 coming

now you know

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Originally posted by: Pale Rider
For a 22" wide screen LCD monitor 1680 is the ideal desktop/productivity resolution in my opinion. Perhaps gamers would like a higher resolution but they are the minority of computer users. Being a gamer myself I am quite happy with 1680.

QFT.

Going higher is far too $$, and going lower just isn't happening.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I think that there are quite a few gamers (even here on these forums) that would kill for a true 120Hz/120FPS gaming display monitor.

But hearing that it is for 3D only, truely disappoints me.

 

[apoppin]

who said it was only for 3d ?

 

[martinblank64]

But can it do real 120Hz in non-3D mode?

 

[martinblank64]

delete double post