i run the 204b bf2 at 16x12.. its effing perfect.. im also running 2 gigs corsair.. thermaltake armour with a 250 power supply just for water and a 600 for card mb hd monitor.
i went with the 204b 20.1" synchmaster running dual from my pcie sapphire 800x gto myself. had the money for a 24er but i didnt think it would go well with bf2. (i live and breathe it) 5ms refresh for excellent gaming. got it from pagecomputers.com for like 500 even.. it listed as 700 i think...
1920X1200 on a dell pos.. with a 16 ms refresh rate? thats garbage.. and not a good time.. i personally use 16x12 on my 20.1" samsung .. its got a 5 ms refresh rate and causes zero ghosting with its digi input. seriously.. why go 24 with a shit rate when you can go 3 inches smaller and get top...
well first off.. who thinks the game is really realistic in the first place.. is that the point.. or is it to make a bad ass game.. in reality.. one of those stingers would shred an apache.. so the fact that it takes 2 in the game is actually decent if youre looking at it in the aspect of...
why dont you cry about it stiller..
orig.
Stiler 2[H]4U
I'm taking it half the people didn't even read the main post...?
"next big multiplayer pc game will be?"
I highly recommend the Samsung 204b.. Its got a 5ms refresh which is about as good as you can get for gaming.. 800:1 contrast ratio.. I play battlefield2 religiously and it rocks. no ghosting or lag whatsoever. dell is overrated and overpriced. it lists for over 900$ at some places but i got it...