Which flat panel should I get, Please help

[cbeavers]

I cant decide between the two, can someone please help me make up my mind and then tell me why that one is better. Thanks so much here are the two flat panels


1. Samsung 17" LCD Syncmaster Monitor Model 171T-Ivory - Retail
Specifications:
Viewable Image Size: 17"
Brightness (Typical): 250 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 350:1
Viewing Angle (H/V): 160/120 (degrees)
Interface: Analog
Horiz. Frequency: 30-81 (kHz)
Max/Native Resolution: 1280x1024
Emissions Standard: TCO '99 Dead Pixels Policy: Replacement or Refund for 8 or more
$339.00

OR

2. ADVUEU 17" (Beige) TFT Active Matrix SXGA LCD, Model ADV17C - Retail
Specifications:
Display: 17"
Pixel Pitch: 0.264mm x 0.264mm
Max. Resolution: 1280x1024
Brightness: 250 cd/m2 (typ)
Contrast Ratio: 350:1 (typ)
Response Time: 30ms
Max. Colors: 16.7M
PC & MAC compatible, Integrated Speaker 2 x 1W
Dead Pixels Policy: Replacement or Refund for 8 or more DEAD PIXELS ONLY! More...
$355.00

 

[fredtam]

Of the two I would get the samsung because I am more familiar with their products. I really can't recommend either of them. You probably chose those two because you are on a budget which I understand but if you game you will not be satisfied with the response time and if you read you will not be satisfied with the contrast ratio. If I were you I would :
1. Watch Dell for deals on the 16ms 17" LCDs that will bring them closer to your budget.
2. Wait till you can add a hundred dollars to your budget and get one.

Youwill be much happier Trust me.

 

[cbeavers]

Oh see I don't really know much about lcd panels, never bought one before. I guess the better response time the better the panel? for gaming that is. Could you explain a couple of the othe specs and what to look for?

 

[fredtam]

Yes, the response time is the time it takes for a pixel to change from one color to another color and back( white-black-white). The faster the response time the less ghosting/blurring you will see during gaming or DVD playback. Although you may still see a little blurring with a 16ms monitor(probably not) you will most likely see a lot of it with a 30ms panel.

The contrast ratio is the ratio of the intensity of brightness between the brightest white and the darkest black. The higher the contrast ratio the better.

 

[Goop]

Not one of your original selections but worthy of your consideration. There may be newer models avail as I got mine a while ago. I got the Planar PX171M. Been very very happy with it - response time is awesome and display quality is excellent and it had some other features i was looking for like speakers and the screen rotates to portrait. Check them out.

Planar

here is some specs of the one I've been using ...from their website.

Model Number PX171M
Planar Part Number 997-2443-00 (Black)
997-2442-00 (White)
997-2444-00 (Silver)

Display Panel 17" color active matrix LCD (TFT)
Color 16.7 million
Viewing Angle 140° Horizontal and 140° Vertical
Brightness (typical) 260 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio (typical) 400:1
Response Time (typical) 12 ms rise, 4 ms fall
Refresh Rate 56-77 Hz
Supported Resolutions 1280 x 1024 SXGA
Audio Integrated stereo speakers, 1W/channel
Pixel Pitch 0.264 mm x 0.264 mm
Display Active Area 17" diagonal

 

[tomcas1]

Samsung wins hands down. Forget the specs and just trust your eyes. After going to several local stores with a Nokia screen tester CD in hand and doing side-by-side comparisons nothing could even come close to the sharpness of the Samsung. Even the highest price Sony could not match the sharpness. Keep in mind I did not test for ghosting since they kind of frown on gaming and movies at work. Surprisingly the analog input models performed as well as the digital input models once the image lock (Sony calls it something else) was fine-tuned. Also, be prepared to use it in the native resolution or you will degrade your image cause of the pixel interpolation.
If this means changing your default text and icon sizes then do it. In my case the company chose to treat me to the 19" Samsung that had the same native resolution but with just slightly larger pixel size. I had a hell of a time convincing the boss the lower priced Samsung with the lesser specs was better than the Sony. Luckily, I was vindicated when PC World or Magazine ran a test on LCDs a couple of months ago, which essentially exposed the whole brightness/contrast ratio lie. Most manufactures lied and overrated their specs due in part to the ambiguity of the test standard. However some underrated their specs substantially. But the most surprising conclusion was better specs, even as tested, did not necessarily reflect on the overall image quality.