Players using LCD monitors?

[Fallschirmjager]

I have a 24 inch dell as well after years of using a CRT and I love it.

Dell and Viewsonic are at the very top of the monitor buisness with NEC, Sony and Samsung are a tier below but still excellent products.
Apple makes good stuff as well, but unless you care about looks then they are just as good as the 2nd tier stuff and cost 20% more.

[Marc von Martial]

Dell and Viewsonic are at the very top of the monitor buisness with NEC, Sony and Samsung are a tier below but still excellent products.

NEC below Dell, you got to be kidding. Even more since the top is EIZO and Dell and Viewsonic are nowhere near that [;)]

[Fallschirmjager]

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

Dell and Viewsonic are at the very top of the monitor buisness with NEC, Sony and Samsung are a tier below but still excellent products.

NEC below Dell, you got to be kidding. Even more since the top is EIZO and Dell and Viewsonic are nowhere near that [;)]

I looked at their 23 inch display and it came no where near Dell is terms of feature and value.
I found the same to be true all the day down to their 19 inch displays.
Dell at the same feature set always beat them in price or had better resoultion, brightness and contrast.
Viewsonic has decent value and some amazing response time on their displays but their 23 inch display was bested by Dell and it was 450 dollars cheaper.
From my shopping experience NEC was bested by Dell in nearly ever catagory and then went on to beat them in price as well.

The monitor I have is IMO the best LCD on the market in the under $1000 range which is where 95% of people are going to be shopping.

[Misty99]

I bought a Viewsonic VP930 (420 EURO), which is about 100 EURO cheaper than an EIZO. The quality is about the same

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/03/27/ ... age37.html

[Marc von Martial]

Pixel interpolation and color range suck with Dells, except for the two I mentioned above, and that is where monitors shine for gaming if you want to have crisp and nice graphics (despite response time, but any current NEC or EIZO is fit for gaming these days).

Reviews state exactly the opposite of your best list [;)]. Like I stated earlier, price is not everything. Granted Dell has the one or other good monitor in the bigger segements. But those are less suitable for gaming. The biggest problem with a Dell is that you can't check it out in a store first, which is very important, cause despite of features and reviews it is important you actually like the image quality.

If you want to buy an LCD you should weight the following, in order of importance:

1. pixel interpolation
2a. color gamut
2b. contrast/brightness
3. response time
4. resolution in comparison to display size

[Marc von Martial]

ORIGINAL: Misty

I bought a Viewsonic VP930 (420 EURO), which is about 100 EURO cheaper than an EIZO. The quality is about the same

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/03/27/ ... age37.html

"Than an EIZO" is a pretty broad statement, don't you think [;)]. I'm not saying Viewsonic is bad or something. But colors (especially the correct display of them) and interpolation of pixels is generally better with EIZOs.

I would not recommend an EIZO to a gamer, simply because they are more aimed at pro users. Video artists, graphic artists like me etc.

[Crimguy]

Certain Dell displays, notably the 2005FPW and the 3007, have been pretty highly regarded by reviewers, particularly in terms of price/performance.  The 2005 used the same LCD as the Apple 20" (also highly regarded) but with a brighter backlight.  While I think it has outstanding picture quality (interpolation is good but probably can be better), my unit like many suffers from some backlight bleeding in the corners due to so-so quality control.

My dad has a 24" Apple that he uses for semi-professional photography, and it is a wonderfully accurate display.  Just tough to get a Powermac video card that can drive it in all it's goodness for Unreal Tournament 2004.

[Marc von Martial]

ORIGINAL: Crimguy

Certain Dell displays, notably the 2005FPW

That's the one I put in as an exception above [;)]

The 3007 is hardly something you use for gaming [;)], it's a 30" LCD.

The corner bleeding you mention above is another point (actually one of the major points if you are a pro user). Hardly any current NEC or Eizo suffers from that.

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

............ but any current NEC or EIZO is fit for gaming these days...........

...talking 'bout EIZO. I'm still using my EIZO F56 (CRT), which I bought in 1996. [:D]. It needs some 15 minutes to "warm up" now, means it displays what we call "ghost-fonts" (dunno if there's an english term), and the white mouse pointer uses to have some mouse trails (due to luminescence), on my black desktop at least. Once warmed up :p it uses to be fine. 10 yrs...I can't think of many other brands surviving that long...maybe some Samsung Syncmasters and NECs.....one reason might be that I'm using a black desktop-background, though.
I once visited a friend at work, his insurance company used EIZOs all the way, 'til they replaced them with HP TFTs. The rest of their EIZOs are still employed in their scan-department, being used 8-10 hrs a day......They are in service since 1995/96. [:D] Great value !

I've used my F56 for DTP most of the time, and for FPS games occasionally. This thing never disappointed me regarding color clarity/temperature or regarding crisp Fonts/lines. It cost around 1700,- German Marks back then, well.....$1133 (USD) ?...kinda i guess...

.....really worth its price.

BTW, I'm not sure whether EIZO LCDs (the top ones) can be used for fully fledged video entertainment/gaming.....their response times (I assume that EIZO belongs to the few companies which publish realistic response times) are a tick too high, imo.

[Misty99]

A review in german:

http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test_eizo_s1910-k.html

http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test-vi ... vp930.html

[Marc von Martial]

ORIGINAL: Misty

A review in german:

http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test_eizo_s1910-k.html

http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test-vi ... vp930.html

A quick glimpse reveals the Eizo beeing superior in a lot of critical points. The 100€ extra are well justified.

[oi_you_nutter]

recently got a dell 20 inch lcd, CotA (and HttR) looks gorgeous at 1680x1050

[JaguarUSF]

1280x1024
1280x1024

[Grotius]

The 3007 is hardly something you use for gaming , it's a 30" LCD.

Speak for yourself! I use the 3007 for gaming every day, and it's flat-out glorious. You just have to have the videocard horsepower for it.

[Marc von Martial]

ORIGINAL: Grotius

The 3007 is hardly something you use for gaming , it's a 30" LCD.

Speak for yourself! I use the 3007 for gaming every day, and it's flat-out glorious. You just have to have the videocard horsepower for it.

Well, let me make it clearer the LCD was not designed for this, it is a multimedia / console display. Of course you can play games on a 30", but realistically how many gamers do [;)] for gaming the 19" to 21" categorie is what people look for. Maybe extend that to 23" for next year.

[Fallschirmjager]

I play many FPS at 30+ FPS on my 24 inch Dell and there is NO ghosting.

The only time the monitor ghosts ironicly is when I try and watch DVDs on it. But my computer is not really suitable for long term DVD watching and does not have an upscaler for DVDs.
Plus I have a HDTV for DVD anyways so it hardlu matters.

The 24 inch and 30 are perfect for gaming and since they allow much higher rez options than most monitors they are in some cases more ideal.


Keep trying Marc, eventualy you will stumble across something true [:)]

[pvthudson01]

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

Anybody playing COTA using a LCD monitor?

If so:

1. What is the native resolution of your monitor?

2. What resolution do you set the game at?

I am works great

I set the game at 1280 resolution

the native is 1280 as well

[Crimguy]

The 30" would be great for gaming if you have the horsepower and pixel response times are up to snuff (I'm not sure on that - I've read reviews that go either way).

I also think Mark was referring more to Dell's non-widescreen offerings. While some consider the 2001 20" to be a great monitor for gaming, I find it to be so-so, and thought the 20" widescreen was a better choice. I have seen some of their cheaper offerings, in the 17 and 19 inch range, and have not been impressed. Good business monitors though.

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

I play many FPS at 30+ FPS on my 24 inch Dell and there is NO ghosting.

The only time the monitor ghosts ironicly is when I try and watch DVDs on it. But my computer is not really suitable for long term DVD watching and does not have an upscaler for DVDs.
Plus I have a HDTV for DVD anyways so it hardlu matters.

The 24 inch and 30 are perfect for gaming and since they allow much higher rez options than most monitors they are in some cases more ideal.


Keep trying Marc, eventualy you will stumble across something true [:)]

[karto]

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck
If you want to buy an LCD you should weight the following, in order of importance:

1. pixel interpolation
2a. color gamut
2b. contrast/brightness
3. response time
4. resolution in comparison to display size

That certainly depends on what you are going to use it for...
Interpolation is only important if you aren't going to run at native resolution all or most of the time (there are a few games with fixed resolutions, but they can usually be played windowed).
Color gamut is important for some professional work, but for most home users who will never do calibration I'd recommend good factory calibration over good gamut any time.

There is no such thing (yet) as a perfect LCD... they are either expensive or lacking in one way or another. Finding a good balance of features for your use and within your budget is what matters. I find your priority list a bit arbitrary.

Offtopic, I still haven't got enough money for CotA [:(]