• Help with choosing a new monitor
    7 replies, posted
I currently have a ACER AL2216W (22" 16:10) and I want a bigger and better upgrade. I am a hardcore gamer and I have a hardcore gaming system. I've been searching the internet far and wide for suggestions and explanations of good gaming lcd monitors and I cannot seem to find one for me. What I want: A trustworthy brand (Acer, ASUS, etc) 1920x1200 (16:10) Low refresh rate (2ms preferred) High contrast ratio Under $300 What I DON'T want: Stupid built-in speakers Gloss I've done a lot of research on Conrast Ratio and it still confuses me, so I have no idea what's good and what's bad in this area. Also, what's the differences between LCD and LED? Disadvantages? Dear old Facepuncher's...can you help me please?
There's no 1920x1200 monitors with no built in speakers for under $300 on newegg. WITH built in speakers, however, there's this: [url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236047[/url]
[QUOTE=MacTrekkie;25872782]There's no 1920x1200 monitors with no built in speakers for under $300 on newegg. WITH built in speakers, however, there's this: [url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236047[/url][/QUOTE] Yeah I've been looking at that one, but I'm not really sure...
you don't need 1920x1200 and you're just going to pay a shitload extra for it. 2ms is somewhat of a marketing gimmick, it's only slightly faster than 5ms BTB. The only real difference between LCD and LED is that LED uses a lot less power and takes up less space, it really doesn't make the picture better because all it does is boost the dynamic contrast ratio (which is retarded because it's how dark or how light the image can be, but it can only do one or the other at a time.) I recommend the Dell U2211H. [editline]5th November 2010[/editline] actually, I retract that statement. If all you're doing is gaming, get the Samsung 2233RZ. [editline]5th November 2010[/editline] actually the 2233RZ only does 1680x1050, I forgot. My bad. The Acer GD235HZbid would be good for you but it's $350. [editline]5th November 2010[/editline] otherwise pretty much anything you buy that isn't IPS or 120 Hz is going to look and perform identical [editline]5th November 2010[/editline] [url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001389[/url]
I do a lot of gaming, watching movies, and photoshop.
[QUOTE=Bullet100;25876452]I do a lot of gaming, watching movies, and photoshop.[/QUOTE] Well the answer is there for you. Get pretty much any TN panel for gaming which all of those are except the U2211H which you should get if you use Photoshop more than game, or spend some extra and get a 120Hz TN panel which is quite worth the price.
[QUOTE=Odellus;25874493]you don't need 1920x1200 and you're just going to pay a shitload extra for it. 2ms is somewhat of a marketing gimmick, it's only slightly faster than 5ms BTB. The only real difference between LCD and LED is that LED uses a lot less power and takes up less space, it really doesn't make the picture better because all it does is boost the dynamic contrast ratio (which is retarded because it's how dark or how light the image can be, but it can only do one or the other at a time.) I recommend the Dell U2211H. [editline]5th November 2010[/editline] actually, I retract that statement. If all you're doing is gaming, get the Samsung 2233RZ. [editline]5th November 2010[/editline] actually the 2233RZ only does 1680x1050, I forgot. My bad. The Acer GD235HZbid would be good for you but it's $350. [editline]5th November 2010[/editline] otherwise pretty much anything you buy that isn't IPS or 120 Hz is going to look and perform identical [editline]5th November 2010[/editline] [URL]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001389[/URL][/QUOTE] The Dell U2211H has 8ms response time which is more than my current 5ms. Sometimes I can notice the ghosting on my current monitor. The Acer GD235HZbid is 3D vision and I'll never use it. Also read there's many problems with it. The Samsung looks nice and can be compared to the ASUS VW266H. I've been looking at the U2311H too, and compared to the U221H, the only difference is the size and brightness. How would the size of the monitor effect the resolution? (considering they're both 16:9) [editline]5th November 2010[/editline] Ok, both Dell's are IPS, and the ASUS and Samsung are TN. What's TN and IPS mean/what do they do?
[QUOTE=Bullet100;25876714]The Dell U2211H has 8ms response time which is more than my current 5ms. Sometimes I can notice the ghosting on my current monitor. The Acer GD235HZbid is 3D vision and I'll never use it. Also read there's many problems with it. The Samsung looks nice and can be compared to the ASUS VW266H. I've been looking at the U2311H too, and compared to the U221H, the only difference is the size and brightness. How would the size of the monitor effect the resolution? (considering they're both 16:9)[/QUOTE] it's actually one of the faster LCDs in terms of response time, the general 5ms BTB you see is normally the absolute bare minimum measured. [url]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2211h.htm[/url] The Acer is just a better 2233RZ, by the way. All 120Hz monitors are 3D vision supportive. [editline]5th November 2010[/editline] the U2211H and U2311H both utilize the same resolution giving you a lower pixel density which would, factually, decrease image quality but I don't think you would notice it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.