Monitor recommendation?

[xnomad]

My CRT is on it's last legs. Yes I still have a CRT, and it's a very good one and a real shame to throw out but it flat-lines once a week now.

It's time for a flatscreen! As we are in a niche market I am not convinced that Googling "Best gaming monitor" is the best answer as we combat simmers have slightly different needs.

I'm worried about dot pitch the most.:!: I want to be able to see the enemy before he spots me, that's the reason I purchased my particular CRT all those years ago as it's very good at that.

I've tried searching these forums but couldn't really come up with much. I borrowed a cheapish flatscreen from work but the colours were awful and playing around with the settings just got tiring.

Any recommendations?

Thanks

[Katana1000S]

Have a look at the Dell U2711 (not made by Dell, just badged by them) might need to upgrade your graphic card for its resolution (2,560 x 1,440) though, its a bit expensive but fantastic quality ...

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/monitors/2010/03/16/dell-u2711-review/1

[T}{OR]

That Dell is 27" and would require, as Katana1000S said, a new GPU.

Instead, my recommendation is Dell U2311H: 23" screen, IPS panel, very low input lag and very high responsiveness. In other words - walks over any TN monitors and then some.

Look no further.

A couple of reviews:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2311h.htm

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1275291737

[brando]

I also hung on to my CRT, an Iiyama Pro, for many years due to its near-perfect rendering ability and resolution. 1024x768x32@120Hz was very easy on the eyes and it was possible to run higher reso's without dropping the refresh rate too much. 1600x1200 @100Hz was what I mainly used, with vsync and triple buffering enabled, and tearing was non-existent.
After 11 years of use it start to show a green tinge that couldn't be adjusted out and which just got worse. With a heavy heart I disposed of it and replaced it with a 'budget' 24" widescreen from a firm called LG. That was three years ago and I have purchased another low-priced monitor made by Hanns.G (HZ281) which has a 27.5" widescreen with a native reso of 1900x1200x32bit @60Hz (same as the LG previously mentioned). I bought both these monitors for less than £200 each here in the UK. My wife now uses the 24" LG. Neither came with any of the dreaded "dead pixels" or cosmetic damage, and both are still functioning well after 3 years and 2 years respectively. They aren't top of the range but that is reflected in the price.
Dell and Samsung are the two major top-of-the-range players with prices in excess of £1000. I'm not quite sure what this premium buys; no doubt someone will enlighten us both soon ;)

Interestingly, Iiyama are still in the monitor business. The Iiyama ProLite B2712HDS 27" Widescreen LCD Monitor looks to be a good deal at around £280. Reviews are very good.

[Langnasen]

The U3011 is good, but expensive. Mine's a warranty upgrade from the 3008 (I got lucky). My GTX580 runs CoD at 2560x1600 at an average (ish) 30fps with all the important stuff maxed out. Still doesn't look as good as it should though, nowhere near RoF's ballpark.

[Bloblast]

I have recently bought a Samsung 27" P2270FH, a good screen.

27" is absolutely the way to go for IL-2 COD, a good investment.

[T}{OR]

27" is absolutely the way to go for IL-2 COD, a good investment.

That is debatable TBH.

Higher res = more VRAM and less FPS, in CloD particularly.

Anything above 24" screen (> 1980x1200) is for enthusiasts and video/photo editing IMO.

[TeeJay82]

27" @ 1900*1200

[Zoom2136]

I-Inc iF-281DPB 28" Class Widescreen LCD Monitor - 1920x1200 WUXGA, 800:1 Contrast, 3ms, HDMI, VGA, Energy Star, Tilt & Swivel Stand, w/Speakers

http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3326540&CatId=3774

This monitor can't be beat... when price is a big factor

[Blackdog_kt]

I can vouch for the IPS panels by Dell. I have one from the previous series, the 2209WA. It's 22", 16:10 and runs at 1680x1050 (i wanted the extra vertical space for flight simming and i also wanted a low-ish resolution so that i won't need to upgrade my GPU soon).

The input lag is minimal and the only way to force ghosting through change of images is to use trackIR/freetrack and move your head left-right so fast that your neck hurts.

In other words, it's perfectly capable of displaying all those fast gaming effects like explosions and the like without any ghosting at all.

Their premium range also comes with a 3 year warranty with on-site replacement policy for the slightest pixel defect.
Many brands claim zero pixel warranty but if you look at the fine print they specify "stuck pixels are pixels stuck to white or black" or something equally silly, which means that if your stuck pixel is the wrong color you don't get a replacement. Well, not with Dell, they cover any kind of defect on the premium models.

The colours and viewing angles are no contest for TN panel monitors also. The only problem IPS panels have is that black is not as black as it should be, but the rest of the advantages really make up for it.

[icetbag]

I can vouch for the IPS panels byDell. I have one from the previous series, the 2209WA. It's 22", 16:10 and runs at 1680x1050 (i wanted the extra vertical space for flight simming and i also wanted a low-ish resolution so that i won't need to upgrade my GPU soon)...


Ditto, I have the same monitor and whilst it it quite costly compared to other low response time TN panels, its very good value for money.

IPS panels have better viewing angles also, if you dont go for a Dell, atleast opt for an IPS panel over a TN one.

[Ataros]

IMO nowadays it is worth looking at 3D-stereoscopic compatible monitors already which are 120 or 240 Hz iirc. In 2-4 years it will be a must.

[Untamo]

I've had this 30" LG W3000H for a couple of years now and still can't find anything wrong with it. If you have the money, I suggest you go 30". The 2560x1600 resolution really is something else. Makes anti-aliasing quite unnecessary. And zooming out to 120 degrees FOV also looks great and increases your SA +billion percent ;)

About spotting dots:
In old IL-2 the full resolution makes you blind, so I use 75% of the native (1920x1200), I can see everything further away than a squadmate with 24" screen.

In CloD the native resolution works good and I can spot the dots when they appear.

-Untamo

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

another Vote for the Dell,whatever size you want but i cant go back to a TN panel now,lovely colours and crisp displays.

[adonys]

I have a Samsung 3D Gaming LCD 2233RZ 22 inch 5ms 120 Hz LCD (http://www.samsung.com/ca/consumer/office/monitors/lcd/LS22CMFKFV/ZA/index.idx?pagetype=prd_detail), and atm there's none better when it comes about (3D) gaming :)

[Rattlehead]

That is debatable TBH.

Higher res = more VRAM and less FPS, in CloD particularly.

Anything above 24" screen (> 1980x1200) is for enthusiasts and video/photo editing IMO.

I personally see no need to go beyond 24" screens or 1900x1200 resolution. That for me is plenty.

[xnomad]

Thanks for all the replies guys. Now that I've started looking I'm spoiled for choice.

My CRT resolution is 1280x1024 and I run pretty much everything on COD on high with no dramas.

Now I'm worried about having a too high native res when stepping up to wide screen.

So you guys say that the IPS panels are the go? What about LG then? I found cheap LED backlit IPS panels with faster response times than the Dells.

http://www.lg.com/au/common/compare/products-compare-result.jsp?CatID=8117&BURL=%2Fau%2Fit-products%2Fmonitors%2Findex.jsp%3Fvalue%3DALL

I also remember losing quite a bit of the cockpit when borrowing the widescreen from work. You had to look down to see the lower half of the instrument panel. :(

Here's my CRT:
http://imgur.com/953y0

Here's the borrowed from work flatscreen:
http://imgur.com/RkOwW

[Untamo]

I personally see no need to go beyond 24" screens or 1900x1200 resolution. That for me is plenty.

Bigger screen allows wider FOV to look good. Wider FOV -> higher SA. Also: higher res also makes AA unnecessary -> runs the same as lower res with AA.

I also remember losing quite a bit of the cockpit when borrowing the widescreen from work. You had to look down to see the lower half of the instrument panel.

In CloD you can hold down Ctrl + Mouse1 and then drag mouse forward/backwards to increase/decrease FOV.

-Untamo

[Rattlehead]

What about LG then?

Oh dear.
Whenever I see 'LG' I think 'Low Grade', based purely on my experiences with the brand. Be it monitors, car audio, DVD players and one time a microwave, LG in my experience is, well, bad.
:(

[Rattlehead]

Also: higher res also makes AA unnecessary -> runs the same as lower res with AA.

-Untamo

I think it depends...I've usually gotten slightly better benefits performance-wise from lower resolutions and AA than higher resolutions without. But it's really a moot point in my opinion.

[T}{OR]

Thanks for all the replies guys. Now that I've started looking I'm spoiled for choice.

My CRT resolution is 1280x1024 and I run pretty much everything on COD on high with no dramas.

Now I'm worried about having a too high native res when stepping up to wide screen.

So you guys say that the IPS panels are the go? What about LG then? I found cheap LED backlit IPS panels with faster response times than the Dells.

http://www.lg.com/au/common/compare/products-compare-result.jsp?CatID=8117&BURL=%2Fau%2Fit-products%2Fmonitors%2Findex.jsp%3Fvalue%3DALL

I also remember losing quite a bit of the cockpit when borrowing the widescreen from work. You had to look down to see the lower half of the instrument panel. :(

Here's my CRT:
http://imgur.com/953y0

Here's the borrowed from work flatscreen:
http://imgur.com/RkOwW

completely disregard manufacturer's response times - each manufacturer uses its own standards for measuring response times and it depends on what it actually measured ... thus it can not be used for comparison of the every day use or between different models/manufacturers


get an IPS panel, TN can't even reproduce all the colors and PVA panes are just too slow


there are 16:10 (1920x1200) and 16:9 (1920x1080) resolutions - if possible I would recommend a 16:10 panel because if you do anything else other than gaming and watching movies the higher vertical area will be very useful

Based on that I can recommend the following IPS Panels:

(from cheapest to the most expensive)

23", 16:9
Dell U2311H

24", 16:10
HP ZR24w
Asus PA246Q (upgraded and factory calibrated panel from the U2410)
Dell U2410

Out of those 4, my choice would be the Asus PA246Q, or Dell U2311H.

[Blackdog_kt]

Thanks for all the replies guys. Now that I've started looking I'm spoiled for choice.

My CRT resolution is 1280x1024 and I run pretty much everything on COD on high with no dramas.

Now I'm worried about having a too high native res when stepping up to wide screen.

So you guys say that the IPS panels are the go? What about LG then? I found cheap LED backlit IPS panels with faster response times than the Dells.

http://www.lg.com/au/common/compare/products-compare-result.jsp?CatID=8117&BURL=%2Fau%2Fit-products%2Fmonitors%2Findex.jsp%3Fvalue%3DALL

I also remember losing quite a bit of the cockpit when borrowing the widescreen from work. You had to look down to see the lower half of the instrument panel. :(

Here's my CRT:
http://imgur.com/953y0

Here's the borrowed from work flatscreen:
http://imgur.com/RkOwW

Higher resolutions are always better to have, but since LCD monitors are generally bad at displaying lower than native resolutions you end up having an entire upgrade path forced on you whenever a couple of new games you want to play that can push your hardware come out: to run this resolution i need a better GPU, to run the GPU i need a new power supply, etc etc.

Definitely don't limit yourself in terms of resolution but take this into account. It was a heavy factor for me when i switched to LCD a couple of years ago, i knew i wouldn't be upgrading for at least 3 years so running 1680x1050 was an advantage in that regard (it's a 22" anyway so dot pitch is not affected that much, for bigger monitors it makes sense to go for 1900x1200 or something like that).

As for panel selection, the e-IPS panels used in the cheaper Dell IPS monitors were being made by LG, so there's a high probability it's the exact same monitor with a different brand and bezels/controls.

Right now the only drawbacks of ISP panels are the way they show black (takes a bit of time getting used to) and the lower refresh rates (i think they only just begun doing 120Mhz models and if they are even available they will probably be expensive). I don't mind because any kind of panel has its set of drawbacks. In the case of IPS the viewing angles and colour fidelity are so much better that i can live with a bit of a brighter black.

As for refresh rates, the LCDs don't flicker like CRTs do, so unless you plan on going for stereoscopy/3D or something like that there's no other reason at all to go for a 120Hz TN panel that has inferior colour quality, colour banding (due to the panel crystal alignment and viewing angle limitations, on many TN monitors the top and bottom of the monitor are usually on the margin, the top part gets washed out and the bottom part gets darker when viewed from a normal, straight-on position) and viewing angles.

And since many TN panels claim 170 degrees of viewing angle, we come to the final point: don't trust the quoted specs that much because the way they are defined is a bit too lenient.

For a viewing angle to be considered visible, specs define that 10% of the total brightness/contrast should be visible. In other words, a monitor claiming 170 degrees might only have a usable of 140, moving your viewpoint the rest 30 degrees results in losing 90% of your contrast/brightness (don't remember which one it was) but specs allow it to be quoted as visible.

Response times are tricky as well. LCD crystals function like little shutters, the backlight illuminates the back of the panel and depending on the crystal's rotation the amount of backlight making it to the front of the screen is adjusted. The amount of time between transitions of the crystals is roughly what response time measures.

The thing is, it takes less time for an LCD crystal to transit from "fully shut" (no light passing through, black pixel) to "fully open" than it takes for it to transition between two partially "open" positions.

When you see a 2ms response time in the specs it's usually for the "faster" black to white transition. However, our monitors don't run on full dark/full vivid mode all the time, in fact most of the time they display colours and shades that vary among in-between values. It's easy then to realize that what really matters is the "slower" gray to gray (or g2g for short) response time. For that, anything lower than 8ms is good, anything lower than 5ms is very good.

Finally, there is also a way to correct the tone of the black on an IPS monitor but it needs an extra polarizer. These monitors tend to be professional models and thus more expensive. I'm not really sure but it might also increase input lag a bit (the amount of time between when something happens in the game and when the monitor is able to display it), making them geared more towards professional applications and less towards gaming.

Long story short, things are complicated but the rough list of requirements i would suggest are:

1) IPS panel unless you want to do 3D.

2) Resolution that matches your GPU/power supply upgrade capabilities.

3) Low input lag

4) Fast g2g response times

Hope it helps.


P.S. As for the loss of available field of view in the game, this depends on how the game implements wide screen resolution. Older titles without proper widescreen support "chop up" some of the vertical range to adjust to the monitor while titles with real widescren support will increase the horizontal range. In one of the recent patches true widescreen support was added to CoD, so i guess you won't have any problems.

[Doc_uk]

Theres only one great flat screen to go for, and thats mine:grin:
http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/samsung-xl2370hd-led-backlit-1080p/839420

Samsung XL2370 1080p full HD:cool:

[xnomad]

Thanks again guys,

I've never owned anything LG, we've got 1 or 2 at work. From what I understand almost all IPS panels on the market are LG manufactured?

The reason I'm interested in the LG is that they are IPS and LED backlit, the contrast ratio is crazily high and the response time, also due to LED's, is low for an IPS ( 5ms Gray to Gray).

http://www.lg.com/au/it-products/monitors/LG-wide-screen-monitors-IPS226V-PN.jsp

Plus nice pixel/dot pitch. Hmmmmmmm what to do? The only thing the Dell appears to have over it in specs on paper, is that it's Dell. However, Dell in my circles doesn't have the best name either when it comes to consumer grade products.
I'm really happy with Dell when it comes to enterprise servers though.

Yeah specs on paper are just that. I might pop over to Harvey Norman across the road at lunch time to give me an idea what things look like in reality.

That Asus link T}{OR posted looks great too but it's 3 times more expensive. I'd rather get it wrong at $200 than at $600

[T}{OR]

That Asus link T}{OR posted looks great too but it's 3 times more expensive. I'd rather get it wrong at $200 than at $600

Then go with either Dell U2311H or HP ZR24w, both monitors are excellent.

You won't find (albeit very very hard) 16:10 TN panel nowadays, and the next best thing with 16:10 is that HP ZR24w. So, if the budget doesn't allow it - go with U2311H, you most certainly won't regret it. It blows any TN out of the picture, anywhere - every time. ;)

No need to go with LED back lit monitors as well.