best bang for the buck

M

manny_17

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Messages
198
Hey fellas,

After looking at most of the displays you guys have set up I notice some things

1) most of you have more then 1 monitor (why?)

2) Oddly enough MOST of you have Dell monitors... do you like them? or would you suggest something else? like a samsung or BenQ... im looking to game and I've heard that the more responce time on a monitor the slower it will go.... let me know guys.

Love the forums!!

Mannnay!!
 
2 monitors = double the display space. It's not needed for people whom use their computers primarily for gaming, but for those interested in productivity. For instance, browser in one, word document in other. Photoshop in one, 3dsmax in other (or html generator/wordpad etc). Possibilities are endless not to mention you can stuff a lot of things onto one monitor and have the other clear. I often have foobar, miranda & chat windows, random folders open (for selecting more music), zips whatever in one monitor, and leave the other monitor for strict browsing purposes. This way virtually no windows are stacked. Infinately useful. If I could afford 3 monitors I just might do it.

Anyway moving on.

Most have Dell monitors on this forum (including myself) because they are just as you noted in the your thread title. Simply they are the best bang for your buck. There are better monitors out there for the size range (for instance Apple), but not for the incredible prices that you can get Dell monitors at during Dell deals or if you like to be more up front and personal from haggling the sales reps.
 
manny_17 said:
Hey fellas,

After looking at most of the displays you guys have set up I notice some things

1) most of you have more then 1 monitor (why?)

2) Oddly enough MOST of you have Dell monitors... do you like them? or would you suggest something else? like a samsung or BenQ... im looking to game and I've heard that the more responce time on a monitor the slower it will go.... let me know guys.

Love the forums!!

Mannnay!!
Click to expand...

1. I have a mere 3 monitors at the moment (I'd personally love to have in the 6-8 range between my various computers) because the extra screen real estate is absolutely worth the money for what I do (programmer). If you're the check-your-email-and-play-games type, then it probably won't do a whole lot for you, but I find the extra monitors not only help by giving me more desktop real estate, but they also help me by giving me spaces in which to arrange my ideas into sections, if that makes any sense. I have my code on one screen, my documentation on another screen, and my play-around stuff (forums, AIM, foobar) on another screen.

2. Most people here have Dell monitors because they flat-out offer the best value for your money, as far as most people are concerned. I doubt you'd be able to find a competitor selling a 24" widescreen LCD for $700 shipped.
 
1. I multitask like crazy and having two monitors makes everything a lot easier. AIM, winamp and documentation are usually on number 2 while what I'm working on is on number one. Also being able to move the photoshop tools to #2 and have the picture maximed on #1 is great, gives you much more room to work on the picture while still having the tools right there.

Downside is my vid card can't run WoW and the second monitor at the same time so I disable #2 before gaming.


2. Dell's are cheap. i'm running a 2005fpw and a samsung 712n. I love the samsung but it doesn't give me the screen resolution I wanted so I got the 2005 to compliment it. If the 2005 had the dot pitch of the samsung it would be perfect.
 
what is all this "2005fpw" stuff youre all talking about?? and what brand of dell monitor is the best? and should I be considering 17 or 19 inch?

many thanks guys

Mannay!!
 
the 2005fpw is Dell's 20" widescreen monitor it runs 1680x1050 natively.
The 2001fp is the standard 20" monitor and runs 1600x1200.
The 2405 is the 24" widescreen and runs 1900x1200.

The only differences between a 17" and a 19" are size and price. You don't gain anything in resolution. Me personally I'd rather have a nicer 17 than a cheap 19 but then price is also a factor when I make my decisions.

If you're going to be playing games and watching movies where the extra screen size may make a difference then consider the 19's.
 
manny_17 said:
Hey fellas,

After looking at most of the displays you guys have set up I notice some things

1) most of you have more then 1 monitor (why?)

2) Oddly enough MOST of you have Dell monitors... do you like them? or would you suggest something else? like a samsung or BenQ... im looking to game and I've heard that the more responce time on a monitor the slower it will go.... let me know guys.

Love the forums!!

Mannnay!!
Click to expand...
1. Two monitors can be beneficial if you're very hardcore into multi tasking. But for the regular every day user, it's really not worth it at all. As far as I know it's impossible to game on one monitor and for example surf the web on the other. You would need to minimize the game and or leave the gaming screen to access the other one. Not really seamless at all.

2. Dell monitors are good. Samsung as well. BenQ is a very good brand also, their reputation is not as good, but they make quality monitors. The fact of the matter is, every company makes monitors that are prone to dead pixels. So it doesn't matter. Just find a good panel that has good specs. The only brand that has significantly low numbers of defected panels (ie: lacking dead pixels and or backlight leakage) is Apple.

The two most important specs for a LCD, in my opinion for gaming would undoubtedly be contrast ratio and response time. A high response time causes "ghosting" and or image tearing. These two effects look like crap, and essentially it makes it look like the image isn't being processed fast enough for the monitor to display it. A low contrast ratio makes for bad image quality, and very bad black ranges.

You want a monitor with at least 500:1 contrast ratio, and 16ms response time or less.




No matter what monitor you decide to get, DO NOT base it solely on specs. Every company has a different way of determining what is meant by 12ms, 16ms, or certain contrast ratio. For example, response time is, I believe, supposed to measure the time it takes a single pixel to change from pure white to pure black. Some companies will measure the time it takes for a pixel to change from grey to pure white, or so on. So as you can imagine, the specifications can become variable on the company.

It's a good idea to read reviews from proven websites ie: HardOCP, Tom's Hardware, Anandtech, Xbit labs, etc. And take a look at the user reviews on Newegg too before you make any decision.







BTW: I'm Jamie from Nova Scotia, talked to you on MSN.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top