20in Widescreen Monitor

[SMHarman]

1in too small, but I have one of these and it is great.
http://www.dabs.com/productview.aspx...446N&InMerch=1
DVI too (though I am using analog). GBP140 from most places.

Originally Posted by SMHarman

1in too small, but I have one of these and it is great.
http://www.dabs.com/productview.aspx...446N&InMerch=1
DVI too (though I am using analog). GBP140 from most places.

I agree, I have one, too - I use it for watching DVD & Cable TV, plus as a normal monitor & it does what it says on the tin

Having said that, I have used a 17" widescreen Samsung 'syncmaster' & it was also very good, despite being a couple of years old & having a slower refresh rate. (Mrs Gaz is still using it)

[tomjleeds]

Originally Posted by Nikesh

Sorry for creating a new post, it won't let me edit my old one. I've just realised that the Samsung monitor isn't 16:9 widescreen. It's 16:10?

Is this the new standard or should I look for a 16:9 one?

Also, do I need a different graphics card? I have a 128mb GeForce MX4000 at the moment.

Thanks.

16:10 is the standard for wide monitors. Don't ask me why, I don't have the faintest idea. Probably something similar to why 17" and 19" monitors use 5:4 instead of 4:3.

Your graphics card will handle it just fine. As long as you're not wanting to play any games, that is

PC World are indeed advertising the Samsung at the £200 mark, but of course it's impossible to get hold of one. I'm yet to find a store with them in stock, and I've checked six That particular model is definitely meant to be good for the price.

Personally I'd stay away from 19" wides, they offer less desktop space than with a 17" or 19" 5:4 display, which seems a little pointless to me. Good if it's mainly going to be used for watching movies I guess, though that size screen still seems small for that purpose to me.

If you're not in any particular rush, you may want to wait a couple of months, as 22" looks to be becoming something of a 'standard', so 20.1" displays should be rather a bargain fairly soon.

[pooper]

Hmm well the loss in height isn't really that noticable at all, whereas the gain in width is actually pretty handy! Especially for running a browser/document on one side of the screen, while doing other stuff in the other half!

As for gaming, even if you play older games (that don't natively support widescreen) there's usually hacks/tweaks to get them working (i'm currently playing Quake II + III & GTA III with widecreen hacks.. works perfectly!)

Excellent site for widescreen gaming info

[tomjleeds]

Originally Posted by pooper

Hmm well the loss in height isn't really that noticable at all, whereas the gain in width is actually pretty handy! Especially for running a browser/document on one side of the screen, while doing other stuff in the other half!

Admittedly it's not a big height loss, but it is there. Thing is, I don't find 1440 wide enough to run two applications side-by-side, and I do like to do so. Plus, two 19" wides would be somewhat unusable, whereas 5:4 displays work brilliantly side-by-side (and, to be honest, this is my preferred viewing setup over a single wide monitor. I guess that's a personal preference.

However, I do plan to stick a 20.1" between the two 17" monitors I currently run, assigning one of the 17"s to a secondary machine, using the 20.1" as the primary monitor and the other 17" as a secondary monitor on the primary machine. Which would take me to a total pixel-width of 4240...slightly crazy, perhaps!

[NoKnowledge]

DELL have 2 sales on atm which runs out on the 10th Jan (tomorrow) (5%) and the other (20%) on 31st Jan.

DELL 2007WFP @ £340
Combined sale price £258 + delivery

DELL 2007WFP

20" and 21" widescreen monitors are 1680 x 1050

[pooper]

Originally Posted by tomjleeds

Admittedly it's not a big height loss, but it is there. Thing is, I don't find 1440 wide enough to run two applications side-by-side, and I do like to do so. Plus, two 19" wides would be somewhat unusable, whereas 5:4 displays work brilliantly side-by-side (and, to be honest, this is my preferred viewing setup over a single wide monitor. I guess that's a personal preference.

However, I do plan to stick a 20.1" between the two 17" monitors I currently run, assigning one of the 17"s to a secondary machine, using the 20.1" as the primary monitor and the other 17" as a secondary monitor on the primary machine. Which would take me to a total pixel-width of 4240...slightly crazy, perhaps!

Yah, i mean, i only bought this monitor purely out of necessity and at the moment im on a really right budget :/

If i wasn't.. i would have gone straight for the Dell 24" 1920x1200! w00t!

Although with all the new funky monitors being shown at CES, i'm glad i didn't

[Nikesh]

I'm slightly confused...is 8ms better than 16ms or is it the other way around?

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by Nikesh

I'm slightly confused...is 8ms better than 16ms or is it the other way around?

refresh rate is only applicable if you do a lot of gaming : the theory is the faster the refresh rate the less ghosting.

ie 8ms would be better for gaming than a 16ms.

What do u want the monitor for btw ?

[Nikesh]

Thanks for making that clearer. I want a monitor for pretty much everything really, Mostly just general work but I've got a TV card so I'll be watching TV, movies, video editing, and I like playing a few games. (C&C Generals, NFS, GTA...) So it's better for me to get a faster refresh rate? Basically I just want a good all-rounder that will last me a couple of years.

[The Jackal]

First LCD flat I bought :

Read stacks of reviews and user opinions until finally I shelled out my hard earning dole money to buy one.

Took it home - plugged it in - started cursing - IT WAS SH*T : 500quid ! FFS thats like 10weeks of signing on - Gutted.

I recommend you view the monitor u buy... Whats great for me may not be for u and vice versa.

For my recent purchase I saw : examined carefully and am VERY HAPPY with it,

Originally Posted by CrC-3rr0r

refresh rate is only applicable if you do a lot of gaming : the theory is the faster the refresh rate the less ghosting.

ie 8ms would be better for gaming than a 16ms.

What do u want the monitor for btw ?

That's kind of wrong, it also applies to watching movies, with a 16ms response time your going to notice alot of ghosting..and it would make watching action movies impossible.

my tft is 6ms response time and i still notice abit of ghosting, that's why i use my 22" CRT at the side of me, perfectly clear picture, flacscreen (trinitron) and great for games with ultra high resos! with great refresh rates, so although the crt is bigger, if your not worried about space id rather spend £50-80 on a 22" CRT than 300+ on a good tft.

Originally Posted by CrC-3rr0r

refresh rate is only applicable if you do a lot of gaming : the theory is the faster the refresh rate the less ghosting.

ie 8ms would be better for gaming than a 16ms.

What do u want the monitor for btw ?

refresh rate is only applicable to crts in any real terms its responce time measured on the lcd/tft and this is measured on the white scale leading to false results anyway

[Nikesh]

I never did buy a new monitor... I thought I'd wait and see if the prices drop...

I've rearranged my desk slightly and a 22in widescreen monitor (I think) would just fit on my desk!

I've been looking at the Samsung 226BW and the Asus MW221U...

Which one's better? The Samsung has a better contrast ratio but the Asus is cheaper... Is there anything else I should know about the two monitors?

Can anyone tell me the dimensions of the two monitors with the stand because I can't seem to find the correct dimensions. Different websites show the dimensions different...

I want the monitor for gaming (Counter Strike: Source), basic photo editing (Photoshop) and work...

Thanks.

[pedantic]

I'd be more inclined to go for the Sammy.

There's a discussion on the Sammy panel over at overclockers (be prepared for a long read though lol) There does seem some concerns though from certain quarters, as Samsung seem to make 2 versions of it, which you can read about in that thread.

There's also an article here on the subject.

I'm not sure about the Asus, but from a personal point of view, I've found Samsung panels to be very good.