LCD Monitors & DVI Vs VGA

i still use a 19' crt and have never used a lcd for i've heard they are just terrible for gaming. also, i prefer my refresh rate to be @ least 100mhz and i've only seen lcd's go up to 85mhz. besides that have lcd's gotten better for gaming? i guess rpg's, rts' and what not wouldn't be a prob, but fps' would. like this ghosting buisiness. someone can explain that word and if that has been corrected? can someone also explain something like 700:1 ratio (or better) and something like 12ms (or better) too. thx. lcd's have gotten so cheap and i would just like to stay up-to-date with technology, but if technology hasn't kept up-to-date then why bother.

besides, i'm tired of lugging my 50 pound monitor for lans. 15 pounds sound better.

Just as is the case with power supplies, comparing LCDs by spec alone is futile.
Unless you can determine that the manufacturers are using the exact same test, the resulting numbers are apples to oranges.
My acquaintances who game have (begrudgingly) begun to convert to LCDs and seem satisfied, but you still have to spend some serious cash to approach CRT performance...the cheap ones don't have the necessary response time and contrast (which I believe is the "700:1" you refer to).

Just as with speakers/sound systems, only you can determine what is "good", "better" and "OMFG!"

Personally, I'm lusting after a Dell 2405...are you listening Santa?:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clocker

... are you listening Santa?:rolleyes:

---

He's listening. :)

did some research on ur dell 2405. pretty nice monitor, but 1k mite turn off some including myself. bad ass though!

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/dell2405/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr. nails

did some research on ur dell 2405. pretty nice monitor, but 1k mite turn off some including myself.

---

Which is why I'm lusting after it rather than watching it now.
It can be had for around $700 actually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clocker

It can be had for around $700 actually.

---

link me..

Dell UltraSharp 2005FPW 20.1-inch Wide Screen LCD

Dell UltraSharp 2405FPW 24-inch Wide Screen LCD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clocker

..are you listening Santa?:rolleyes:

---

Ur getting coal for Christmas for telling me I was unhelpful in the other thread. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gam3Guy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clocker

..are you listening Santa?:rolleyes:

---

Ur getting coal for Christmas for telling me I was unhelpful in the other thread. :)

---

With home heating costs rising as they are coal might be the best thing I could get.

Sprocket on the other hand, is just lovin the cold temps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clocker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gam3Guy

Ur getting coal for Christmas for telling me I was unhelpful in the other thread. :)

---

With home heating costs rising as they are coal might be the best thing I could get.

Sprocket on the other hand, is just lovin the cold temps.

---

You have a good point there. My Pc's likin' the low temps as well.
'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clocker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gam3Guy

Ur getting coal for Christmas for telling me I was unhelpful in the other thread. :)

---

With home heating costs rising as they are coal might be the best thing I could get.

Sprocket on the other hand, is just lovin the cold temps.

---

Yeah. Try heating a place with just Athlon XPs. :strongsad

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virtualbody1234

Yeah. Try heating a place with just Athlon XPs. :strongsad

---

Oh, that's easy.
Try it with an a64.
My Winnie sucks the heat from the room...hasn't breached 22c all day.

I went from CRT to LCD and I thought games looked better on the LCD.
Samsung 912N.

Ghosting?
I believe it only occurs at low resolutions, because I've never seen ghosting at 1280x1024. Even then, most of my games don't ghost at 1024x768.

The clarity is the best part about an LCD. You will "definitely" notice things are crisper. The colors are much much better too.

I've seen extra details in images that CRTs can't produce.

doesn't running at a low refresh rate hurt ur eyes? my crt is at 100 right now and when i lower it it bothers me. lcd's are the same? cuz i know lcd run around 75-85 only.

Dell UltraSharp 3007WFP 30-inch Wide Screen LCD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr. nails

doesn't running at a low refresh rate hurt ur eyes? my crt is at 100 right now and when i lower it it bothers me. lcd's are the same? cuz i know lcd run around 75-85 only.

---

LCDs use a different technology in their refresh rates. An LCD with 75-85Hz looks 3-4 times crisper than a CRT at 120Hz.
LCDs can also display fine details that CRTs blur out. If your a major graphics artists, you should upgrade to an LCD or Plasma immediately.

Quote:

---

If your a major graphics artists, you should upgrade to an LCD or Plasma immediately.

---

I have 2 friends who have been graphic artists for 10+ years and would never recommend an LCD over a good 'ole CRT monitor. They just don't compare when it comes to color reproduction/accuracy.

Plasma screens are a different story but they don't make them [strictly] for PC use. And, I have yet to see a plasma screen that small.

Frankly I wouldn't care for a monitor bigger then the 19" monitor I'm currently using.

But, isn't 19" is large enough for PC use? I mean, how much larger can they get? The manufacturers have already figured this out. Witness the introduction of the widescreen monitor, the newest trend.

My 19' HP LCD is good for gaming, dont see why it would be "horrible".

A while back I remember reading in one of the PC Mags I subscribe to that the testers there were really impressed with the Samsung Syncmaster 9xxT (I can't remember the numbers I think it was 940T or something but the T I'm sure of because its more expensive than the N version). They had it as their top pick in 19" LCD Monitors for several months. At the time it was out of my price range but I'm sure its come down by now ($349 US). It was said that it was great for gaming.
The title of this post "LCD Monitors & DVI Vs VGA " fooled me cause I thought someone would be asking whether to use the DVI or VGA hook up for their LCD monitor. When gaming, an LCD monitor hooked up by the Vga type connector is not as good as using the DVI because your graphics card is digital just as the DVI connection and if you use the VGA connection everything has to be converted to analog before going to the monitor and redigitalized when it gets there or something to that effect.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824001069

here is a link to the newegg page for the 940T ($315 + shipping)

response time on that sux ballz.

Must admit I've yet to have any major problems when it comes to LCD screens and games (and that's using a pretty cheap LCD monitor).

I'm not sure about specific gaming monitors (and the refresh rates since I just leave mine on default) but there are certain LCD monitors that are tailored for game playing so it's worth reading around.

In terms of ghosting I've yet to see any and understand it's less of a problem on the newer monitor releases. One problem you may want to look into is backlight bleeding which will effect darker games such as F.E.A.R. Whilst it's not a massive problem it may be off putting (as it causes light splotches around the edge of screens and makes it hard for the monitor to create a black colour, leaving a greyish feel) and be visibly different when compared to a CRT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SeK612

One problem you may want to look into is backlight bleeding which will effect darker games such as F.E.A.R. Whilst it's not a massive problem it may be off putting (as it causes light splotches around the edge of screens and makes it hard for the monitor to create a black colour, leaving a greyish feel) and be visibly different when compared to a CRT.

---

this is the reason i don't really want to upgrade to lcd yet. i want lcd cuz they save space and look better. not to mention just a lot lighter than it's crt counter-part, but i don't want performance hits either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harrycary

Frankly I wouldn't care for a monitor bigger then the 19" monitor I'm currently using.

But, isn't 19" is large enough for PC use? I mean, how much larger can they get? The manufacturers have already figured this out. Witness the introduction of the widescreen monitor, the newest trend.

---

I have a friend that has a 32 inch LCD tv that he uses as a monitor, and it is damn nice. I have a 22 inch crt- damn heavy and a little dark, but hey, I got it for free, just had to fix the power button. if I get enough money this summer I will be definitly upgrading to >20" lcd

i was at frys this weekend and they had cod2 setup on a 42 inch widescreen lcd tv and it was bad ass. loved the way it looked. couldn't tell u if there was any ghosting or what not just for the fact i was taken in by the size of the tv and how much fun it was. lol, i'd have to actually watch someone else play the game on that for me to notice any deficiencies*.

Quote:

---

response time on that sux ballz

---

You have to be careful comparing response times, most companies try to fool you by reporting Grey to Grey response which always looks like the monitor is really fast but Samsung chose to report the more acurrate response which is the minimum acceptable for gaming and I respect their honesty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Appzalien

Quote:

---

response time on that sux ballz

---

You have to be careful comparing response times, most companies try to fool you by reporting Grey to Grey response which always looks like the monitor is really fast but Samsung chose to report the more acurrate response which is the minimum acceptable for gaming and I respect their honesty.

---

plz explain.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824001072

8ms so its good for gaming :D

i have a 17 inch 12ms samsung and it rocks for CS, WoW, UT2k4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr. nails

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Appzalien

You have to be careful comparing response times, most companies try to fool you by reporting Grey to Grey response which always looks like the monitor is really fast but Samsung chose to report the more acurrate response which is the minimum acceptable for gaming and I respect their honesty.

---

plz explain.

---

could someone explain what grey to grey response rate means and the difference between that and whichever ur other option is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr. nails

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr. nails

plz explain.

---

could someone explain what grey to grey response rate means and the difference between that and whichever ur other option is?

---

Grey to grey is always faster than the real response time and so it is inaccurate. So don't go by grey to grey its always slower but I'm not sure how much exactly tho you might want to research.

Oh yea and I hear connecting ur monitor via DVI is faster and creates lest ghosting than VGA because it doen't have to go through digital to analog to digital its just digital strait to digital - so less ghosting. Not sure if ne one stated that yet...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gam3Guy

Oh yea and I hear connecting ur monitor via DVI is faster and creates lest ghosting than VGA because it doen't have to go through digital to analog to digital its just digital strait to digital - so less ghosting. Not sure if ne one stated that yet...

---

no one has stated that yet, but knew of it in some way or another.

also, could u elaberate on grey to grey? what is the other option? i mean, usually lcds mention 8ms response rate and that's it. it doesn't state 8ms grey to grey or whatever. but i have seen it say grey to grey be4. lol, if any of that makes sense.

Why grey to grey?

LCD pixels can be off (black) on (white) or somewhere in between (grey). This is achieved by varying the voltage supplied to the pixel. In order to switch from black to white you can apply a voltage higher than the maximum needed to achieve white, and the higher the voltage the quicker it switches. This is exactly what they do, it is called overvolting. For rapid white to black the voltages are simply reversed.

To change from grey to grey you can't apply overvolting (but see below) or you will end up going too far and end up with a white (or black if going to darker grey) pixel. Consequently it takes longer to switch from grey to grey.

Since most changes are grey to grey it should be more meaningful to give a grey to grey timing. Unfortunately there is no standard for measuring the levels of grey or at what point the change is determined to have been achieved. This means that it is impossible to give an accurate comparison between manufacturers' figures.

Viewsonic seem to have come up with a method of overvolting even with grey to grey changes, allowing them to quote some very low response times - 2 to 3 ms!!!