What would you do in my place? (choice of gaming monitor)

[darXoul]

Hi,

Right now, I have a pretty decent rig (A64 3200+, GF 6800 GT, 1 GB RAM) and since I'm a very demanding gamer and want to enjoy games like CoD2 or F.E.A.R. in 12x10/4/8 settings, I'm planning to get an Athlon 64 X2 4400+ (found a great price in one of the stores, barely more expensive than A64 4000+), GF 7800 GTX 512 (probably from Point of View), ASUS A8N32-SLI...

Basically, at home I do: (1) gaming, (2) typical internet activities (e-mail, websites, etc.), (3) video, (4) some work (Office mainly).
I play FPS games, sports games, RPGs, some adventures, racing games, etc.

I currently have a Philips 109P40 monitor and I usually play in 12x10@100 Hz. The monitor is actually pretty good, and I have no complaints in terms of color reproduction, ergonomy, contrast. Space or power consumption don't matter to me.

On the other hand, I like the looks of LCDs and I've recently read about the new Viewsonic VX922 with 2 ms (I know it's marketing) TN matrix. Beside the looks (black/silver perfectly fits the rest of my gear), it's also nice to have an additional inch of visible diagonal (obviously 18" in case of 19" CRTs).

However, I'm afraid of the typical LCD flaws:

A. Ghosting / blurry movement in fast paced games,
B. Poor video quality with lots of noise (particularly in case of TN matrix),
C. Color banding in games / movies (as above),
D. Native resolution (I should be able to play everything in 1280x1024 but some games use 1280x960 instead),
E. Crappy viewing angles (again, applies primarily to those fast TN displays).

What would you do in my place? Switch to a good 19" LCD and go for speed, compromising colors somewhat, switch to a slower full 8-bit LCD or stick with my good 'old' Brilliance 109P40? I also considered the purchase of a 21" CRT but those things are extremely huge, heavy and cost quite a bit so if I'm satisfied with 12x10 and don't really see the need to go above that with AA switched on, the 2 inches might not be worth the cash.

 

[Captante]

It depends ... If you go with the LCD, 8ms is fast enough for gaming & IMO 6 bit color is pretty rough, especially if your used to a good CRT, otherwise I'd say go ahead & grab a nice flat-screen 21 inch CRT before you can't get one at all... as long as you can deal with the huge size, the picture is considerably brighter & since it can actually change resolutions unlike an LCD you'll have more flexability, just make sure it supports decent refresh rates at high resolution.

 

[xtknight]

A. Ghosting / blurry movement in fast paced games
I have a "12ms." TN matrix, and it's hardly an issue IMO. I won't sugar-coat it for you, you will see it under fast motion (like moving a tank in BF2), but my matrix really averages 20ms. and it's very uneven, and the best PVA+overdrive are under 16ms. now if not lower, and they have a very stable response graph.
B. Poor video quality with lots of noise (particularly in case of TN matrix),
Noise? Dithering on 6-bit LCDs, yeah. If overdrive overshoots it can also cause noise, but Tom's Hardware Guide has a rating for this issue.
C. Color banding in games / movies (as above),
Probably not on an 8-bit LCD.
D. Native resolution (I should be able to play everything in 1280x1024 but some games use 1280x960 instead),
I've never had an issue running any of my games at 1280x1024. I run BF2, Quake 2, Quake 3, FEAR, Quake 4 all at 1280x1024 with no issues. I have a GeForce 6800NU PCIe.
E. Crappy viewing angles (again, applies primarily to those fast TN displays).
Not on decent S-IPS/S-PVA displays though.

The Viewsonic VP930b or Samsung 970P are very good monitors that use S-PVA panels and feedforward driving (usually called overdrive). It's important to note: an LCD is not a place to pinch pennies. It doesn't sound like a TN panel would do you justice, but I like mine...

Remember it's not all downsides with LCDs. For me, they are MUCH easier on the eyes. I don't think I could ever go back to using a CRT. They also never lose focus or convergence, so you don't have to literally risk your life to adjust them like with CRTs.

It would be one thing if aperture grille Trinitrons/Diamondtrons were still around, but they are few and far between these days, and you'll have to find one used AFAIK. Lenovo (IBM) sells a couple of new ThinkVision AGs, but it's anyone's guess as to how good they are.

I'm pretty certain the Samsung 970P puts up a good fight against a shadow mask CRT, including at color accuracy and contrast. The Samsung 770P sure does. The only thing you need be worried about is the response time, which in my experience does not bother me, and my LCD is already a one year old TN. Ghosting effects tend to be worse on TNs even though they are supposedly faster. Even on my dad's PVA I think it's a tad better than on my TN at least in some cases. Neither of our LCDs even use overdrive either.

Personally I think you should setup dual monitors.

If the "ghosting" happens to bother you then use your CRT for gaming, and use your LCD for web site viewing and general usage. The LCD is very easy on my eyes. I used to get red-eye all the time with CRTs, no matter the refresh rate. But for a year, I've stuck with my LCD for gaming knowing full well I could have gone back to my CRT. My eyes thanked me.

 

[CP5670]

I would just stick with what you have now. You wouldn't really get much out of any of the other options if you are going to be only using 12x9/12x10 and your existing monitor works okay for you.

Probably not on an 8-bit LCD.

8-bit LCDs show the banding too. It's just better than 6-bit ones. The 10-bit LED monitors get rid of it, but those are really expensive.

I've never had an issue running any of my games at 1280x1024. I run BF2, Quake 2, Quake 3, FEAR, Quake 4 all at 1280x1024 with no issues. I have a GeForce 6800NU PCIe.

That depends on what you call "no issues." I can't run FEAR at anything over 800x600 without having the framerate dip into the 40s quite often on a 6800 GT. Playing at 1280x1024 would mean dropping most of the graphical options to their lowest settings for me. Although it shouldn't matter with the 512 GTX the OP is getting.

 

[xtknight]

I shouldn't say 'no issues'. I myself do have to turn down texture settings a bit (and don't mind) but he's getting a 7800GTX 512, so yeah, he won't have much issue with it which is what I really meant to say.

As for the banding, I've never myself encountered it in any real world scenario on my 6-bit TN, but I can definitely see it in the test gradients. CRTs don't have it because the dots blend it in. LCDs can't replicate that. Same reason why text is blurrier on a CRT though, so there's trade-offs with that gradient smoothness.

 

[Captante]

Its interesting that I seem to get much better then average performance from my 6800GT in FEAR... at 1280x1024 & high quality its somtimes as low as 35fps but average is much higher & its fully playable, while at 1024x768 the lowest I see is 44fps & its smooth sailing at all times... in fact I tried 800x600 & it made almost no difference in performance, but IQ took a big hit... Quake 4 is another story though & 1024x768 is the maximum that runs smoothly.

 

[darXoul]

Thanks for your opinions and votes, guys. Since good 21" CRTs are getting very rare and hard to find indeed (even more so if you want a black bezel one like myself), I guess this option should be taken off the poll.

As for dual monitor setup, it would be quite an appealing idea but due to space constraints, it's not feasible for me. CRT or LCD makes no difference but CRT and LCD is a bit too much for my desk

My upcoming rig (X2 4400+ and 7800 GTX 512) will handle everything in 12x10 but I'm still a bit afraid of the native resolution issue because of two reasons:

a) some games use 12x9 instead of 12x10 - in this case, the vertical number of pixels differs from the LCD's native res so I guess that image quality would deteriorate,

b) I play some games in 10x7 since in 12x10, "2D" image elements are simply too small and text is hard to read as well (e.g. in SimCity 4, Dungeon Siege 2, etc.). With 19" real visible diagonal, maybe it wouldn't be an issue though.

I know that most people say LCDs are much easier on the eyes but I must confess that @ 100/120 Hz, I really have no problems with my eyes using my current monitor.

Any more opinions and votes?

 

[TSS]

i'd say stick with the 19" crt. no matter how fast LCDs will get crts will always be better, for gaming atleast. 21" would kinda be overkill.. and for the price their going might aswell buy a LCD then.

i bought a samsung 997mb recently, 19" crt. quite happy with it and i dont think ill go LCD just yet for the next couple of years

so stick with what ya got. and after a year or 2 more, upgrade to SED

 

[cpacini]

Originally posted by: darXoul
Thanks for your opinions and votes, guys. Since good 21" CRTs are getting very rare and hard to find indeed (even more so if you want a black bezel one like myself), I guess this option should be taken off the poll.

As for dual monitor setup, it would be quite an appealing idea but due to space constraints, it's not feasible for me. CRT or LCD makes no difference but CRT and LCD is a bit too much for my desk

My upcoming rig (X2 4400+ and 7800 GTX 512) will handle everything in 12x10 but I'm still a bit afraid of the native resolution issue because of two reasons:

a) some games use 12x9 instead of 12x10 - in this case, the vertical number of pixels differs from the LCD's native res so I guess that image quality would deteriorate,

b) I play some games in 10x7 since in 12x10, "2D" image elements are simply too small and text is hard to read as well (e.g. in SimCity 4, Dungeon Siege 2, etc.). With 19" real visible diagonal, maybe it wouldn't be an issue though.

I know that most people say LCDs are much easier on the eyes but I must confess that @ 100/120 Hz, I really have no problems with my eyes using my current monitor.

Any more opinions and votes?

Just out of curiosity, why not buy an lcd that will support 1600x1200? It just seems a little odd to get a 512GTX and not let it stretch its legs a bit. And there isnt that big of an IQ penalty for running out of native resolution on a good LCD, so you could still run SC4 at 10x7.

If it was me I'd get a 2405fpw and call it a day.

 

[ddogg]

Originally posted by: TSS
i'd say stick with the 19" crt. no matter how fast LCDs will get crts will always be better, for gaming atleast. 21" would kinda be overkill.. and for the price their going might aswell buy a LCD then.

i bought a samsung 997mb recently, 19" crt. quite happy with it and i dont think ill go LCD just yet for the next couple of years

so stick with what ya got. and after a year or 2 more, upgrade to SED

yup i say stick with your 19" CRT unless you plan to upgrade to the 2405fpw.

 

[darXoul]

Thanks for the suggestion regarding the 2405FPW. Many people actually seem to like this monitor a lot. Its price in Poland is outrageous though - 5600 PLN, i.e. ~1700 USD. That's quite a bit. Due to VAT and other issues, comp part prices in PL are higher than in the US on the whole, but in this case I think the difference is just crazy.

I'll take a look around, maybe I can find the Dell cheaper. If not, I don't think it's worth that much. 16x12 is nice but one 7800 GTX 512 won't really cope with games like CoD2 or F.E.A.R. in this resolution and high settings - and I don't wanna spend the money to get another one just yet - I prefer to grab one card now and add another later for a beefy SLI setup The card costs 900 USD in my country so it's not exactly a bargain.

 

[BFG10K]

Get a 21" CRT. When it comes to LCDs you basically pay more for less.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: darXoul
Thanks for the suggestion regarding the 2405FPW. Many people actually seem to like this monitor a lot. Its price in Poland is outrageous though - 5600 PLN, i.e. ~1700 USD. That's quite a bit. Due to VAT and other issues, comp part prices in PL are higher than in the US on the whole, but in this case I think the difference is just crazy.

I'll take a look around, maybe I can find the Dell cheaper. If not, I don't think it's worth that much. 16x12 is nice but one 7800 GTX 512 won't really cope with games like CoD2 or F.E.A.R. in this resolution and high settings - and I don't wanna spend the money to get another one just yet - I prefer to grab one card now and add another later for a beefy SLI setup The card costs 900 USD in my country so it's not exactly a bargain.

How about a Samsung 214T?

 

[JRW]

I'd stick with that CRT if you do a lot of gaming, I had a Dell 2001FP sitting next to a 21" Sony G520P for awhile (dual monitor / clone mode) and even tho the LCD had a extra vibrant output and sharper text it had image quality issues in key areas, first was Black levels ..when playing games at night with the lights out ,such as Fear or Doom 3, the LCD looked horrible compared to the CRT due to washed out blacks.

Next was color banding (dithering) When comparing photo's on both monitors I kept seeing banding on the LCD side while on the CRT these areas had smooth gradients instead. then there was motion blur, it wasn't bad on the LCD but certainly noticeable especially when I played Half life 2 online ,even when you didnt see motion blur framerates still looked overall smoother on the CRT side especially when a game was maintaining 60fps.

Another thing to consider is the fact most LCDs run 60hz refresh .. I was always used to running without Vsync enabled and would increase the refresh rate to reduce the screen tearing effect associated with it ,but on an LCD running without vsync looks pretty bad, even when both monitors were set at 60hz the LCD's screen tearing effect was notably worse.

In the end I sent the 2001FP back to dell for a refund and bought a Sony 24" Widescreen CRT (FW900) and have absolutely no regrets, LCD just isnt for me.

 

[Wolfshanze]

darXoul... I'm a big-time gamer with a fairly decent rig (see sig line). Several months ago, I decided I should move to LCD for much the same reasons you are thinking... I did tons of research on LCD monitors, and I picked out a highly recomended and popular monitor (I believe it was the 19" Viewsonic 912B).

Not to downgrade the monitor I bought, but as a gaming monitor, I don't think it can beat a CRT. For a FLATSCREEN LCD MONITOR, it's a great gaming monitor, but only when compared with other LCD monitors... bottom line, it's hard to beat a CRT on straight-up gaming requirements... Let me tell you my observations:

A) Ghosting wasn't an issue... I never noticed any ghosting with my LCD in gaming... I think this problem has been solved by high-speed LCDs
B) Poor video quality? Not an issue... I thought the screen was very good
C) Color banding... this I did notice... as has been mentioned this is still a problem with most LCDs... I wasn't happy with this at all with my LCD & Gaming... I did take notice
D) Native Resolution... definately a problem in my book, and one I wonder if LCDs will ever be able to fix (maybe not). Generally speaking, the further you get away from non-native resolutions, esp in regards to aspect ratio, the worse the distortion becomes in non-native resolutions. If you're only going from 1280x1024 to 1024x968, you may not notice much of a differance, but if you change aspect and greatly change resolution, you will DEFINATELY notice a differance... I have some old-school games that I play in (believe it or not) 640x480... they looked AWFUL on my LCD monitor, but look just fine on my CRT. Now I realize this is an extreme case, but if you don't intend on playing everything in native resolution, YOU WILL GIVE UP QUALITY even if it's a small step... CRT will ALWAYS be better then LCD in any non-native resolution.
E) Crappy viewing angles... to be honest, this wasn't a huge issue to me... then again, I don't try playing games at a 45-degree angle from my monitor... do you? I usually sit in front of my monitor anyways, so if I had a problem with viewing angles I never noticed.

Having said all that, as a GAMER, I wasn't happy switching from CRT to LCD... so much in fact, I gave the LCD to my wife and went back to my 19" CRT. My wife doesn't play games, and she LOVES the LCD... for anything other then games, I think the LCD is the way to go... for gamers, you can get the "best gaming LCD on the market" all you want... you can definately find that gem... but realize, no matter how good an LCD is, I don't think for gaming, it can beat a CRT across the board on gaming matters.

That's my 2-cents.

 

[ddogg]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
Get a 21" CRT. When it comes to LCDs you basically pay more for less.

in that case, get the 24" Sony/HP CRT monitor, its HUGE but it kicks a$$. you can find them on ebay for about $300.

 

[lavaheadache]

I wanted to vote but I couldn't find the "get 2005fpw " option.

 

[darXoul]

Thanks again for all your helpful feedback, especially guys who elaborated a bit more in their posts (xtnight, JRW and Wolfshanze).

Replying to your suggestions / remarks:

=> In general, I don't really play too many older games and my new rig will handle everything in 1280x1024 but I'm still afraid of native res since:

a) there are some very rare cases where native res simply won't be available (example: the IMHO very good adventure game Still Life fixed @ 800x600),

b) like I said, in some games it's 1280x960 instead of 1280x1024 - which already changes the ratio a bit and requires interpolation due to different number of vertical pixels (correct?),

c) again, like I said above - even with a 19" full visible diagonal, I can't really imagine playing DS2 or SC4 @ 1280x1024 because of too small icons/text.

=> All those Dell LCDs are possibly nice but their prices in Poland don't encourage a purchase - I'm not a guy on a tight budget as you can tell from my planned upgrades (900 bucks for a video card ) but I'm not paying 1.5k $ for a goddamn monitor I'm not sure I'll be satisfied with. In Poland, Dells are pretty rare in the retail market (although, e.g. almost my entire company uses Dell PCs in HQ and Branches), and such LCDs are niche products. If I'm not happy with my Dell, I guess I could have a hard time selling it. That's why no such option in the poll.

=> Wolfshanze, you're right about the viewing angles of course. Sometimes I look at my monitor at a weird angle (not while gaming) simply because I stretch my legs, put them on my bookshelf and my position becomes nearly horizontal It's all about the arrangement of my room and my (too) comfortable chair Still, viewing angles shouldn't be an issue. BTW, you have a pretty similar gaming rig to my own.

=> Crap, I can't believe how difficult it is to buy a good BLACK 21" CRT in Poland now... Those monitors seem to be extinct! I searched for ViewSonic G220FB but to no avail. And if I switch from 19" to 21", it HAS to be black


Summarizing, it looks like the most probable option for me is not to buy the sexy ViewSonic VX922 or even VP930B but stick with my trusted Philips... More opinions are welcome of course

 

[PingSpike]

The one thing that really, really bugs me about LCDs is the native resolution business. I don't want to be buying a new video card constantly just to play the latest games at native res. The other drawbacks I could probably deal with.

But in the end, I think BFG10K is probably right. You're paying more for less, at least for gaming anyway. They seem nice for everything else though.

I think I'm gonna dig around and try to find an old trinitron on ebay instead of searching for an affordable LCD. I should probably get on that since they seem to have stopped making them.

 

[Nextman916]

If you have the money get the an 8ms 8-bit, i guarentee you wont be dissapointed.

 

[Compellor]

Originally posted by: darXoul
Summarizing, it looks like the most probable option for me is not to buy the sexy ViewSonic VX922 or even VP930B but stick with my trusted Philips... More opinions are welcome of course

I bought the VP930b a few weeks ago and games look very good outside of its native screen resolution of 1280x1024. At 1280x960 it looks just as good as the native screen res. Lower resolutions like 1152x864 and 1024x768 also look good. I play F.E.A.R. at 1024x768 and the graphics and text look sharp and well detailed. The screen starts to get slightly blurry at 800x600 and below but it's still not that bad.

I bought this monitor for not just gaming, but other things like video editing, DVDs, Web site graphics, etc. I also really like the slim bezel design and adjustable stand that lets you pivot and rotate it. It's really a good all-around LCD monitor and I highly recommend it to anyone that does more than just play games.

 

[Wolfshanze]

In gaming, native resolution looks fantastic on a LCD (minus any color banding)... in non-native resolutions (any of them), you're going to notice that the CRT looks better flat-out. How much better depends on how far from native resolution you go, but in any case a CRT will always beat a LCD in non-native resolutions.

If you play EVERY game in native-resolution, I would say an LCD is nice to go with, but if you spend any amount of time in non-native resolutions, you will sacrifice clarity compared to playing on a CRT. This was the deal-breaker for me... I don't consider it a waste of money, because I gave it to my non-gaming wife who loves it, but until they come out with a fix for resolution changes, I'll stick with my CRT. I currently have a 19" Viewsonic (I forget the model number, but it is a flat-CRT and BLACK! I wanna say G90fb).

Good to know my gaming-rig isn't too out of date... you go to these forums and it seems everybody has a 10GHz system with a GeForce8 or something. I feel so slow with a "mere" 3GHz GeForce6 system.

 

[Compellor]

Wolfshanze, I think 1024x768 is the lowest screen res you may want to go with a GOOD LCD monitor. I was a CRT user for 10 years and owned several Sony Trinitron (still have a few that work) and I was amazed at how much better the VP930b looks over any of them--even in games. I agree that you do lose some qaulity outside of the native screen res, but it's really not that bad on the VP930b or other 8-bit panels like it. It's really a slight degradation the lower you go with it. I though it was going to look bad but it doesn't until you get down to 800x600. But even then it's just a bit blurry.

Don't feel bad about your system--mine is about on par with yours. It's still got some life in it. I just upgraded from a 9800 Pro to a X800XL since I didn't see the need to do a full system upgrade to PCIe. Maybe in 6-8 months I'll do it.