LCD Monitors

[SL65]

Can anyone here tell me what are the drawbacks (if any?) of buying cheap LCD monitors?

I'm searching for a 19" LCD monitor for my dad. I want to know what the big difference is between this nice $419AUD monitor and this $607 one.
The cheap one has a "12ms response rate" and the expensive one has 8ms. Is that a significant difference worth paying that much more for?

Theres a full list of monitors here, if you own any of them and can tell me if they are any good, it might help.

[swek]

I'm no expert on the matter but I had a very cheap LCD once and recently moved up a bit. The main difference is illumination. The picture of my old LCD wasn't constant. It had areas near the frame that were a bit lighter than the center bit. Another factor is visibility. If you looked at the screen sideways or from an downwards/upwards angle, the colours changed and the picture became less vissible/brilliant. So you should look at it from every possible angle and see how it behaves once you're standing in front of it.

Regarding the response rate. My old panel had 24ms and even taht was enough for gaming. It blurred a little when you moved documents with black text very fast but it wasn't that dramatic. My new screen has 16ms and there's no blur at all. Not even in games. Well, you can't see a tiny ammount when you move the browser window like a monkey on ectasy, but I don't think you're planning to do that. Therefore I conclude that the difference is irrelevant.

Oh, one other thing. Online shopping isn't an option. At least here an LCD can have a certain ammount of dead pixels without you being entitled to a replacement. I've always checked the one I was going to buy at the store. Theres nothing more more annoying than unpacking your brand new LCD at home only to stare at a dead pixle right in the center of the screen.

[SL65]

Thanks for the info. No, I definatly won't be online shopping. Part of shopping cheap is not paying for postage + handling so I always buy in the store.

You say your new screen has 16ms and it seems to be quite acceptable. The cheap monitor I'm looking at has 12ms so that should be more than good enough.

Could you be more specific about your old monitor? What brand was it and how old-ish was it?

[bartboy9891]

what i hate is that they get scratched/dirty so fucking easily.

[swek]

Originally Posted by SL65AMG~V12~604BHP!!!!!!!

Could you be more specific about your old monitor? What brand was it and how old-ish was it?

It was a LG15something. About 2-3 years old. Not that it matters since I don't think you can buy 15" screens anymore.

[SL65]

Originally Posted by swek

It was a LG15something. About 2-3 years old. Not that it matters since I don't think you can buy 15" screens anymore.

True that, and I don't know why! 15"ers are great because you can get the same quality that a 19" screen is avaiable in (only smaller) and they are a bargain. Its also good if you lack office space. I'm sure there are still thousands of them available at shop-fronts though.

So can anyone else answer my question? Should I go buy the cheap one or fork out the money for the expensive one?

[Scott]

I would spend the loot...

I have personal experience with the Viewsonic VA902B and I LOVE it! It is a 19 inch flat screen, but it is analog only, it does not have the DVI port. RIght now on mwave.com they are listed at $287 (plus shipping of course) and I hav epurchased 6 of them in the past 4 months. I bought 4 at work and 2 at home... big and biright and damn good looking to boot!

I also have a smaller 15" Viewsonic LCD that I am staring at this very second, it is a VA520 tht I bought used for $100, and it is trucking right along. I have had it for 2 years now and not one complaint!

[flamingice]

Hmm... I haven't had a look at the 2 that you're comparing, but just a little bit of info with respect to 'response times'.

First, be careful what response times they're quoting. I don't know if it's more standardized now, but when I got my LCD, some where quoting grey to grey, some were just half a cycle, not a full cycle... kind of misleading.

Also, I'd say that reponse times are actually pretty important. I have a cheapish 17", which has a response time of 16ms. I can notice a significant amount of blurring when watching movies, playing games, etc. And it's not just my monitor, it's the same with most other LCD's with response times over 10ms. I think below 10ms it starts to become almost unnoticeable.

In the end, it's really about what looks best to you. Stores near me have displays set up with dozens of LCD's all playing the same feed, next to each other, and you can just look and compare them. If you can find something like that near you, go check it out.

Overall, I think my LCD is great. So much clearer and also easier on the eyes than my old CRT. Looks a lot better too, and uses waaay less space. Good luck with your purchase!

[Andrew911tt]

if your dad is just going to use it for Word, Internet, and a DVD ever once in a while then the cheaper the better. If he is going to do a lot of gaming then you need to spend some money.

[SL65]

Originally Posted by ssnapier

I would spend the loot...

I have personal experience with the Viewsonic VA902B and I LOVE it! It is a 19 inch flat screen, but it is analog only, it does not have the DVI port. RIght now on mwave.com they are listed at $287 (plus shipping of course) and I hav epurchased 6 of them in the past 4 months. I bought 4 at work and 2 at home... big and biright and damn good looking to boot!

I also have a smaller 15" Viewsonic LCD that I am staring at this very second, it is a VA520 tht I bought used for $100, and it is trucking right along. I have had it for 2 years now and not one complaint!

Ahhh great, thats the stuff I want to hear! So I guess you'd give the thumbsup to a Viewsonic aye...

Well the cheap one I was looking at earlier was a Benq ($419) however I can get a Viewsonic for $429. The response time is the same (12ms) however the only difference I can see is the "contrast ratio". The Benq had contrast ratio of 450:1 where-as the Viewsonic had 500:1. I can assume the Viewsonic is better then??

Originally Posted by flamingice

Also, I'd say that reponse times are actually pretty important. I have a cheapish 17", which has a response time of 16ms. I can notice a significant amount of blurring when watching movies, playing games, etc. And it's not just my monitor, it's the same with most other LCD's with response times over 10ms. I think below 10ms it starts to become almost unnoticeable.

I think I'll definatly settle for something 12ms or under

Originally Posted by Andrew911tt

if your dad is just going to use it for Word, Internet, and a DVD ever once in a while then the cheaper the better. If he is going to do a lot of gaming then you need to spend some money.

My plan is to eventually get his monitor and then I'll be doing the gaming See thats the plan

[haha604]

I have a Benq 19" LCD with 16ms (FP931). My eyes can't spot any ghosting when playing games or watching films.

As a general rule, more expensive LCD's will be capable of displaying 16.7million colors (32 bit), while less expensive ones, limited in ability to display a maximum of around 240,000 colors (24bit), use a dithering technique to 'fake' 16.2 million colors. Most people won't spot the difference between 24bit and 32bit colors, but if you are a hardcore graphics professional then this matters.

And most importantly, ms and contrast ratio cannot be compared across the board because every manufacturer uses a different method to measure them.

[mrkrazzy]

In my personal opinion, Benq is a good brand to go for. Forgive me if im wrong but i believe they are made by acer or something like that.

And there are many options out there for monitors, for example i found a 19" samsung one for $449 AUD (12ms) or $510 AUD for the one you linked to and a 19" LG one for $419 AUD

If you want good online prices, (not the expensive ones you was linking to) check out www.umart.net.au

[SL65]

^Thanks heaps! That business is very good with cheap prices. I'm not sure if you can purchase from a shopfront (to avoid postage + handling costs) but I'll look into it.

But now I really must know:
Is it better to have a higher "contrast ratio" or not? eg; 800:1 better than 450:1?

I'm nearing decision making time, thanks all

[flyingfridge]

I've had 3 17" 12ms monitors (2 currently still in use, I sold the other one to my dad) 2 LG and a Philips and all have been nothing less than perfect. Sharp, no ghosting at all. The LGs are the slightly nicer ones than the Philips, but I believe at the moment Philips offers excellent value for money and the best warranty. I wouldn't touch a Benq 17" with a 40ft barge pole, they are useless, but their 19" are quite nice. Still after a perfect run out of LG, I'd really need to be impressed to go elsewhere. 12ms will do you fine. I'm a hard gamer, especially racing games, and 12 has never set a foot wrong.

[Buba]

Generally a higher contrast ratio is better, but I wouldn't worry about that a lot...

A German Mag I just had here recommended for best 19" performance
-> Eizo FlexScan S1910

But that maybe a bit over the top...

As best TFT for the money they recommend
-> BenQ FP91V
its has also a dvi input, and its only around 350 Euros in Germany, I guess its the same as the one you posted, only with a little bit different name because you're on the other side of the world... And it has a (measured by the mag) contrast ratio of 750:1

Go for that!

[SL65]

lol so 'Fridge says he wouldn't touch a Benq with a 40ft barge pole and Bub's sez, "go for that!"

Could someone cast their eyes over this monitor (the one at the top of the list). Its the cheapest ($380) yet it has unbelieveable stats - 10ms and 800:1 contrast ratio That is damn good but what the hell is this brand?!! Sounds German.


I'm still leaning towards the Viewsonics after the wrap ssnapier gave it but I really do need it cheap so I am considering lots of things.

[jensked]

man, I bougth a quite cheap Siemens LCD monitor two years ago. It cost me 299 euro and it's my best buy ever . I can see no ghost effect whatsoever (ok the built in speakers are shit, but i don't use them). My girlfriend also has a very cheap LCD monitor, and it's the same story there:
i'd say, don't buy an expensive one. My experiences with 'cheap' LCD monitors are very good, but then again, i don't know shit about the technology

[Buba]

Well, if you're not going to buy it over the net anyway, why don't you go in the shop and let them show you a few... The one you like best for the least money -> buy it!

Buba

[SL65]

^Cos the shops I'm looking at are basically places where your cash gets you your good (or service). They don't have displays out or anything, they just sell stuff cheap provided you know what you want unlike somewhere like Harvey Norman (not sure if you know of it..).

Ok, now I'm not going to go for the 'unknown' brand I posted a pic of before. I want a brand name. So from this list here, its between the Benq ($419), the Viewsonic ($429) or now even the Acer ($439).
They are all more or less the same, I guess the warrantee and stuff comes into place and also the contrast ratio.

[Buba]

As long as you're not watching movies 24/7 on it, forget about the contrast ratio...

Forget about the acer, it doesn't have dvi (provided your PC has it!)

Then find out if they have a pick up service in case stuff goes wrong, and then roll with that

Buba