Time for new monitor or stick with my NEC 20wmgx2?

I've been out of the loop on monitors for quite a while. I've been an NEC fan for nearly two decades, and my NEC 20wmgx2 continues to serve me well. Unfortunately, I have the new purchase itch.

http://reviews.cnet.com/lcd-monitors/nec-multisync-20wmgx2-lcd/4505-3174_7-31627974.html

I'm looking for opinions on whether it would be worthwhile to upgrade from this monitor. Computer use is mainly for gaming, a little design work, and never movie watching. Would upgrading justify the cost associated with newer models and/or brands?

I have an NEC 20WMGX2 as well. I love this thing, but would really like something bigger/higher res. I tried one of those $400 27" IPS displays... and the colors just doesn't hold a candle to the NEC IMO (or maybe I got a bad version, I don't know). I really do need to find a replacement though - this NEC has 13000 hours on it, and the backlight is getting weaker

Aside from the new purchase itch, what would you change about your monitor if you could? Size? Resolution? Specific features? We can't make an upgrade recommendation without knowing why you want to upgrade? If all you're looking to do is to spend money, let me know and I'll give you my Paypal info

Well, I'd prefer to go maybe 2-4 inches bigger. Additionally, this monitor is highly reflective, so it does not help with eye strain. Moving to a matte would be my preference. Improved contrast ratio and color gamut would be a plus too. I've heard both pros and cons to higher response time, but I guess it cannot hurt to move up to 120Hz or 240Hz.

Master Blaster said:

Well, I'd prefer to go maybe 2-4 inches bigger.

Click to expand...

Alright then, best to look at the 23-24" range, as most monitors are actually 23.6" and advertised as either 23 or 24.

Master Blaster said:

Additionally, this monitor is highly reflective, so it does not help with eye strain. Moving to a matte would be my preference.

Click to expand...

I would suggest going with TN/VA then, as their matte coatings are minimal. Most matte IPS panels use heavy coating. Definitely view one in person as a retail store to make sure it won't bother you.

Master Blaster said:

Improved contrast ratio and color gamut would be a plus too.

Click to expand...

Wider color gamut is not a good thing for gaming, which you stated you'd want to do in your original post. This leads to over saturation. I'm guessing then you want more accurate colors and likely 8-bit per subpixel rather than the typical 6-bit plus FRC.

Master Blaster said:

I've heard both pros and cons to higher response time, but I guess it cannot hurt to move up to 120Hz or 240Hz.

Click to expand...

Response time and refresh rate are not the same thing. Getting a 120hz monitor limits you to TN, which puts you in conflict with some of your other goals. 240hz doesn't exist in PC monitors except in TV/monitor hybrids with motion interpolation.

Based on what you want, the best compromise that I could come up with is the Samsung S24A650D. It's a VA panel, so it's response time isn't as good as a TN or even modern overdriven IPS panels, but should be adequate. I'd still recommend trying before buying if you have that option. Contrast and black levels will be among the best you can get on an LCD. It's 24" and 1080p, so it offers you a larger size and slightly higher resolution. The panel is actually semi-gloss, which is the ideal compromise between highly reflective glossy solutions and overly grainy matte solutions. It was a strong consideration for me, but the response time was a bit on the slow side for my gaming preferences.

So, given that you have an older S-IPS panel, what do you gain/lose by going to this Samsung?

Color Reproduction: about the same, minus gamma shift (see below)
Viewing angles: both advertised as 178/178, but this VA monitor will give you slightly better real world vertical angles (leaning back in your chair), but worse horizontal angles. Overall, IPS > VA in this regard
Response time: Given that yours isn't overdriven like today's panels, the Samsung should actually offer comparable or faster response times
Contrast: real world contrast will be 3-4x better on the Samsung

Again though, try to view this monitor in person.

Thanks Medion for the detailed response.

Master Blaster said:

Thanks Medion for the detailed response.

Click to expand...

Just keep in mind that pretty much no matte monitor will reproduce colors in the same way the 20WMGX2 does. The gloss really does make everything pop. Since colors seem to be a priority to you, that's something to consider.

What kind of budget are you looking at? If you're willing to move upto 27... perhaps that "semi-gloss" Samsung would be worth looking into? Pricy at $1200 though. Then again, I don't know about you, but I've been rocking my 20WMGX2 for almost 8 years now - so the extra money doesn't seem too bad from that perspective.

TerraPhantm said:

Just keep in mind that pretty much no matte monitor will reproduce colors in the same way the 20WMGX2 does. The gloss really does make everything pop. Since colors seem to be a priority to you, that's something to consider.

What kind of budget are you looking at? If you're willing to move upto 27... perhaps that "semi-gloss" Samsung would be worth looking into? Pricy at $1200 though. Then again, I don't know about you, but I've been rocking my 20WMGX2 for almost 8 years now - so the extra money doesn't seem too bad from that perspective.

Click to expand...

The recommendation that I gave him is also semi-gloss.

The Samsung 650 may be a decent option to try. The only isssues I can think of are:

Color coverage isn't the greatest on it. I think it was around 86% or so s-rgb?

The 20wmgx2 may be better for gaming. Wasn't that model considered top of the line as far as response times and gaming? I've seen gamers mention it is/was one of the fastest IPS screens around.

The 20"er may look sharper, as it has a lower dot pitch than any 1080p 24"er, and especially a 1080p 27"er. You'd have to move up to 27" and 1440p to match it.