monitor........ which one? [Archive] - SV650.org

hovis

28-12-07, 11:24 AM

http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Browse/catalogId/1500000701/identifier/8963228/zone/priceCutsZone/languageId/-1%26C%24PRICECUT%3D1/Trail/C%24cip%3D1500006463%3EC%24cip%3D1500006485.htm

EDIT it should read 20" widescreen

Luckypants

28-12-07, 11:46 AM

You don't say what you use your PC for. If watching movies, then the widescreen format would be better. For eveything else the good old square format is a better option.

I presume you are upgrading your current monitor which is smaller? Will your graphics card support a sufficient number of pixels at good enough colour depth to make full use of a larger screen?

hovis

28-12-07, 11:50 AM

You don't say what you use your PC for. If watching movies, then the widescreen format would be better. For eveything else the good old square format is a better option.?dunno? i just want to replace the old CRT bulk, just surfing, i dont watch films, or play gmes

I presume you are upgrading your current monitor which is smaller? Will your graphics card support a sufficient number of pixels at good enough colour depth to make full use of a larger screen?

i dont think i have a grafix card?

orose

28-12-07, 11:53 AM

As they're both the same price and manufacturer, I'd go with the first one (black display)

You get a higher overall resolution (and LCDs tend not to work very well outside of their optimum), the same brightness, as near as makes no difference identical dot pitch, but a slightly lower contrast.

The only downside I can see is that both are analogue input only, so if your PC doesn't have the blue d-shaped VGA connectors, neither are compatible.

Sudoxe

28-12-07, 11:57 AM

I use a pair of 19inch windscreen's on my desktop at home. It works well for me, my work laptop is also wide screen.

At work I use a pair of 18inch traditional shaped ones.

Overall I prefere the widescreen's, but im not your average user. I have unix shells and all sorts open and not just web browers.

Once you get use to them, there fantastic for surfing the web, having applications open side by side, etc. It depends on what you use a computer for I guess.

Dan

Sudoxe

28-12-07, 11:58 AM

The only downside I can see is that both are analogue input only, so if your PC doesn't have the blue d-shaped VGA connectors, neither are compatible.

2 quid and a DVI-VGA connector will fix that :thumleft:

Luckypants

28-12-07, 12:04 PM

dunno? i just want to replace the old CRT bulk, just surfing, i dont watch films, or play gmes

i dont think i have a grafix card?

In that case go for the square one. You will get slightly more screen height with that, seeing as both are 20" and screen size is measured diagonally.

You will have screen driving hardware, if not a separate graphics card, then 'on board' graphics. The same still applies, will the graphics support a higher resolution to make the most of your new screen? You may find that your graphics will only support widescreen formats at higher resolutions, so check that first before you buy. To check, got to Control Panel ---> Display ----> Settings and adjust the screen area to see what higher settings are available.

hovis

28-12-07, 12:20 PM

The only downside I can see is that both are analogue input only, so if your PC doesn't have the blue d-shaped VGA connectors, neither are compatible.
whats that then?:confused:

hovis

28-12-07, 12:21 PM

The only downside I can see is that both are analogue input only, so if your PC doesn't have the blue d-shaped VGA connectors, neither are compatible.
whats that then?:confused:

edit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VGA_connector

got one of these

Viney

28-12-07, 12:29 PM

ThEGr33k

28-12-07, 12:53 PM

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/125098

I have one of those... it is a little more expensive than those you posted but its also about 200% better. ;)

Modern LCD monitors dont have any issues running at none native resolution. Mine I play games like Crysis at 1080x768 (runs average 60FPS)as my GFX card dont have the power to put out the native (at 1600x1080 is runs 25 average dropping to 18 sometimes, which is hard to play at :().

:thumleft:

hovis

28-12-07, 06:20 PM

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/125098

I have one of those... it is a little more expensive than those you posted but its also about 200% better. ;)

:thumleft:
how?:smt058

phil24_7

28-12-07, 06:34 PM

It just is Hovis!

Xan173

28-12-07, 06:43 PM

Why not get one of these monitors instead?

http://www.mongabay.com/images/malaysia/06/malaysia0513.JPG

ThEGr33k

28-12-07, 08:54 PM

how?:smt058

It just is :rolleyes:

Better response time... meaning that its more responsive, better contrast, looks better (if that matters) its not made by acer, always helps... :thumleft:

Also has RGB and DVI-D the latter for when you go for a digital output GFX card... Its the future :D

pencil shavings

28-12-07, 11:52 PM

Pedrosa

29-12-07, 12:05 AM

Milk Monitor used to be pretty good until that old b*tch Thatcher stole the daily bottle off every school kid in the land!:nomore:

ThEGr33k

29-12-07, 12:10 AM

is acer a bad thing then?

http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0864402717.119879609 0@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccdladdmlhjifdjcflgceggdhhmdgmk.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=539721&category_oid=

I was thinking about getting this!

They arnt particualrly bad... they just arnt particularly good either. :rolleyes:

Again id point you at my link... "Only" 20" But i can asure you its enough to look great! :thumleft:

hovis

29-12-07, 10:39 AM

is it just a bit of name snobbery? or is there somting wrong with them?

ThEGr33k

29-12-07, 11:53 AM

is it just a bit of name snobbery? or is there somting wrong with them?

Its that they arn't as good spec wise as others. Acer tend to cater to PC world and places like that, not the PC enthusiast (geek)... As a geek im using my know to try to help you. Samsung make better products simple as that. Guess its ultimatly down to you.

Asus = Cheap and cheerful
Samsung = Mid priced gamer monitor, high quality.

hovis

29-12-07, 11:54 AM

im not a geek

ThEGr33k

29-12-07, 12:33 PM

im not a geek

:-s

Apophes

29-12-07, 12:37 PM

im not a geek

I think thats why the geek is trying to help you

i also run a samsung widescreen monitor and wife has emachines one and the picture quality is very noticabley different on mine :) :)

northwind

29-12-07, 03:43 PM

This would be a pretty nice choice I think:

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-063-SA&groupid=703&catid=17&subcat=948

It's a slightly older model but still good. Wee bit more expensive than your Acers there but it's a better monitor- better colour definition, better picture overall.

Or, this is mine:

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-006-BE&groupid=703&catid=17&subcat=949

Lots of backlight bleed- on dark colours the bottom of the screen looks washed out- but it's big and cheap.

I like widescreen monitors, small ones are pretty useless but once you get up to 20" or so they're very nice to use.

Sudoxe

29-12-07, 04:38 PM

is it just a bit of name snobbery? or is there somting wrong with them?

Nothing at all, im a geek and have a pair of acer monitors. Why? because they were cheap.

I dont need them to reproduce colours exactly as they would print in a photo for example.

I dont play games competitively, so to me the refresh rate doesn't matter in any real world situation. (think, people who have to have the latest £500 graphics card to play the latest game at the best level, etc)

Get the acer, its a lot cheaper than the other 20inch models (i looked on ebuyer yesterday). It will work fine if you are anything like an average PC user.

Dan

hovis

30-12-07, 07:10 PM

Get the acer, its a lot cheaper than the other 20inch models (i looked on ebuyer yesterday). It will work fine if you are anything like an average PC user.

Dan:thumleft: which one?;)