[DRB]

I have no freakin' clue. I see them priced all over the place and don't understand the differences between them. I don't want to spend a lot but it needs to be of decent quality. Its going to be for a PC only.

- no gaming
- pictures
- some video

Any help will be greatly appreciated.

 

[binary visions]

Dell 1905FP (which is the old one, and just as good if you can still find one) or 1907FP (which is the new model).

Awesome monitor. Keep an eye on bensbargains.net and they will go on sale if you don't need it immediately.

 

[Kornphlake]

Everybody seems to love Dell flat panels, seems to be the only thing people love that comes in a brown box with a crooked blue E.

If it's just for web surfing I'd say just get what ever is on sale with rebates at circuit city or compusa. I have a hard time seeing any differance between the cheap ones, they all seem to be about the same. It's still hard to beat the clarity of a CRT if you've got the desk space.

 

[binary visions]

I'd suggest that my Dell rivals the clarity of all but the pricier CRTs.

I can clearly see a difference between the inexpensive LCDs like my Princetons at work and the Dell I've got at home... yet the price difference wasn't that much.

There are other nice LCDs like the Apple Cinemas or the high end Gateways but the Dell beats them in the price-to-performance ratio. For pictures, I wouldn't do yourself the disservice of buying a cheap LCD, you're going to want something bright and contrast-y.

Just MHO of course

 

[Tenchiro]

I recently got a Viewsonic va2012wb and besides one incident it has been a fantastic monitor. Although from what I have read on the web this is an issue with many different LCD's.

If you plan on getting Windows Vista, make sure the display you get is HDMI compatible though.

 

[Tenchiro]

I have no freakin' clue. I see them priced all over the place and don't understand the differences between them. I don't want to spend a lot but it needs to be of decent quality. Its going to be for a PC only.

Here is a blurb from PC World on what to look for;

LCD Monitors

Native resolution: Because an LCD uses a matrix of cells to display its image, it has a fixed (or native) resolution at which it looks best. A 15-inch LCD has a native resolution of 1024 by 768, while a 17- or 18-inch model will look its best at 1280 by 1024. If you set the monitor to a lower resolution, the image will blur, because the display will use only a portion of the pixels it contains and will scale up the resulting image to fill the screen.

Though scaling technologies have improved recently, you're likely to be disappointed with the results. Text looks jagged at nonnative resolutions, so an LCD is a good choice if you tend to use just one resolution for all applications.

Viewing angle: An LCD's viewing angle (measured in degrees) indicates how far you can move to the sides or above or below the center of the display before the image begins to darken or blur. An angle of 160 degrees is advisable; a narrower angle may make the screen look as if you were seeing it through a tunnel. Vendors measure viewing angles in different ways, so those specs are similarly meaningless, except within brands. Whatever the spec reads, viewing angle is vital, so view before you buy.

Many LCDs have stands that can adjust or swivel sideways; this can help compensate for a relatively narrow viewing angle.

Contrast ratio: This term refers to the difference in light intensity between the brightest white and the darkest black that an LCD can produce. Look for a contrast ratio of 300:1 or better--with anything lower, colors may wash out when you turn up the brightness and may disappear when you turn it down.

Digital vs. analog: If your PC has a graphics card with digital video-out, choose a digital LCD. Because the image won't have to be converted from analog to digital and back again, it will be clearer. Even if your system doesn't have a DVI port, a digital LCD makes sense, since most also have an analog connection. Digital inputs tend to be found on relatively high-end models, but they are becoming increasingly prevalent at all price levels.

 

[Kornphlake]

I'd suggest that my Dell rivals the clarity of all but the pricier CRTs.

I can clearly see a difference between the inexpensive LCDs like my Princetons at work and the Dell I've got at home... yet the price difference wasn't that much.

There are other nice LCDs like the Apple Cinemas or the high end Gateways but the Dell beats them in the price-to-performance ratio. For pictures, I wouldn't do yourself the disservice of buying a cheap LCD, you're going to want something bright and contrast-y.

Just MHO of course

OOps, I mis read the original post to say no games, no pictures and some video. Yeah, get a dell monitor if you're going to be doing any work with photos.

I wasn't trying to compare Dell monitors to other cheap flat panels, rather I was saying that comparing a cheap monitor to a cheap monitor, you'll have a tough time finding one better than another. Some of the cheap ones are slightly better than the more expensive ones though.

You'll want to make sure that your video card can support the native resolution of the monitor and not bog down though, that's really annoying and you can't really turn down the resolution on a LCD.

 

[DRB]

Okay so two questions:

1. Do the Dell and the viewsonic have this HDMI thingy y'all speak of?

2. How do I tell if my video card can support the native resolution of the monitor?

Thanks for the info everyone.

 

[binary visions]

No, neither the Dell nor the Viewsonic have HDMI inputs. Windows Vista isn't going to require HDMI, though. Tenchiro, whatcha talkin' 'bout, Willis?

DRB, what video card do you have? If you have a pre-built system, what system do you have?

Most video cards will support 1280x1024 which is the native resolution of the Dell. The Viewsonic is 1680x1050. If you have video card documentation, it should list the supported resolutions.

 

[Tenchiro]

No, neither the Dell nor the Viewsonic have HDMI inputs. Windows Vista isn't going to require HDMI, though. Tenchiro, whatcha talkin' 'bout, Willis?

http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/hardware/hdcp-vista.ars

Sorry I should have said HDCP not HDMI. HDMI is the physical interface... HDCP is the content protection scheme that if you hardware does not support, and you play an HD video on Vista it will be downsampled to roughly 25% of it's former glory.

While the final implementation on release my vary from what has been reported, it is always a good idea toplan for the future. But hey if you never plan on playing any sort of HD video or won't get Vista then you are free to get whichever display you want.

 

[-dustin]

my monitor is a Dell 1905FP. picture quality is good. however, i still go to my girlfriend's computer to fine tune. she's got a 17" Dell CRT. i messed around with my monitor, attempting to tweak it, and nothing seems to work. video card, perhaps?

 

[binary visions]

I thought DVI could support HDCP as well

And studio execs agreed to keep the HDCP downsampling tokens off the files until at least 2010, so no worries there.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060521-6880.html

 

[binary visions]

Inbred; you have to be a bit more specific. Specifically, how is the image quality inferior?

Contrast, color and saturation are all great on my 1905FP using DVI. Resolution is plenty good. What difference are you seeing out of your girlfriend's monitor?

DVI, by the way, will improve things if you aren't using it.

 

[Tenchiro]

I thought DVI could support HDCP as well

And studio execs agreed to keep the HDCP downsampling tokens off the files until at least 2010, so no worries there.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060521-6880.html

Still that is only 4 years away, my last display lasted almost 10 years. although it is very likely that most of the DRM's included in Vista will have cracks and workarounds in its first week of release.

Still something to keep in mind for people currently in the monitor market.

 

[binary visions]

Still that is only 4 years away, my last display lasted almost 10 years. although it is very likely that most of the DRM's included in Vista will have cracks and workarounds in its first week of release.

Still something to keep in mind for people currently in the monitor market.

Yes, it's fine to keep in mind, but for the price of an HDCP supported panel now, you could buy one cheap one now, and one when the prices on HDCP panels come down in 4 years.

As a matter of fact, I don't even know of any current, low priced LCD panels that support HDCP.

The cheapest monitor in this roundup is $600.

 

[Tenchiro]

Yes, it's fine to keep in mind, but for the price of an HDCP supported panel now, you could buy one cheap one now, and one when the prices on HDCP panels come down in 4 years.

As a matter of fact, I don't even know of any current, low priced LCD panels that support HDCP.

The cheapest monitor in this roundup is $600.

Gateway released one recently, it is 19" Widescreen (FPD1975W) and is only $300, although the Dell 2007WFP is only a bit more, supports HDCP and is 20"

 

[Tenchiro]

Hell, looking at Dell's website I might return my Viewsonic and order one of those. They are on sale for $367 now.

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&cs=19&sku=320-4688

 

[binary visions]

Hell, looking at Dell's website I might return my Viewsonic and order one of those. They are on sale for $367 now.

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&cs=19&sku=320-4688

You can buy coupons on eBay for a buck that'll net you $20 off 200 or sometimes $30 off 300.

 

[OGRipper]

You guys rock! I hope bike newbs get help like this when they come to RM, good stuff. Those Dells are looking sweet, thanks.

 

[binary visions]

Just one thing to keep in mind when shopping monitors is that, like televisions, there is a non-quantitative aspect of picture quality. It has a lot to do with how the firmware and image processing chips handle the signal.

The only reason I mention it is because you can look at a lot of cheap monitors that will have decent specs for brightness, contrast, etc., but might end up looking lousy in the end.