90% gaming
10% Movies/porn
22" Dell or 24" Dell
10% Movies/porn
22" Dell or 24" Dell
Last edited by White-Fusion (2007-01-25 13:16:47)
Wont see much from e.g 5ms to 2ms like the 19'' viewsonic. I think Johnys (Fusion's) problem is, battlefield2/2142 doesnt support true widescreen, therefor his game will look fat. Nor is he exactly keen on the idea of a black border around the sides to sort out the distortion. This is why he was interested in the 19'' as theres no distortion (noteably lower resolution though).Brizzzer wrote:
Mabey the question is more or less if he is going to be gaming more or do other stuff. Cause if you gets a big monitor its a waste of money if he is going to be gaming. Its funny how they don't make larger monitors with faster response times.
Martyn
Last edited by Bell (2007-01-25 13:18:04)
I didn't even speak of that resolution mabey talking someone else?Bertster7 wrote:
You couldn't be more wrong. At high resolutions like 2560x1600, the 8800GTX will really struggle.
And at that high of a resolution I say again you won't notice a difference unless this is a appropriate monitor size involved. If you have a monitor that supports 1280x1024 and a monitor that supports 1600x1200 it will look that same since both monitors have max resolutions.
Edit: Spelling
Last edited by Brizzzer (2007-01-25 13:19:02)
I will eventually go to other games, and then the widescreen will be ownage.
You don't need fast response times. 8ms is good enough (16ms is too slow a gives nasty flickering and ghosting), 5-6ms is ideal. Anything beyond that is unnoticeable by the human eye and so is pretty pointless.Brizzzer wrote:
Mabey the question is more or less if he is going to be gaming more or do other stuff. Cause if you gets a big monitor its a waste of money if he is going to be gaming. Its funny how they don't make larger monitors with faster response times.
Typical TVs have a refresh of 50-60Hz. A 2ms response time, for example, is 500Hz, which is just silly.
It's not the case.Bell wrote:
Wont see much from e.g 5ms to 2ms like the 19'' viewsonic. I think Johnys (Fusion's) problem is, battlefield2/2142 doesnt support true widescreen, therefor his game will look fat. Nor is he exactly keen on the idea of a black border around the sides to sort out the distortion. This is why he was interested in the 19'' as theres no distortion (noteably lower resolution though).Brizzzer wrote:
Mabey the question is more or less if he is going to be gaming more or do other stuff. Cause if you gets a big monitor its a waste of money if he is going to be gaming. Its funny how they don't make larger monitors with faster response times.
Martyn
I'll put some screenies up if you want. There are slight fatness issues with the HUD, but not with the actual 3d graphics, which are rendered in the correct resolution.
So its only the hud that will be fat?
Now would CRTs be running at 2ms? If so then it would be comparable to a CRT which end up being the best for gaming cause of the fast response time. But I say before its pointless to get a large resolution monitor if he is going to be doing nothing but gamingBertster7 wrote:
You don't need fast response times. 8ms is good enough (16ms is too slow a gives nasty flickering and ghosting), 5-6ms is ideal. Anything beyond that is unnoticeable by the human eye and so is pretty pointless.Brizzzer wrote:
Mabey the question is more or less if he is going to be gaming more or do other stuff. Cause if you gets a big monitor its a waste of money if he is going to be gaming. Its funny how they don't make larger monitors with faster response times.
Typical TVs have a refresh of 50-60Hz. A 2ms response time, for example, is 500Hz, which is just silly.
That's right.White-Fusion wrote:
So its only the hud that will be fat?
I'd ignore this Brizzzer joker if I were you. He's talking rubbish.
I think it's very nice. Could have better contrast ratio though. 1000+ is ideal.White-Fusion wrote:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-015-DE
what do you think
Well find me a monitor
DELL 24" Ultrasharp IS the way to go Or go dual screening. One widescreen, one normal. That's what I'll be doing in a few days ;P Currently running dual 1280x1024's.
What i'd find funny is that you telling the guy to go all out and buy the best. You never asked what would work best for him. Yes he has a 8800GTX it does NOT mean he has to have the best monitor. Geez is he going to game more or watch more movies or other stuff. Also 2ms does make a difference you can ask anyone who using a monitor with it if they come from a 8ms.Bertster7 wrote:
That's right.White-Fusion wrote:
So its only the hud that will be fat?
I'd ignore this Brizzzer joker if I were you. He's talking rubbish.
No. CRTs run upto about 100Hz, 120Hz tops.Brizzzer wrote:
Now would CRTs be running at 2ms? If so then it would be comparable to a CRT which end up being the best for gaming cause of the fast response time. But I say before its pointless to get a large resolution monitor if he is going to be doing nothing but gamingBertster7 wrote:
You don't need fast response times. 8ms is good enough (16ms is too slow a gives nasty flickering and ghosting), 5-6ms is ideal. Anything beyond that is unnoticeable by the human eye and so is pretty pointless.Brizzzer wrote:
Mabey the question is more or less if he is going to be gaming more or do other stuff. Cause if you gets a big monitor its a waste of money if he is going to be gaming. Its funny how they don't make larger monitors with faster response times.
Typical TVs have a refresh of 50-60Hz. A 2ms response time, for example, is 500Hz, which is just silly.
They are not comparable in the same way though because one is transitor switch time and one is the scan rate of the electron beam.
Refresh and response time are not exactly the same and response time does give a more noticable effect, but only very slightly.
My head hurts, just tell me what to buy lol, and give me a link
One more ss to show and is much clearer than that : (BRB) (not mine btw).
Martyn
White-Fusion your better off just doing research cause obliviously us dumb shits can't agree whats best for you. And besides ultimately its your pocket book that determines your monitor.
That's what I'd do.leetkyle wrote:
DELL 24" Ultrasharp IS the way to go Or go dual screening. One widescreen, one normal. That's what I'll be doing in a few days ;P Currently running dual 1280x1024's.
If that's too much money and you want a 22" then this:
http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/ProductI … tID=487000
is better than the Dell one.
Im a lazy bugger, im not doing anything
I think ill go with the 22" inch dell widescreen, i just dont like the idea of the game being fat.
I think ill go with the 22" inch dell widescreen, i just dont like the idea of the game being fat.
You play any RPGs? Oblivion? WoW? They both support widescreen.
http://www.widescreengamingforums.com
Great place to tell you which games work in widescreen and which don't.
http://www.widescreengamingforums.com
Great place to tell you which games work in widescreen and which don't.
what make is that? :SBertster7 wrote:
That's what I'd do.leetkyle wrote:
DELL 24" Ultrasharp IS the way to go Or go dual screening. One widescreen, one normal. That's what I'll be doing in a few days ;P Currently running dual 1280x1024's.
If that's too much money and you want a 22" then this:
http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/ProductI … tID=487000
is better than the Dell one.
http://accessories.euro.dell.com/sna/pr … ;sku=88221
Me likey
Not too sure what the difference is between this and the one you posted from OCUK though...
EDIT: Oh its the same. lol. Great minds eh... or just me being stupid?!
Anyways looks like a good one to me.
5ms response on a 20+ inch is pretty damn good.
Me likey
Not too sure what the difference is between this and the one you posted from OCUK though...
EDIT: Oh its the same. lol. Great minds eh... or just me being stupid?!
Anyways looks like a good one to me.
5ms response on a 20+ inch is pretty damn good.
Last edited by =Karma-Kills= (2007-01-25 13:35:48)
I will be playing oblivion probs, not as much as BF2 and Bf2142 tho
To make it not look fat on a 22" monitor you use this command line.White-Fusion wrote:
Im a lazy bugger, im not doing anything
I think ill go with the 22" inch dell widescreen, i just dont like the idea of the game being fat.
"C:\Program Files\EA GAMES\Battlefield 2\BF2.exe" +menu 1 +fullscreen 1 +szx 1680 +szy 1050
OK.