Monitor suggestions?

[a1ph4w01f91]

So I have my build now... I should probably have something to view what I am doing with. Just a general question but what monitor do you guys find to be good quality monitors for a halfway reasonable price. Somewhere within a $500 budget range.

[xeromist]

It might help to have a wishlist of features. 120Hz? IPS? Size? Display Port? etc.

[pcunite]

Yeah, narrow it down for us ... for me 24" and IPS are minimums ... then I start looking from there.

[Chino]

Too bad you're not running a Crossfire setup. Would have suggsted 3 ASUS VH236H 23" ($149.99) for a nice Eyefinity setup.

How about a ASUS VG278HE Black 27" for $499.99?
*1920x1080
*144Hz Refresh Rate
*2ms Response Time
*3D Ready

[a1ph4w01f91]

Guess I should have put a x2 on the video card. But I took a look at the ASUS VG278HE Black 27" on NewEgg and I'm going to go with that. Smooth as butter seems to be the phrase all the reviews use. Thanks Chino!

[Area 66]

Don't get a 1920 x 1080. go for a 1920 x 1200 minimum.

[Baalberith_NL]

Yes, get a 16:10 screen. For me personally, the best i can think of is the Dell U3011

update: True, but it's the thing u look at all day. Better spend some money on a good
screen, then on a little better piece of hardware inside the system imho.

[Area 66]

a Dell U3011, lol , you are a bit over the $ 500 OP Budget

[HalloweenWeed]

These are the features that sold me on the Dell U2412m(b), I bought a second one:

24"
IPS - This means it can show the full color gamut and has excellent wide viewing angle, meaning you can move to side, up, or down in viewing angle and still see the colors proper, to a very wide angle as opposed to cheaper LCD technologies. Ppls really notice this a lot with laptops. I can testify to this - the white levels do drop a bit when >~35* vertical otherwise it's excellent. IPS is the choice of photo graphics professionals, such as professional photographers. They cannot use TN panels as they do not show accurate colors/greyscale levels, and produce color "banding," artificial borders where the color level changes suddenly as opposed to a gradual change.
LED backlit for more uniform backlighting, the corners are not less/more lit than the rest.
300 cd/m2 - MAXIMUM! For most shaded indoor use you don't want any brigher! Reducing the brightness reduces contrast, and you get less actual greyscale (and color brightness) levels displayed properly.
1920:1200 pixels and 16:10 ratio for more desktop pixel real estate. Can render HD movies W/ room at the bottom for controls.
Height & tilt adjustment and more physical adjustments incl rotate to portrait mode.
$400
Must respond quickly to vid signals - you don't want to miss the oppurtunity to enter BIOS to adjust settings. Some models (like Acer I think) reviews said the monitor took over 10sec to turn on. The U2412m turns on almost instantly.
As for the pixel mS response time, take it with a grain of salt as most mfgrs fudge this number to the max. Go by customer reviews as to whether or not it produces ghosting or 'motion-blur' during fast-motion video or fast-moving games. Most studies have shown that unless the panel pixels are really bad slow (like >10mS) most ppl don't notice it anyway, FYI.


They are wonderful. I have read many reviews; customer, magazine, and website reviews; that talk about the articulation, features, and build feel of the monitors; and the Dell monitors always shine in these respects. Many other brands have ppls say things like "feels cheap," 'gaudy bezel design,' 'bad power and control buttons,' "cheap stand," etc. When I unpacked the U2412m it felt solid, nice design, no shiny surfaces to collect fingerprints, buttons feel good and work well. I am using DVI(-D) interface BTW (on both computers). It comes with a two-outlet USB hub built-in FYI, but they are extremely hard to use as you cannot see the receptacles without turning the display over except in portrait mode (and then you have to turn it to see). But that's not why you buy a monitor.


The specs from the Dell site:
3-yr wrrnty default, can extend to 5 with extra$$.
sku=320-2676
"anti glare with hard coat 3H"
Optimal Resolution:
1920 x 1200 at 60 Hz
Contrast Ratio:
1000 : 1 (typical)
2,000,000:1 (dynamic)
Dynamic Contrast Ratio:
2 million:1 (Max)
Brightness:
300 cd/m2 (typical)
Response Time:
8ms (gray to gray) Typical
Max Viewing Angle (vertical/horizontal)
178º / 178º
Color Support:
16.7 million colors
Color Gamut
82% (CIE 1976)
Pixel Pitch:
0.27 mm
Device Type
Widescreen Flat Panel Display
STAND
Adjustability
Height-adjustable stand, tilt , swivel , pivot and built in cable-management
Weight (panel only - for VESA mount)
3.97 kg (8.73 lbs)





Yeah don't take those ms ratings very seriously. Half the mfgr's fudge those numbers. Instead, read the customer reviews for the real-world view. If you are looking for a sub-$300 monitor, I can't help you.

As far as gaming and video (ghosting) goes, just look at the reviews. FYI.

[xeromist]

Don't get a 1920 x 1080. go for a 1920 x 1200 minimum.

I used to think that as well, but I started with a 1920x1080 and then found that I was able to easily add two more for surround because that resolution is plentiful. 1920x1200 is a dying breed and limiting yourself to that resolution will seriously reduce your choices. As we've discussed in other threads there are none or next to no 1920x1200 120hz screens either.