LCD monitor anyone?

[Torlok2002]

Anyone want a monitor.? Well I wouldnt get this one... check out the price!

http://www.newegg.com/app/viewProduc...001-143&depa=0

[Daniel]

lol 666

[USED]

Response Time: 25 ms eewwww
IT IS THE DEVIL hahahhaha

[Xullion]

I bought a Samsung 192 a couple of weeks ago, it's also an 19 inch TFT screen, for 590 Euro's..... I really love this screen, nothing wrong with it.

[Ironbuket]

I wont be buying a flat screen anytime soon because:

1 – They cost too much for good ones
2 – When the bulbs go its probably easier to throw it away than try to find someone that will fix it for a reasonable price
3 – Too easy to damage them
4 – Unacceptable small print on warranties. 99.9% of suppliers have this or similar (as with this one) “Replacement or Refund for 8 or more DEAD PIXELS ONLY!”. I guess you could try to see it run before you buy, but a place that’s going to let you do that probably is charging you a lot more.

Just buy a 21” CRT. Thanks to all these “morons” buying crappy low end LCDs the CRT prices have tumbled.

If you want flat, buy a plasma.
http://www.sonic.net/soundscape/plasma/plasma.html

Hmm, think I better just clarify that I am not saying the people in this thread are morons
...Its just that "everyone" wants to buy flat these days without having a clue what the "real" differences are in what they are buying apart from the shape of the case

[Torlok2002]

um, if i remember correctly, plasma screeen suck compared to LCD.

plasma fades and has a lot shorter life than LCD.

Anyone got a link, as i am too tired to find one now.

[Ironbuket]

I did

In my post right under where I say buy a plasma instead I put a link to a page that talks about the differences between plasma and lcd

[TheOne]

i got the samsung 191T and i can say that it is really worth buying! The colors and contrast are great! the sharpness is incredible. (is this the right word?)

i really love this screen! i bought it from a seller who gave me gurantee that there are no dead pixels!

[USED]

well come back to us in a year or two and let me know how its working for you...
and what is the responce time on that?
if its anything over 16ms then games and videos must be um less than nice..

I got a 22inch NEC 125f for $450 US and I love it, it is freakin huge, so big that I have to move my head to view things on the screen... it is just about as bright as an LCD contrast is almost on par, I can watch movies play video games and do my 3d, and if I were to get an LCD for this price it would have been a 17 inch with a crappppy responce time and I would have hated my self...
and trust me the LCD's dont last that long... we have 100's at the college that I work for and we are getting about 2-3 years out of them, that is compaired to 5-7 years on a CRT
just because something looks cool, its not the best, but some times people have to live and learn

[TheOne]

response times got nothing to say! everyone fakes them...

the 191T got a response time of 25ms.

i played ut, ut2003, ut2004, quake3, mafia and gta: vice city on it and it looks even better than on a normal screen or an flat screen with 16 ms.

[Ironbuket]

Was your 19" LCD the first time you have had a monitor that big? If so then its normal that you think its great. Whenever you move up in size it always looks amazing compared to what you had before, even if the larger monitor has worse specs

I had the same experience as USED when I moved up from 19 to 21". You are actually conscious of moving your head around to look at different parts of the screen when you first start using it, its really funny. I would never go back to sub 21"

[Jyncus]

Originally posted by TheOne
i played ut, ut2003, ut2004, quake3, mafia and gta: vice city on it and it looks even better than on a normal screen or an flat screen with 16 ms.

Are you kidding? "faking" response time? err
I purchased the exact same LCD model a few weeks ago - and although I was hesitant to go with the 25ms response time, my parents (who I was buying it for) insisted that they wanted that one. Immediately after hooking it up, I installed quake 3 on the PC and played a few matches on various levels.

Only one word to describe the way the game played on that LCD: unplayable!
I was extremely disappointed to see the ghosting and blurring in the game because of that crappy response time. If I stood perfect still, the game was crystal clear and insanely sharp - but going across a jump pad or moving the mouse quickly...the entire level turned into a giant blur. That was enough proof for me - I didnt bother installing any other games on it.

It's been known as a fact by everyone that LCDs are simply not as good as CRTs when it comes to gaming. Period. I understand they've gotten MUCH better than they use to be with contrast ratios and response times - but it's still gonna be a while before they can run a fast-paced game like q3 like a CRT can. Pretty sad considering how much more they cost..merely for aesthetic/convienence purposes.

[Ironbuket]

it's still gonna be a while before they can run a fast-paced game like q3 like a CRT can

They can, but you have to pay for a high-end one. Most people arent prepared to pay the premium and so end up with an lcd that still costs much more than a CRT, but sucks technically.

[TheOne]

i am not kidding! thats a fact.
they use absolutely the same tecnology for 16ms lcds as for 25ms lcds.

thats not what i say, thats what pros say.

[Ironbuket]

Link to article: --> Samsung and BenQ's High-End LCD Showdown @ Toms Hardware

Summary:
We tested them so believe it - LCD screens with a refresh rate faster than 16 ms and 20 ms, response times of 12 ms.