• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Torn between CRT or LCD - help please!

Tengis

Tengis

Supreme [H]ardness
2FA
Joined
Jun 11, 2003
Messages
6,528
Any suggestions on a 17 inch or bigger CRT or LCD? I WANT an LCD, I just dont want ghosting. People say some ghost, other people say the same one doesnt... so I really dont know which to aim for. If it has ghosting I dont want an LCD... is there any proof of no ghosting on any type of monitor?

Gah, Im tired, Im sure you people understand what Im talking about. LCD or CRT, 17 inches or bigger, 700$ is my budget, although 500-600 is preferred. Can anyone suggest anything for me that doesnt ghost, fits my budget, and I wouldnt be disapointed with it.

Thanks, Ill edit this post tomorow when Im not so tired.
 
Wait for the Philips 19 inch LCD that's 12 MS. It's the 90S5CS and will retail for 712 bucks.
 
I have a Dell 1901FP LCD with a 25ms Response time and I don't have any ghosting. There is a bit of fast motion "grainy" look but that I only notice on very fast flyby animations. I play UT2004 and have 0 problems compared to my 19" Mitusbishi Diamondton CRT

I know the Kyle and the bunch here at [H] dislike tomshardware.com but Tom has a good review round up on fast LCD monitors that I suggest you look at.

Tom's Review
 
It sounds like you don't know if an LCD is right for you. I would make sure that you order from monitors direct or dell so you can return the monitor hassle free within 30 days.
www.monitorsdirect.com
www.dell.com

I have an Hitachi CML174B that I got from monitors direct. It is under your budget but I like it a lot. Since you have more money to spend you might want to look into a Samsung panel or a Dell panel.
 
i would check out the samsung 172x its 17'' its just over $500 and its got a 12ms response time... thats the lowest response time available (im pretty sure) so the chances of ghosting are going to be very very very slim.. (i plan on getting that monitor for my gaming monitor)
 
sniper991122 said:
so the chances of ghosting are going to be very very very slim.. (i plan on getting that monitor for my gaming monitor)
Click to expand...

Umm... no.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/samsung_3.html

That 12ms response time seems to be measured from pure black to pure white, while the greys and midtone response pretty suck ass.

The contrast and color reproduction, however, is awesome.

I really have to wonder if all the people lauding this screen's response time have ever seen a screen with a Hydis or AU Optronics v2 panel in action and how much of their praise is from placebo.

My best advice is to test the 172X along side LCDs with the AU Optronics v2 or Hydis panels at a store, play FarCry on them, then a stealth ops/indoors-type games (ie. a really bright game vs. the more ubiquitious Doom/corridor/dark-ish game).
 
That review was probably of the 25ms PVA panel 172X and not the retail version. Never make a decision off of one review as bias get in the way and opinions on ghosting vary. Overall the reviews from both professional and consumers praise the 172x as being one of the best gaming monitors out.
 
Neurofreeze said:
Umm... no.
Click to expand...
*sigh* this is why i didn't say 'you wont see ghosting'

i said... and i quote 'very very very slim'

meaning... its possible... but not going to be too likely.. (probably slim..)
 
jskagg said:
That review was probably of the 25ms PVA panel 172X and not the retail version. Never make a decision off of one review as bias get in the way and opinions on ghosting vary. Overall the reviews from both professional and consumers praise the 172x as being one of the best gaming monitors out.
Click to expand...

No, they stated specifically that it was the 12ms version, look back a couple pages or look at the table below the graph. By the way, I don't know what "25ms PVA panel 172X" you speak of, because all Samsung 172X 12ms panels are PVA-based.

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=24-001-146&depa=0

Panel Type: a-si TFT/PVA LCD
Native Resolution: SXGA (1280 x 1024)
Pixel Pitch: 0.264 mm
Brightness: 270 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 500 : 1
Response Time: 12 ms
Click to expand...

Also, how many of those reviews were only reviewer's impressions, short, and/or vague? What'd they test?

This site reviews stuff with reviewer's impressions and hard, empirical numbers. It's very thorough, and of what I've been able to see in person (which is quite a bit, I bummed around monitor sections of various computer stores messing with monitors while I was in the market as much as possible), they're always right on the money.

Seriously, how many of you have simply been impressed by the fact that this monitor is a name brand, new, and has good specs? A thousand short little blurbs on CNET, numerous consumers who don't have much experience with good LCDs, and short one-page reviews done by sites who don't regularly review LCDs and have no standard methodology mean nothing compared to a single good review by a consistent and thorough site and reviewer.

Surprisingly, Tom's is a decent LCD reviewer, they do it quite regularly and consistently (I guess they're not biased in this market since there's no high-profile ethical debates about it). They're particularly good with contrast ratio assessment, but somewhat still subjective with the response time (although they clearly have an understanding.

Samsung SyncMaster 172X: Games, Movies, Notes

Games

No dice, the Samsung panel is still a notch below that of the AU Optronics [I believe they mean the newer v2 16ms ones, as the old v1 would simply get its ass kicked by this newer PVA-based LCD]. The screen still leaves perceptible ghosting. The rendering is comparable to that of the LG-Philips 16 ms panels. The Hydis panel therefore still remains the most responsive panel for the moment.
Click to expand...

http://www4.tomshardware.com/display/20040413/lcd-07.html
 
sniper991122 said:
*sigh* this is why i didn't say 'you wont see ghosting'

i said... and i quote 'very very very slim'

meaning... its possible... but not going to be too likely.. (probably slim..)
Click to expand...

It looks very likely to me. Unless all you do is play outdoor levels in FarCry (ie. no Doom3 or stealth ops for you), you're going to see it. If you're inexperienced with fast LCDs you may just not notice because all the modern (AU Optronics v2, LG Phillips 16ms, Hydis, this Samsung PVA 12ms panel) are at the very least decent.

It's like going from crappy montor speakers to the Logitech Z560's. You'll be floored with the sound quality, but anyone who has experience with multiple higher-end setups (I'm not talking $1230983120312USD pro audio stuff, even just Klipsch ProMedia stuff), would know that it really isn't that great, simply decent for its price.
 
The specification download from samsung's site claims it is a TN TFT. PVA monitors can not have that fast of response time with present technology as x-bit said in that review. PVA monitors have the better color explaining that aspect of the review. I don't know but this is just what I have found through digging. The 25ms ones they gave to reviewers were all PVA, I still think the 12ms is TN
 
Neurofreeze said:
It looks very likely to me. Unless all you do is play outdoor levels in FarCry (ie. no Doom3 or stealth ops for you), you're going to see it. If you're inexperienced with fast LCDs you may just not notice because all the modern (AU Optronics v2, LG Phillips 16ms, Hydis, this Samsung PVA 12ms panel) are at the very least decent.

It's like going from crappy montor speakers to the Logitech Z560's. You'll be floored with the sound quality, but anyone who has experience with multiple higher-end setups (I'm not talking $1230983120312USD pro audio stuff, even just Klipsch ProMedia stuff), would know that it really isn't that great, simply decent for its price.
Click to expand...


what would you recommend then for a monitor thats to be used heavily for gaming? (this is in a place where lcd is the only type of monitor that will fit)

what type of monitor do you think would 'blow away' the samsung 172x?
 
jskagg said:
The specification download from samsung's site claims it is a TN TFT. PVA monitors can not have that fast of response time with present technology as x-bit said in that review. PVA monitors have the better color explaining that aspect of the review. I don't know but this is just what I have found through digging. The 25ms ones they gave to reviewers were all PVA, I still think the 12ms is TN
Click to expand...

The viewing angles are excellent as you should expect from a PVA matrix. No, this hasn’t been a typo! The monitor does use a PVA matrix, although the manufacturer’s website says “TN+Film”.
Click to expand...

The incredibly slow version of the 172X you speak of were from LAST YEAR. They debuted around Fall, reviewers slammed it, then Samsung reworked the panel and finally released a decent one this year, which is the current 172X everyone's gobbling up. I don't think the old 172X actually made it to retail.

(Xbitlabs review was March 4th 2004, Tom's April 13th 2004, Tom's actually reviewed the old version too; they said its pixel response of the old 172X was something like a "catastrophic picture rendering failure" or something to that effect.)

Second, Samsung's website doesn't look like it was looked over all too closely:
[link=http://www.samsung.com/Products/Monitor/LCDMonitor/Monitor_LCDMonitor_172X_sp.htm]Samsung's website's 172X specs[/link]
Color Supported 16.2Mil.
Click to expand...

16.2M is the number used to inflate an 18-bit panel (262,144 actual colors) trying to fake (dither) a true 24-bit panel (16.7M). As far as I know, no manufacturers producing quality panels produce any 18-bit panels anymore. Not only that, would this page be true, then this monitor would simply suck in color reproductions, even compared to older (20ms) TFT+TN panels from AU Optronics or LG Philips and wouldn't be worth a damn.

Finally, the manual states ai-s TFT Active Matrix, it does not specifiy whether it is a-is TFT/PVA or a-is TFT/TN, so pulling that up doesn't mean squat.
 
I did some googling and reading and I think I figured it out!

Okay, the old, old 172X that made it to reviewers last year, which totally got railed, is actually a TN+Film panel: it just sucked even on its pixel response. It was dog-slow and had 16.2M (18-bit dithered) colors instead of the standard 16.7M (24-bit true). Samsung's site hasn't updated their 172X page for the new PVA-based 12ms panel! Yes, this means the current 172X is a PVA and 12ms, which explains the so-so response time the new reviews are giving it.

sniper991122 said:
what would you recommend then for a monitor thats to be used heavily for gaming? (this is in a place where lcd is the only type of monitor that will fit)

what type of monitor do you think would 'blow away' the samsung 172x?
Click to expand...

I think I came off a little harsh (probably because there were so many blindly praising the 172X), but the 172X is still pretty damn good, but it's just not as good as the AU Optronics v2 (16ms) stuff in terms of pixel response (although significantly better contrast) and clearly not as good to the very, very new 12ms Optronics panels (which even have comparable color reproduction and contrast).

Supposedly there's a new 173V series with an updated 12ms TFT+TN Film panel that blows away its predecessor (which was 25ms), but I've only seen it for sale in Japan and Europe (more or less the same price as the 172X). I've seen the 173VT around the web in the US, but that has an added touchscreen. I don't know what it does to the cost.

Have you looked into the BenQ FP767-12? It's the first monitor with the AU Optronics 12ms panel. There's a new Hydis panel coming, too. Although Hydis performs the best, it doesn't come cheap. Besides, waiting sucks. :(

So yeah... BenQ FP767-12 is about the only alternative readily available, in your price range, and an excellent performer all around. Note that it has shit for ergonomics. The Samsung stuff has some crazy ergonomics, the BenQ will basically tilt... that's about it. It looks like the no-go ergonomics of it shaved a few bucks off the price though. Also, you'll be giving up 20 degrees in horizontal viewing area with the switch to TN+Film (140 opposed to 160).

Edit: Heh, Tom's got careless with editing on the last page of their newest LCD review: They used the outdated Samsung website's specs AND transposed the color depth of the 172X with the BenQ FP767-12. It is certain that the BenQ FP767-12 is one of the new AU Optronics TN+Film 12ms panels, which is certainly a true 24-bit panel, not some 18-bit 16.2M dithered crap.

http://www.benq.com/display/lcd_fp767-12.html

There's a link to the manufacturer's product page.

Edit again: Please note that it is the FP767-12, not the FP767-v2, which uses the 16ms Optronics panels.
 
okay, so between the samsung 172x and the benq fp767-12 which would perform better for games? (tilt doesn't matter, they would be mounted on the wall either way, and other aspects dont matter as much since i'd have a 2nd monitor for browsing and aim and stuff... this ones just primarily for games)
 
Most seem (except for CNET/ZDNet, who give some of the worst reviews ever) to lean towards the BenQ FP767-12. I honestly can't say in person, since out of the two I've only used the 172X.

I personally use a monitor based on a Hydis panel (16ms Acer 1721), but I don't suggest getting it since its awesome pixel response is really all it has. Comparated to the Samsung and Optronics panels, its contrast only so-so, which can be pretty important when looking at dark corridors in games, but this monitor was way cheaper, $400 (and this monitor also lacks ergonomics as well). I can say however my panel is more responsive in person and on reviews than the 172X though. ;) Outdoor FarCry stuff is basically the same across the board between these two, but anything indoors/corridoors/stealth ops games/etc. mine beats it. I'd imagine the same would go for the BenQ since it's everything the 16ms Optronics panel was but better.

(By the way, BenQ is the parent company of AU Optronics I believe, hence why they have the first 12ms Optronics LCD out.)

Seriously, if you can find a computer outlet (like CompUSA, or Fry's, or Microcenter, or Best Buy) with these monitors, go see for yourself. Just remember to try both light and dark games and attempt to calibrate the monitor yourself (brightness and contrast are generally set way too high in stores so people can see them from a distance, which does affect pixel response).
 
i'd love to be able to go to best buy or compusa to try one of these monitors, but at best buy all we have is like a no name brand 15'' 50ms lcd monitor, and some other random ones.. and they aren't even hooked up to a computer, its just the monitor displaying an image with a little motion...

thats why, my choice has to be mostly on reviews and suggestions by other people... i try to use tomshardware and anandtech to base my decisions, but they aren't always best =\
 
In Maximum PC the DELL 2001fp (16ms) scored better in ghosting (or lack of it) than many of the 12ms panels. If you can test out the specific panel you are interested in, instead of just relying on a spec number.
 
none of this helps me much...

My options:

New CRT + X800XT Platinum when it comes out

AWESOME Flat panel

Which should I get? Cast your votes!
 
I can't beleive that anyone who is hardcore gamer still considers an LCD

what is the world coming to.
 
AMD T-type said:
I can't beleive that anyone who is hardcore gamer still considers an LCD

what is the world coming to.
Click to expand...

the worlds coming to cramped dorm rooms that are to be shared between two people :) thats what its coming to... so in my case lcd > crt greatly because of size..
 
Tengis said:
none of this helps me much...

My options:

1. New CRT + X800XT Platinum when it comes out

2. AWESOME Flat panel

Which should I get? Cast your votes!
Click to expand...

uhh.. the first one!
 
agentzero9 said:
In Maximum PC the DELL 2001fp (16ms) scored better in ghosting (or lack of it) than many of the 12ms panels. If you can test out the specific panel you are interested in, instead of just relying on a spec number.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the 2001fp use the TN+Film 16ms LG Philips panel? I forget. In that review, the LCD reviewed used an LG Philips IPS panel.


Tengis said:
none of this helps me much...

My options:

New CRT + X800XT Platinum when it comes out

AWESOME Flat panel

Which should I get? Cast your votes!
Click to expand...


If you don't care about weight, power consumption, heat, and size, the choice is clear:

CRT + Video card.

The only reason why I buy LCDs is because weight, heat, size, and (eventually) power consumption do matter to me.
 
I move my computer about once a week to different places, the weight of my monitor breaks my back. I will only buy an LCD if I know it wont ghost, but I dont know that! So Im having som troubles. =p.
 
sniper991122 said:
the worlds coming to cramped dorm rooms that are to be shared between two people :) thats what its coming to... so in my case lcd > crt greatly because of size..
Click to expand...

Well then, thats a whole other story :p
 
It's too bad you have to move your monitor so much; my FP2141 is the best $550 I've ever spent.
 
Neurofreeze said:
Edit: Heh, Tom's got careless with editing on the last page of their newest LCD review: They used the outdated Samsung website's specs AND transposed the color depth of the 172X with the BenQ FP767-12. It is certain that the BenQ FP767-12 is one of the new AU Optronics TN+Film 12ms panels, which is certainly a true 24-bit panel, not some 18-bit 16.2M dithered crap.

http://www.benq.com/display/lcd_fp767-12.html

There's a link to the manufacturer's product page.

Edit again: Please note that it is the FP767-12, not the FP767-v2, which uses the 16ms Optronics panels.
Click to expand...

http://www.benq.com/display/lcd_fp767-12_specs.html

according to the spec sheet, the FP767-12 can only display 16.2 million colors with dithering.
 
I work in an office that deals with large (>500MB) images, and I can tell you we have yet to find a LCD monitor that comes close to a CRT for "roaming" quality (panning around a static image). We have a few very expensive IBM LCDs with a strange aspect ratio that are picture perfect when looking an static image. As soon as you start panning around (or watch a video or whateva) you get bad ghosting. They all do it and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. They are simply justifying their purchases. We ended up with a few the Dell 21" LCDs, but they really pale in comparision to the Sony F520 and FW900 CRTs we have been using. I suspect as soon as they start getting dead pixels and the vendor won't take them back until there 5 or 6 (sometimes more, depends on vendor) pixels gone, we will stop buying them completely.

Also don't buy one unless you can drive it with DVI.

Just my $0.02.
 
Be sure to order from Dell or Monitorsdirect so you can return it without a restocking fee.
 
So, the more trained your eyes, the more ghosting you see? I kind of expect that. Course, I could live with ghosting if it's not too bad, but thats far more subjective than to trust to reviewers. When I get the cash for the screen and a card that can drive it with the games that I want to play, I'll save up and try :)
 
It's a personal judgment call thats 2-fold. Some people's eyes are naturally "slow" and hardly see ghosting or even at all. Then there's people like Barry Bonds who could probably read a newspaper in a centrifuge...and beyond how much ghosting you happen to notice, there's also the issue of how much it bothers you. Some people can't stand ghosting at all, and some are just fine with it. But it all depends on you...and what you use your computer for. Like i mentioned a few days ago, I still play a lot of 3rd person adventure games and RPGs...Some of those games looked like a blurry mess on all the LCDs I tried and I found it unacceptable...again tho I have fast eyes and I was bothered by it, while others might not see it as much, or just might not care! Go to a store or a friend's house and try out some LCDs and play around with them!
 
Maybe I have bad eyes, but the 25ms response time on my Samsung 181T has always been perfect in all games, and I have never noticed any ghosting whatsoever. I use a DVI connection, though, which I truly believe makes the difference; if you notice ghosting on LCDs using VGA, try one using DVI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top