[Applefreak01]

I want to know what LCD is best for my PC and games. I want a monitor that works on the Mac also when I get my new mac next summer. I've been looking at the ViewSonic VG170m and the VG800. Both the Vg170m and VG800 are about the same in cost, but the 170m has a pixel response time of 16ms compared to 25ms of the VG800.

I also read somewhere that the human eye sees fluid motion at 25ms or less. So I'm think the Vg800 will work, plus it is a SuperClearMVA LCD, which ViewSonic saids helps to improve viewing video or games. I was wondering if anyboby has seen this LCD in person or who knows that it good for games. Thanks.

[Ramza]

Check out this new Hitachi screen! It has 16ms
http://www.gamepc.com/shop/product.a...ookie%5Ftest=1
It has pretty good specs in other areas too.
I haven't heard many good things at all on the VG800.
The 170m has pretty bad viewing angel as well. 140.

[G4ME]

its called a CRT, its a quarter of the cost and you don't need to deal with dead pixles, LCDs will be a passing phase, just like Plasma TVs, i would wait for those OLED, or what ever they are,

I know this was not help full what so ever but hey i like my CRTs

[Ramza]

I don't think dead pixels are a very big problem nowadays... A lot people have reporting no murdered pixels.

I think LCD's have a lot more life to them. OELD's won't come out for another 3 years or so. They are having some big trouble with blue colors.

[Applefreak01]

Thanks to those who replied to this post.

I've decided to go with the Hitachi CML174. I found it on the web for $621, not bad. I need room to do homework and put my book(s) on my desk and an LCD would give me some room on my desk. Thanks.

[solitere]

Originally posted by Applefreak01:
I want to know what LCD is best for my PC and games. I want a monitor that works on the Mac also when I get my new mac next summer. I've been looking at the ViewSonic VG170m and the VG800. Both the Vg170m and VG800 are about the same in cost, but the 170m has a pixel response time of 16ms compared to 25ms of the VG800.

I recently purchased the VG800 display and so far I am very pleased with it. DVD and moving video works great on the VG800. It´s not as good as on a CRT but good enough. I have tryed other LCD monitors with pixelresponse over 35ms they are not suited if you like gaming and video. The Pixelresponse time should be 25ms or under.

Other stuff with the VG800 you should be avere of is that the VG800 has a Analog interface not DVI-D or ADC. I use the VG800 at home and I got a VX900 at my office machines which is a simular display. The VX900 has better color accurucy and a bit sharper image!

If your on a budget and wants a good lcd monitor the VG800 is a great choise if you could spare a little extra I would go for the Formac 17.4" or the VX900 model!

[Eug]

Originally posted by G4ME:
its called a CRT, its a quarter of the cost and you don't need to deal with dead pixles, LCDs will be a passing phase, just like Plasma TVs, i would wait for those OLED, or what ever they are,

I know this was not help full what so ever but hey i like my CRTs

OLED is essentially vapourware at this point.

I just took my CRT and put it in my hallway. And I have a very nice Samsung 950p shadow mask monitor (not that mediocre 950b) with both VGA and BNC. It has been replaced with a Samsung SyncMaster 172T digital LCD. I love it! Passing phase? You mean like the internet? A couple of important side benefits. I save a HUGE amount of desk space. It matches my TiBook.

For text quality it's like this (best to worst):

1) LCD with DVI
2) LCD with VGA
3) Shadow mask with BNC or VGA
4) Aperture grill with VGA

Note, I do not play games. All I can say is that for movies the Samsung is very good, even in fast action scenes. Games are supposed to be pretty fluid once the response time drops to 25 ms. The 172T has a response time < 25 ms, but some people have noticed a bit of ghosting in fast action on the 181T/191T which are said to be similar monitors in terms of specs. The Hitachi supposedly has a 16 ms response time, but people on various forums have said that the spec is not to be trusted. I guess time will tell.

I have a question though. If the pixel response time were truly 16 ms, would it flicker at 60 Hz? 0.016 x 60 = 960 (ie. less than 1000). This wouldn't be a problem though, since you could just run it at 75 Hz.

[Applefreak01]

I changed my mind and I'm going to get the ViewSonic VG800 now. I don't have DVI on my graphics card so I really don't need a monitor that supports that. The VG800 has a response time of 25ms, which should be good enough for games, if not I can always get a S-Video cable and play games on my TV. I like how the VG800 looks and it has a larger display than the CML174 or the other LCD's I've been looking at.

[Eug]

Originally posted by Applefreak01:
I changed my mind and I'm going to get the ViewSonic VG800 now. I don't have DVI on my graphics card so I really don't need a monitor that supports that. The VG800 has a response time of 25ms, which should be good enough for games, if not I can always get a S-Video cable and play games on my TV. I like how the VG800 looks and it has a larger display than the CML174 or the other LCD's I've been looking at.

Trust me, once you've seen DVI, you'll wish you had it. It's always best to future proof your hardware. Even cheap video cards these days may have DVI, and DVI has started to make its appearance on laptops (ie. TiBook).

If you can swing the extra bit of money, then I'd say definitely go for it. If you can't well that's a different story.

Also, some of the more expensive units with DVI are in general just better quality, but I don't know if that applies to the ViewSonics, since I've never used them.

[AppleCello]

Originally posted by Eug:
I have a question though. If the pixel response time were truly 16 ms, would it flicker at 60 Hz? 0.016 x 60 = 960 (ie. less than 1000). This wouldn't be a problem though, since you could just run it at 75 Hz.

I think that the LCD doesnt have anything to do with refresh rates. The pixels are only updated as they need to be, with a max response time of 25ms or whatever your monitor is rated. refresh rates dont apply to LCDs, if I understand it correctly.

Patrick

[solitere]

Originally posted by Eug:

Trust me, once you've seen DVI, you'll wish you had it. It's always best to future proof your hardware. Even cheap video cards these days may have DVI, and DVI has started to make its appearance on laptops (ie. TiBook).

If you can swing the extra bit of money, then I'd say definitely go for it. If you can't well that's a different story.

Also, some of the more expensive units with DVI are in general just better quality, but I don't know if that applies to the ViewSonics, since I've never used them.

I got a VG800 for home but i´m using a VX900 (DVI connection) at the office. And the differance are noticable but only if you have very low tolarance level! The VG800 is a great display for what it costs.

The VG800 is the best display I have had at home so far and I have gone true some during my years! And the Color accuracy is very good on the VG800 and it uses the same LCD manufacturing as the formac displays.

The only really bad thing I could say about VG800 is that it has 2 speakers that are quite useless!

[Eug]

Originally posted by solitere:


I got a VG800 for home but i´m using a VX900 (DVI connection) at the office. And the differance are noticable but only if you have very low tolarance level! The VG800 is a great display for what it costs.

Fair enough.

In truth, I'm using my Windows XP machine via VGA on my LCD too, and it does look pretty good. I'm not using the Windows XP machine that much these days so I figure I'd just put the money towards accessories for the TiBook.

I do have a lower tolerance than average though it seems. The average desktop PC with low end nVidia card would almost be unusable to me at higher resolutions, yet much of the world uses them. I dunno how they can stand it. Indeed, I don't know how everyone can use 60 Hz with CRTs either.

I think that the LCD doesnt have anything to do with refresh rates. The pixels are only updated as they need to be, with a max response time of 25ms or whatever your monitor is rated. refresh rates dont apply to LCDs, if I understand it correctly.

Didn't know that. I'll have to read up on it.