which wide screen?

[flycatchr]

so which wide screen should i go for and why?
any ideas - does the 2ms mean anything?
or is the .27mm pitch better than the .282? can the eye even see the difference?
or should i just make the decision based on the space available in my writing desk? (height limitation)
(prices ex VAT)
thanks

23.6" WIDE TFT, 1920 X 1080 @ 85Hz, 5 Millisecond, 0.27mm dot pitch, 50000:1 Contrast Ratio, D-Sub/DVI/HDMI, Tilt & Swivel Stand
R 1 877

22" WIDE TFT, 1680 X 1050, 2 Millisecond, .282mm dot pitch, 20000:1 Contrast Ratio, Analogue/DVI, Tilt Stand, MagicBright3
R 1 942

24" WIDE TFT, 1920 X 1200, 5 Millisecond, 20000:1 Contrast Ratio, Analogue/DVI/HDMI, Swivel, Tilt Stand, MagicBright3
R 2 199

[Megageth]

Does your budget allow for a 120hz? Nvidia have a 3D system that works on those. I think its the system that Jules has just got.
Otherwise I dont think there's a huge difference in LCD's these days. They are all fast enough for gaming and I cant tell the difference, quality-wise. I have a cheapish Samsung 23" and its awesome.

[J_Th4ng]

As Geth said, most LCD monitors will be fine for gaming nowadays, the refresh rates have dropped low enough that you shouldn't experience any ghosting on any of those that you have listed.

My first thought would be to go for option A or C from that list, as both are capable of displaying FullHD, and therefore would be more future proof if you wanted to add a BluRay drive and watch BluRay movies on the PC.

However, the key point to consider is that LCD's always operat best at their native resoultion. Therefore, you should be sure that your Graphics card has enough power to run your games at the resolution of the monitor, where possible. Scaling of images has improved somewhat in both nVidia and ATi's drivers over the years, but you'll still see a slight blurriness when scalling an image from a lower resolution up to the native resolution.

As for 120Hz monitors, yes they would be a great option for stereoscopic glasses. But they are also quite pricey, so are more of a nice to have than a necessity. Although if this is what Jules has got, maybe he can give an opinion on the setup and it's use?

[flycatchr]

2 millisecond = 120 Hz?

and i got a 9800GTx - should be ok?

[J_Th4ng]

No. Refresh rate != Response rate.

Most LCD's have a 60Hz refresh rate, regardless of response rate i.e. displays 60 frames per second. Stereoscopic vision requires a refresh rate of 120Hz because the glasses block out each alternate frame to either eye, so each eye will see 60 fps out of the 120 being displayed.

Response rate is the time that the moitor takes to change colours when it receives a change. Typically measured as Grey-to-Grey i.e the time it takes to go from Grey to a reequested colour and back to Grey again. Slow response rates was what caused ghosting on older LCD's because the old image was still showing while the new one was being displayed.

The 2ms and 5ms that you see on those different monitors are more a factor of their size. There are not many 2ms 1920x1200 monitors out there, but most 1680x1050 monitors will be 2ms. I have a 5ms 1920x1200, and the image is crystal clear and sharp.

As to your GPU, ja the card is a good one and will run higher resolutions. You may need to turn some settings down in the latest games to get good framerates at that resolution though. Still, it's worth it to have a monitor that will last you for years, when you'll pobably replace your graphics card a lot sooner.

[SoSheOhPathix]

I got the high-end Fujitsu Seimens 22' WS HD 120Hz 2ms blahdey blahdey monitor for long term use, and perhaps using 3D glasses.
It was very expensive. Ridiculously so...

The glasses are... okay, I guess (I borrowed a pair from the place I bought my rig, to see if I wanted to buy a pair) but I don't think they are worth the money at this time. The novelty factor makes it all very special and exciting to begin with (no mistake, Borderlands looks fantastic in full 3D, but it takes some adjusting to), but I found a few hours of wearing them, and I got a headache, not to mention that they aren't very comfortable (I wear glasses to play, rather than contacts, but that isn't an option with 3D glasses. Unlike cinema sets, you can't wear them over spectacles). Few games will utilise them today. Maybe in future, when full 3D becomes more common in gaming, and prices drop (they are new tech, so very expensive) I'll buy a pair.
Even the in-shop techie that built my rig said it was a waste of money at the moment.

An issue I have with the really high resolutions is that despite it being crystal clear and spacious, I need a friggin' microscope to see what's on the screen outside of the games. Mine's very capable of running at 1920x1200, but I've found 1680x1050 is easier to use.

[Megageth]

A tip for widescreen users:
Holding Control + Mouse Scroll will let you change the viewing size of your browser window. (Control + Num 0 resets to default in Firefox).
Otherwise I find myself leaning closer and closer to the screen to read the crap you lot post.

[AuRoRa]

Mr Fly!

Another good choice would be the Samsung P2370 - 23" , 2ms , 50000:1 Contrast , Ultra slim and ultra power saving.

I have this and its really good - ( u can ask Shadi and Lep , they saw it) Brilliant coulor and its native res is 1920x1080

I believe this could be the monitor u have listed (Number 1 on the list???)

Its a realy good buy , im very happy wiff it :D
(if u would like to see , go to my PC review - there is a link for the monitor)