Printable View
Hey everyone!
I think my old TTX 17 inch monitor is getting ready to die on me so I've been lookig around for a really nice 19 inch monitor. I just saw this on newegg and wanted everyone's opinion.
http://www.hitachidisplays.com/products/19_721F.htm
Let me know!! Thanks! http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/smile.gif
It looks like a really nice monitor... http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/smile.gif
------------------
IceBox 3000™
AOpen 300watt case
T-bird 1GHz @ 1137
Vol. II HSF
Soltek 75KAV-X
128MB PC100@133
GF2 mx400 64MB TVOUT @ 216/180
Linksys 10/100
IBM 60GXP 40GB 7200rpm
12x DVD
Win2k
It's decent, but I would recommend spending a little more for a monitor with an Aperture Grille tube, rather than the Invar Shadow Mask that this monitor uses. In my opinion, the monitor is the most important component in a system, and you should get the best one that you can afford...
The maximum refresh rate of 1600X1200 @ 75Hz is low. Even if you run it @ 1280X1024 @ 85, it is maxed out. Look for a monitor with a higher clock - 1600X1200 @ 85+.
[This message has been edited by Kevin930 (edited 04-07-2002).]
Hey everyone,
Thanks for the replies! Just curious Kevin, what monitor do you recommend? I was looking at the Sony's but I think they are out of my price range! http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/smile.gif
I couldn't agree more, the monitor is very important and will outlive everything else inside your PC. It really is worth stretching your budget as much as you can, it's not like splashing out on a top-end video card only to see that extra outlay be eaten up 6 months later in the next wave of cards. A monitor is an investment, and for a 19" you really want to be able to do 1600x1200 flicker-free (i.e. 85Hz+ as Kevin930 said), for future gaming at least if you find it too squinty on your desktop.
My recommendation would be one of the nicer Iiyama models. I have the VM Pro 451, but don't think I'm biased, before I bought it I wasn't biased and after researching the market decided it had to be mine because of its stunning looks to match its incredible display ability. It had every kind of adjustment feature I wanted, a crisp flat display and an ability to handle stupid resolutions at silly refresh rates (forget the specs, you can run this monitor at 2048x1536@74Hz and 1600x1200@95Hz). The USB hub is really useful and the warranty rocks too, even if the speakers don't. I have occasionally used them when I don't fancy carting around the big boxes and just need functional audio.
It has been discontinued since January this year according to Iiyama's site but that should only allow you to find an even sweeter deal. Its replacement big brother, the VM Pro 454 is incredible, and for such a superior monitor it is now very reasonably priced, down by about $100-150 on its release price to below what the 451 used to sell for. If you have the cash then I would go for this one as it has all the performance of a 22" but will not overpower your desk (much http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/smile.gif). You will only need/want to upgrade when you find a similarly sized flat-panel that costs less, can keep up with fast images and can also display different resolutions smoothly (I'm guessing 5 years to never, CRT isn't limited by physical pixel size so low-res gaming looks as good as your high-res desktop).
The Sonys are consistently well-liked and almost match Iiyama technically (no-one comes close aesthetically!). Make sure you get a flatscreen too, whatever make you decide on, it will make you fall in love with your PC all over again, or patch-up a rocky relationship if it's been giving you grief. A pretty face compensates for many of life's disappointments http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/wink.gif.
Let us know how you get on, and search for other threads on aperture grille vs. shadow mask technology to get a knowledge of the monitor types and which might suit you best. It's been discussed plenty here before. Hope this helps, have fun,
Bennyboy.
Go with AOC.... http://www.aocmonitor.com/home.html Go to product quicklink and click on Pure Flatface 9KLR. The only monitors we sell to local customers including LCD models. Have previously tested other brands(Sony, NEC,Viewsonic,etc) and for superb visual and longevity have stuck with AOC.
Thanks everyone for the replies! http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/biggrin.gif
Benny, I was looking at Iiyama's website and I noticed the Vision Master Pro 454 (I think that this is the model that replaced yours) and it seems really nice. One question that I have is I noticed that this particular model has a .25 dot pitch. Is that good for a high quality monitor? http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/confused.gif I've noticed some of the other brands have a .22 or even a .20 dot pitch. Would that imply that the lower dot pitch would yield higher image quality? Let me know what you think! Thanks!
[This message has been edited by 411sponge (edited 04-08-2002).]
The lower the dot pitch, the higher the image quality (less blurry) and the higher resolution the monitor supports.
By the way: Have a look at the EIZO monitors, they support high resolutions, high refresh rates and they last long. You might have to stretch your budget a little though but they are definitely worth the investment.
------------------
HWC FORCE3D ICQ AL= 57497564
OCN ICQ AL= 67864797
411sponge: The AOC will run:2048x1536@75Hz and 1600x1200@120Hz. We usually run at 1152x864,1280x768,1280x1024, for all day, everyday use at 100Hz with no problems. This is with GeForce and ATI cards. ATI 32bit on an AOC----WOW!
Yeah, the lower the pitch the better, but it gets confusing when you compare aperture grille (trinitron type) with shadow mask (regular) monitors. The figure quoted for aperture grille monitors is actually the minimum grille spacing (it can vary from centre to edge), the dot pitch is usually the horizontal distance between RGB phosphor clusters on a shadow mask screen. Since the clusters are arranged in a triangular (isometric?) pattern then the verical and horizontal distances will be different, the horizontal being shorter. This can artificially make an aperture grille monitor appear less sharp on paper. Have a look at my last post in this old thread for an explanation http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/smile.gif.
monitor trouble
This might be of interest too..
Shadow Mask vs. Aperture Grille
Specs aren't everything, and like with all statistics, it helps to understand exactly where the numbers come from so you can't be fooled by salestalk. The Sonys I think are 0.24 grille pitch but I'd be buggered if you could spot the difference (please don't spot the difference, please).
Indeed, the VM Pro 454 is a peach in peach's clothing. If you have the money but not the desk space for 22" then this is a very nice way to live your computing life. I am planning to get one someday to take advantage of my DualHead graphics card, twin 19" will make a lovely editing workstation.
One thing that mattered a lot to me was extensive geometry control, larger screens need more work to keep them square and true and especially flatscreens which are susceptible to more irregularities due to the complex technologies to make them flat. Having worked with a few old monitors you tend to find the convergence deteriorates (red and blue fringing on crisp details). Over time this will happen to most monitors so I wanted to make sure I had the controls to manually adjust both horizontal AND vertical convergence. Last time I checked the Sony range only allowed for horizontal, Iiyama do both. Some really high-end monitors allow for convergence adjustment in each portion of the screen, but I have yet to see a 19" with such capability.
WhiteandGray, from the AOC website that 9KLR doesn't look like it can do the refresh rates you quoted, but if you live with it then I trust your eyes. It says it only has a horizontal refresh rate of 95kHz which would limit it to 79Hz at 1600x1200 and 60Hz at 2048x1536. To get the specs you are seeing you need a 115kHz refresh for the 2048 res and 144kHz for 1600 @120Hz. The highest I've ever seen is 140kHz on Iiyama's top 22" model. Good on AOC for turning out a top-notch monitor, but they really ought to get their website corrected rather than underselling themselves so badly. And if they look that good on ATI, just imagine what they could do on the end of a Matrox card! http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/tongue.gif
Of course it's good to evaluate all these technical details but if you have the opportunity just get down to a dealer and look at them. Even if it's not the model or make you want, just looking at other's technology with a better understanding can greatly help you decide what you value most in a screen: size, resolution, refresh rate, text clarity, image detail, colour reproduction etc. Just go easy on the salesman, chances are he will not have much of a clue when you start throwing big words like "dot pitch" about.
Bennyboy.
Edited to correct dumb spelling and general long-windedness that tends to happen at 3am.
Also edited to explain what was edited, nothing worse than seeing [edited by.....] and then being left wondering what was wrong with the original. OK, maybe drowning in your own urine is slightly worse, but at least all you (us?) anal-retentive types can rest easy tonight.
[This message has been edited by Bennyboy (edited 04-09-2002).]
[This message has been edited by Bennyboy (edited 04-09-2002).]
Bennyboy:Unfortunatly i can't figure out how to post screenshots of: Display Properties, Settings, Advanced, Monitor/Adapter to show you what is listed so i guess you'll have to take this that i typed from those windows:
Under Monitor Tab:
1. Refresh Frequency
43 Hertz Interlaced
47 Hertz Interlaced
60 Hertz
70 Hertz
75 Hertz
85 Hertz
100 Hertz
Under Adapter Tab:
2. List of Valid Modes
640x480, 256 Colors, 72-200 Hertz
640x480, High Color(16 bit) 60-200 Hertz
640x480, True Color(32 bit) 60-200 Hertz
800x600, 256 Colors, 47 Hertz Interlaced
800x600, 256 Colors, 56-200 Hertz
800x600, High Color,(16 bit) 47(Interlaced)-200
800x600, True Color,(32 bit) same as 16 bit
1024x768, 256 Colors 43(Interlaced)-200Hz
1024x768, High Color(16bit),True Color(32bit) 43-200Hz
1152x864, 256 Colors 43-100Hz
1152x864, High Color(16bit),True Color(32bit) 43-100Hz
1280x768, 256,16bit,32bit 56-85Hz
1280x768, High Color, True Color 56-85Hz
1280x1024, 256 Color 43-160Hz
1280x1024, High Color, True Color 43-160Hz
1600x1200, 256 Colors 60-120Hz
1600x1200, High Color, True Color 60-120Hz
1792x1344, 256 Colors 60-90Hz
1792x1344, High Color, True Color 60-120Hz
1800x1440, 256 Colors, High Color, True Color 60-90Hz
1856x1392 256, High Color, True Color 60-90Hz
1920x1080, 256, High Color, True Color 60-100Hz
1920x1200, 256,High Color, True Color 60-100Hz
1920x1440, 256, High Color, True Color 60-85Hz
2048x1536, 256, High Color, True Color 60-75Hz
Phew!!!!!! This was what i based things on and also continuos usage for years relating to customer base and personal use.
For the record, ViewSonic makes excellent low to mid priced monitors with a very good warranty.
Quote:
OK, maybe drowning in your own urine is slightly worse, but at least all you (us?) anal-retentive types can rest easy tonight.
http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/biggrin.gif http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/biggrin.gif
I agree, specs are just something to go by - not live by...Quote:
Specs aren't everything, and like with all statistics, it helps to understand exactly where the numbers come from so you can't be fooled by salestalk. The Sonys I think are 0.24 grille pitch but I'd be buggered if you could spot the difference (please don't spot the difference, please).
In the end, it's important to get a monitor that has a great picture and as Bennyboy stated, lots of adjustments to enable compensation in the picture quality...
