What to look for in an LCD?

[halfpower]

I'm about to lay down some money for two analog LCDs with 1280x1024 resolution and 15 pin connectors. I was wondering though, are there other specifications I should be looking at? vertical frequency, horizontal frequency, response time, bandwidth, etc. Are they important?

Will a dual head nVIDIA MX4000 pair well with a two Samsung 710N or two Samsung 715V?

 

[imported_itr]

look for response time if you're a gamer - <12ms should be enough. any reason why you're going with vga lcds intead of dvi?

 

[halfpower]

Thus far I'm not a gamer. The computer is a DAW/PC. I might use it to learn some OS an programming stuff too.

I'm going with VGA because my video card is VGA. I'm not expecting a big quality/price improvement by going with DVI. I don't know much about this stuff though

While I'm on the topic, is the following correct?

VGA = analog 15 pin
DVI = some newer digital interface

 

[Tu13erhead]

Oh, so close. DVI = Digital Video Interface

 

[HomicidalSloth]

The only real thing to watch for is responce time. If you're into games, 12ms or faster. If not, and you don't really watch videos or anything of that sort, 25ms or quicker should be find. 16ms is a good way to go if you're inbetween.

Yeah, DVI = Digital, while VGA = analog.
DVI > VGA

 

[glorygunk]

If mainly what you intend to do is audio editing, response time is not critical at all. Older generation 25ms monitors would do as well. Make sure to get something with good contrast ratios...such as >=500:1 because it causes less eye strain. You'd be safe buying good brand names such as Samsung or Viewsonic.

 

[halfpower]

Originally posted by: HomicidalSloth
DVI > VGA

But by how much?

 

[microAmp]

DVI
6-bit or is it 8-bit panel
response time.

 

[glorygunk]

Originally posted by: halfpower

Originally posted by: HomicidalSloth
DVI > VGA

But by how much?

Not much. For majority of monitors, digital->analog conversion is so good that most people can't tell the difference.

 

[Valkerie]

remember dot pitch, don't get anything above .25 if you want vibrant images

16ms and lower should be fine

doesn't matter if it's DVI or 15-pin, you can always change the inputs with an adapter, but DVI is better than analog

nearly all 15" LCD's support max 1024x768, so you're looking at a +17" LCD

 

[pcgeek11]

Originally posted by: Valkerie
remember dot pitch, don't get anything above .25 if you want vibrant images

16ms and lower should be fine

doesn't matter if it's DVI or 15-pin, you can always change the inputs with an adapter, but DVI is better than analog

nearly all 15" LCD's support max 1024x768, so you're looking at a +17" LCD

Make sure it supports 8 bit color which is 16.7 million and not 6 bit which is 16.2 million dithered to look like 16.7...

 

[lucky9]

Depends on what he's doing. If color fidelity (in a professional way) is important, it costs more for 8bit. 6bit is faster. I'd prefer to use an analog/digital converter so if I upgraded the video card I could use the digital interface. But it depends on whether it will ever be done...saving money is good if it makes sense in the circumstances that are present.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

Yes, id go for a DVI too and get a simple adapter for DVI-to-VGA.
Regarding the panels: There different Panels on the market, like MA, MVA, TN and S-IPS. TN-Panels are best for gaming, but as the guys above said they tend to produce Dithering on Images. U can see what dithering looks like when u turn ur CRT to 16bit colors and then take a look at some images. Looks similiar but not that extreme with a TN-Panel. Advantage of TN-Panel over the another big type of Panels, the S-IPS-Panels, is the speed, which means that for gaming u should buy a TN-Panel and if u want a screen for doin alot of image editing and stuff u better go for a TFT with an S-IPS-Panel, also these have a higher view ° angle. If ur doing only a few image editing from time to time its no problem to have a TFT with the cheaper TN-Panel, cuz this dithering effect is only annyoing when all u do is concerning images and pictures. If u do some of this and and some of that then TN-Panels are good enough.

Some TN-Panel TFT´s u may like to check the prices for:
Hyundai ImageQuest L90D+, 19", 1280x1024, analog/digital, Audio with TN-Panel for about 350-400Euros
BenQ FP71V+, 17", 1280x1024, analog/digital, TN-Panel for about 300Euros http://home.arcor.de/r00f/1.jpg
BenQ FP767 version 2, 17", 1280x1024, analog, Audio about 220Euros. TN-panel


another advice is: lot of shops offer pixel tests, this costs about 20-40$ and guarantees u that u will get a screen without dead pixels. I think its wort the extra money.




btw i must lose a word on the fukcing response times: PLS STOP TAKING LOW RESPONSE TIMES FOR SERIOUS OR AS A SIGN OF A GOOD TFT! It makes no sense, since every manufacturer is doin their own kind of testing their response times. Response times are far from being a standard, some meassure the times between black and white, other between different scales of grey and u never can be sure what the heck ur manufacturer is doing their. Response times exist, but their impact and meaning is ways over...erm...you know what iam trying to say. They are just not comparable between different TFT and thatswhy these stupid numbers should be the least to care for. Sry, but they are just a marketing gag to give JoeSixpack a feeling of improved performance, hope u know what i mean. My english is fukced up, so i wont be explaining the technical side and why response times are crap for customers since todays response times are by far fast enough for every kind of usage, gaming or whatever. What u should look for and compare to other TFT`s are: the type of the panel (eg TN or S-IPS), Contrast, Brightness and some other specs. Response times dont matter any more.