Top LCD: Apple 30" Cinema Display or Westinghouse 37" LCD-TV ?

Labrador said:
My Brother I thinked talked me into the 30" ACD, mainly because of the resolution :) I currently game at 1920x1200, he said to go down to 1920x1080 would be a big difference, and even more so on such a larger screen for 37" would look very pixelated ?
Click to expand...

If you scroll back, I said the very same thing. The bigger the screen, the higher the resolution for LCD monitor.

If a LCD TV can replace LCD Monitor, don't you think most of us would have done it by now? Why is everyone in this forum geting 24" Dell, because it's the biggest "affordable" LCD monitor.

If LCD TV can replace a LCD monitor, we'll all just to 30 - 40 " LCD TV long ago for the price. THe reason they can't cut it, is precisely due to the low resolution at such large screen.
 
btw i've owned both the 2405fpw and the 37in westy. i have done a side by side comparison. 1920x1080 vs 1920x1200 is not that much different. and nothing looks pixilated at all. the westy is a very impressive monitor. i highly suggest you guys go to a local electronics store and ask to plug in a laptop into the westy and see for yourself. make sure you use dvi1 or vga.
 
Why don't you get a 8 MB or high photo shoot, map the digital photo at 1920x1280 and show us?
 
if i had a camera that could shoot 8mp then i would do it for u

seriously for the doubters, at least go check out the westinghouse in person and connect a laptop or desktop to it through dvi THEN decide if the westy is that much worse than the acd
 
Xeero said:
if i had a camera that could shoot 8mp then i would do it for u

seriously for the doubters, at least go check out the westinghouse in person and connect a laptop or desktop to it through dvi THEN decide if the westy is that much worse than the acd
Click to expand...

Anything Apple is overpriced because it has "style". Ive seen the Westy in person and it looks great. Cinema display = waste of money unless your funds are perpetual.
 
Blethrow said:
Lol. You're right, I don't know much. But I do know my 30" ACD looks damn fine being driven by two 7800GTX cards and a 840EE at 4.2 Ghz. So I guess I know a little bit about high end systems.
Click to expand...

interchanging "fast" with high-end" makes baby jeebus cry.

High end for x86 is shit like dually Xeons and Opterons paired up with Quadro, FireGL or Realizm video, piles of Registered RAM and SCSI storage or (S)ATA hardware RAID5.

But the 30" Apple is UBaR high-end, though.
 
Tengis said:
Anything Apple is overpriced because it has "style". Ive seen the Westy in person and it looks great. Cinema display = waste of money unless your funds are perpetual.
Click to expand...
The ACD has almost twice as many pixels. The only other 2560x1600 display I found was some odd "3D display" that's over twice as expensive as the ACD.
 
MisterDNA said:
interchanging "fast" with high-end" makes baby jeebus cry.

High end for x86 is shit like dually Xeons and Opterons paired up with Quadro, FireGL or Realizm video, piles of Registered RAM and SCSI storage or (S)ATA hardware RAID5.

But the 30" Apple is UBaR high-end, though.
Click to expand...

High end for workstations maybe.. If you notice.. going that route makes no difference over a gaming system with an FX-57 (or x2 4800+ oced to 2.8), and 2-4 gigs of pc3200-pc4000 ram. Actually.. the gaming system normally beats the Xeons and Opterons..
 
All depends on the intention of the system. Sometimes purely fast = 'high-end'.
This beast is mostly for analyzing mass spectrometry data to identify proteins involved in different biological circuitry in cells, which is what I do professionaly. The app I run for that is kind of like folding at home in that is scales efficiently to arbitrary thread numbers and runs for days on a single data set. It also benefits substantially from hyperthreading (~20% extra per core). Thus I get at least three times as much speed with the 840 EE overclocked as I would with just about any single core processor. For this kind of ting, the 840EE dominates.

I've got a Quadro FX 3400 sitting on my floor gathering dust 'cause my GTX cards stomp it for everything I do graphically, which is mostly molecular modelling.

MisterDNA said:
interchanging "fast" with high-end" makes baby jeebus cry.

High end for x86 is shit like dually Xeons and Opterons paired up with Quadro, FireGL or Realizm video, piles of Registered RAM and SCSI storage or (S)ATA hardware RAID5.

But the 30" Apple is UBaR high-end, though.
Click to expand...
 
Good idea, so i did that.

Though I strongly advocate the 30" ACD, the Westy is definitely an excellent monitor. For me, highest resolution is still most important (I'd get the IBM uber-monitor if I could) but the Westy is no doubt an excellent solution where budget is high but not unlimited. Very bright, great viewing angle, and it makes a proper HDTV (1080p, nothing else is 'true' HDTV :p). I'd love to have one.

Xeero said:
seriously for the doubters, at least go check out the westinghouse in person and connect a laptop or desktop to it through dvi THEN decide if the westy is that much worse than the acd
Click to expand...
 
Noob Question for all here. Right now I have a syntax olevia 27" and I can go max res 1280 X 1024 (60hz refresh). Do a lot of FPS gaming (Fear, Quake etc). When ever my frame rates go below 35ish things get really blurry and hurts to look at (40 or better all smooth). If I bought the Westy or the ACD would either of those perform well enough to eliminate this problem?

Or is that a problem inherent with all LCDs?
 
hm, haven't seen any ghosting on pc games so i'm can't say. on console gaming, ghosting is more noticeable.
 
apcor said:
Noob Question for all here. Right now I have a syntax olevia 27" and I can go max res 1280 X 1024 (60hz refresh). Do a lot of FPS gaming (Fear, Quake etc). When ever my frame rates go below 35ish things get really blurry and hurts to look at (40 or better all smooth). If I bought the Westy or the ACD would either of those perform well enough to eliminate this problem?

Or is that a problem inherent with all LCDs?
Click to expand...

You're running a 27" at 12x10 that's why. If it's a 19 to 20", 12x 10, no problem.

If it is a 27", you need 19x12 to 2560x1600. Your res is too low
 
Blethrow said:
All depends on the intention of the system. Sometimes purely fast = 'high-end'.
This beast is mostly for analyzing mass spectrometry data to identify proteins involved in different biological circuitry in cells, which is what I do professionaly. The app I run for that is kind of like folding at home in that is scales efficiently to arbitrary thread numbers and runs for days on a single data set. It also benefits substantially from hyperthreading (~20% extra per core). Thus I get at least three times as much speed with the 840 EE overclocked as I would with just about any single core processor. For this kind of ting, the 840EE dominates.

I've got a Quadro FX 3400 sitting on my floor gathering dust 'cause my GTX cards stomp it for everything I do graphically, which is mostly molecular modelling.
Click to expand...


Blethrow, now that you have been using the apple for over 1 yr., can we hear an update of the pros and cons.

Ditto on the FX3400. It sounds like your co. pay for it. Even the mid end ATI x1600 can beat its speed for $149, which is what it is worth now.
 
Pros: obvious. Still the the biggest, excepting the IBM, which has an unacceptable refresh rate IMO. If you need the real estate as I do, nothing beats the 30ACD.

That said, the contrast ratio could stand to be a lot better. It is acceptable, but not impressive. That's really the only thing I notice at all regularly as far as defficiencies.

Yeah the Quadro, I knew that was going to be essentially disposable after a year. I'll probably put it in the computer I'm going to build for my girlfriend off my old P4 3.4 and P5AD2 board. It will suit her needs nicely.

Happy Hopping said:
Blethrow, now that you have been using the apple for over 1 yr., can we hear an update of the pros and cons.

Ditto on the FX3400. It sounds like your co. pay for it. Even the mid end ATI x1600 can beat its speed for $149, which is what it is worth now.
Click to expand...
 
For what? The heat it generates so you can save some heating oil or natural gas. If so, great idea.

For DVI display? Even a X1300 can easily match the FX3400, so just the shipping isn't worth it. The Quadro driver is good though, but you need to switch to nvidia driver for games.
 
Alright, I remember, it's no use for me. I believe Viewsonic has a very similar one at 21 or 22" at that ultra high res.
 
Happy Hopping said:
Alright, I remember, it's no use for me. I believe Viewsonic has a very similar one at 21 or 22" at that ultra high res.
Click to expand...
Yeah, actually I think they were the same display. I can't recall the resolution but it was high, they called it the "something" megapixel display I think.
 
the Viewsonic should be cheaper, as IBM price is always high, not to mention they bought it from Viewsonic.
 
I'm thinking of taking a look at the Westy - unfortunately best buy wants like 1800 for it and according to the website doesn't have it in stores. Can anyone suggest a place that usually carries them and/or the cheapest place I can get one?

Edit: Also, since its 1920x1080 instead of 1920x1200, will it be hard to force games to use this resolution? I mean, I game in 1600x1200 now, but that's fairly standard. I don't recall any games with 1920x1080 options.
 
FWIW, they have it in store in San Francisco.

Xaeos said:
I'm thinking of taking a look at the Westy - unfortunately best buy wants like 1800 for it and according to the website doesn't have it in stores. Can anyone suggest a place that usually carries them and/or the cheapest place I can get one?

Edit: Also, since its 1920x1080 instead of 1920x1200, will it be hard to force games to use this resolution? I mean, I game in 1600x1200 now, but that's fairly standard. I don't recall any games with 1920x1080 options.
Click to expand...
 
Ive checked online and there are a handful of places selling the Westinghouse 37" LCD for 1600 shipped.


Do a simple web search
 
Edit: Also, since its 1920x1080 instead of 1920x1200, will it be hard to force games to use this resolution? I mean, I game in 1600x1200 now, but that's fairly standard. I don't recall any games with 1920x1080 options.
Click to expand...

You also need to consider screen size differences. A 24" Dell2405FPW has a resolution of 1920x1200. An Apple 30" HD-Cinema display has 2560 x 1600, while the westinghouse is a 37" display with only 1920x1080. Less than that of a 24"inch screen, which is 13" smaller than the westinghouse. A screen that size will have very large pixels at that amount of pixels, making a blurry picture compaired to the other two.
 
RaphaelVinceti said:
You also need to consider screen size differences. A 24" Dell2405FPW has a resolution of 1920x1200. An Apple 30" HD-Cinema display has 2560 x 1600, while the westinghouse is a 37" display with only 1920x1080. Less than that of a 24"inch screen, which is 13" smaller than the westinghouse. A screen that size will have very large pixels at that amount of pixels, making a blurry picture compaired to the other two.
Click to expand...

The picture won't be blurry but rather pixelated just like when you blow up a low res image to full screen on a monitor. However, keep in mind that it aint as bad as having the large monitors that only do like 1280x768 resolution
 
pixilated and blurry are similar. When something becomes pixilated, it inturn becomes blurry, the image isnt sharp.
 
My friend uses this as a display ... IT IS NOT BLURRY, it's razor sharp like a PC monitor.

It looks awesome, World of Warcraft, Molten Core looked HOT..... I am about to buy this myself.


You should see Fear on this thing, several other games ... MY GOD ... people do not know what they are talking about.

Sure the dot pitch is a little bigger, but so is the damn LCD, its pixel perfect.
 
Huggles said:
These newbs know nothing. You can't see pixels at all from where I sit, which is about 2 1/2 feet from the screen.

I have to be within a foot to see pixels, and even then, just barely.


Westinghouse FTW
Click to expand...

Lets see:

A.) Nobody cares what you can and cannot see
B.) Nobody knows where you "sit" in your home in front of a computer, and
C.) Lets try to supply people with constructive information regarding the aformentioned displays, before making a blanket statement like "noobs"

:( :rolleyes:
 
Just got hit up the AV Forums. Mostly adults over there, read what they have to say and trust me, they get deep in discussion about everything.

The last thing I would ever do is "take pictures" and get into debates with teens and college guys .... hahhahahahhahah that's not how you go about this sorta thing


Anyways, yeah .... Awesome picture. Mind blowing.
 
pawstar said:
The picture won't be blurry but rather pixelated just like when you blow up a low res image to full screen on a monitor. However, keep in mind that it aint as bad as having the large monitors that only do like 1280x768 resolution
Click to expand...

For God's sake, this is not a lawyer conference. Blur, Pixelate, Bad for your eyes, what's the difference.

The pt. is, the res. is too low for a 37". That's what everyone is trying to say. If 37" works, don't you think everyone will just to buy the 37" and noone would be buying the 24" dell or 30" apple.
 
Happy Hopping said:
For God's sake, this is not a lawyer conference. Blur, Pixelate, Bad for your eyes, what's the difference.

The pt. is, the res. is too low for a 37". That's what everyone is trying to say. If 37" works, don't you think everyone will just to buy the 37" and noone would be buying the 24" dell or 30" apple.
Click to expand...


Too low :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top