View Full Version : Is this spec for a TFT monitor OK?

01-01-2005, 20:38:19
Display size : 19ins
Resolution : 1280 x 1024
Colors : 16,7 million
Brightness : 250 cd/m²
Contrast : 600:1
Viewing angle (h/v) : 170°/170°
Horizontal frequency : 31-92 kHz
Vertical frequency : 55-85 Hz
Response time : 25 ms - is this a tad high?
Input signal : analogue
Power supply : 12 V/5 A
Tilt angle : -5°/20°
Speakers : Yes
Plug & Play : Yes
VESA mounting : Yes
Certificates : CE, TÜV, UL, FCC
Weight : 5.9 kg
Dimensions (WxDxH) : 432 mm x 198 mm x 440 mm
Warranty : 3 year on-site exchange warranty

£258.49 inc VAT

01-01-2005, 20:54:40
Yes the response time sucks...okay for basic office use (maybe) but for games or movies you want a response time of 12-15 ms

01-01-2005, 20:56:15
thanks zmama :)

02-01-2005, 11:27:00
I've never looked into that much detail when buying a monitor. Usually just the screen size, resolution, tend to assume the rest will work.

02-01-2005, 11:49:40
If you're buying an LCD and want to use it for gaming, here's a list of requirements:

1) Response Time: 16ms or lower (12ms and 8ms are available)
2) 8 or 10-bit color: Be careful -- most of the 12ms and 8ms panels get their response times because they're 6-bit color per channel (18-bit color total, as opposed to the photorealistic 24-bit color 16ms panels and higher usually have)
3) Brightness: 250 nitts brightness as a minimum
4) Contrast Ratio: 400:1 contrast ratio as a minimum

Other things to know about response times: The number given is an average -- gray colors in particular have a surprisingly long response time compared to the average.

The reason this response time is important is to eliminate "ghosting" or motion-blur effects in fast-paced or high-contrast games/apps/movies.

Most LCD panels are 60 or 75 Hz (and this is totally acceptable -- the "flicker" of low-Hz is a quirk of CRTs, not LCDs).

This means they redraw the screen 60 or 75 times per second.

A 25ms panel is capable of redrawing the screen 40 times per second, on average (1000 / 25). Clearly, this is below the 60 or 75, which is why the image can "ghost", having 2 frames appear on one refresh...or the illusion of that anyway.

A 16ms panel is capable of redrawing the screen 62.5 times per second, on average (1000 / 16).

A 12ms panel is capable of redrawing the screen 83 times per second, on average (1000 / 12).

An 8ms panel is capable of redrawing the screen 125 times per second, on average (1000 / 8).

02-01-2005, 20:25:49
Cool. Thanks for the advice. I'm unlikly to pl;ay anything more demanding that C&C Generals or SMAX but something a little better than office grade is clearly req'd. Could I get away with a 15/16 ms monitor for that?

02-01-2005, 22:41:37
Probably, those aren't that taxing.
Your best bet is to go to a store and look at a 15/16 ms and see what you think. See if they'll play a movie on it and look for ghosting and streaks. If it looks good to you, then...

03-01-2005, 07:30:31
Thanks for the advice. i'll let you know how I get on.

03-01-2005, 07:52:41
Monitor size and type : 17" (43.2cm) active matrix TFT
Resolution : 1280 x 1024 (SXGA)
Response time / Brightness / Contrast Ratio : 16ms / 250cd/m2 / 4501
Dimensions h x w x d : 402 x 378 x 141 mm
Weight : 4.5 kg
Inputs : Analogue
Height adjustable stand / Audio capability : No / Optional AS500PA soundbar
VESA mounting compatible / Security slot : Yes (100mm) / Yes
Warranty : 3 year next busness day exchange

How about this Dell? £217.26

03-01-2005, 09:49:33
Here's a review of that monitor: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1631321,00.asp

Attractive price. Good brightness uniformity.
Limited viewing angle range. Autosync did not result in jitter-free image. Tilt-only base with limited range of motion.
Bottom Line:
The Dell E173FP has a competitive price, but it lacks the features and performance to compete in this pack. Equipped with just the basics and showing some flaws in its performance, buyers will find better values among the competition.

03-01-2005, 10:19:47

03-01-2005, 12:27:22
I've got a Samsung LCD with a crap refresh rate and I haven't noticed a difference. Not even with Half-Life.

03-01-2005, 15:43:22
Originally posted by Spartak


04-01-2005, 00:10:16

04-01-2005, 13:06:37
The Samsung I bought.

From Neoseeker (http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/samsung213t/3.html):

Gaming Quality:

We used a few first person shooter games to assess to critique the 213T:

Unreal 2003
Quake 3 Arena

In terms of sheer wow factor, it's hard to beat watching Unreal Tournament running on such a large, perfectly flat screen. The geometry of and LCD is of course near perfect, and the naturally non-reflective properties of LCD's make them very ideal for low glare imagery.

The one thing you'd be concerned about is response time in fast action games. We were not able to observe any ghosting or distortion during our gameplay, though one of us felt that the screen didn't "feel" the same as a CRT. GamePC has already completed their review of the 213T and they noticed a prevalent amount of ghosting while playing GTA: Vice City (one of the most popular PC titles here). Although the stated 25ms pixel refresh rate is suitable for all types of applications and gaming, the hardcore gamers will want something with a pixel refresh rate of no more than 16ms.

Pretty expensive for the response time(US~$1200), but like I said, I haven't noticed any problem. It was my graduation gift to myself, or I'd never have sprung for it.