Monitors - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Gaming Forum
-- Monitors

Posted by shaw on Oct-25-2008 05:05:

Monitors

I had an old 4:3 19" for a few years & finally upgraded, but I'm thinking this new one might be too much. What do you guys use, & how big do you think is too big for gaming if you're using it at a desk?

While we're at it, are there any games that have dual monitor support?

Posted by Capitalizt on Oct-25-2008 06:17:

I got a 32 inch 720P LCD TV for $500 last year...works great as a monitor.

Posted by Darkarbiter on Oct-25-2008 06:40:

quote:
Originally posted by Capitalizt
I got a 32 inch 720P LCD TV for $500 last year...works great as a monitor.

720p is fuck all though. Thats only 1280x720.

I'm quite happy with my 17" crt capable of 1280x1024 at 75hz (1600x1200 at 60, but thats not useable). I hate the crappy colour you get on lcds... and its much easier to see the pixels, which means you really need a higher resolution to get the same effect for games/movies). Might upgrade to a plasma or one of those lazer tvs/moniters at some stage though. As much as its really hard to lift, I'll stick by it's better colour/smooth tranisition of pixels/solidness.

Posted by Fledz on Oct-25-2008 07:13:

My 17" widescreen laptop does 1920x1200 at native resolution.

I'm so used to the real eastate on the screen that when I get a desktop I won't be able to get anything smaller than a 24" due to needing 1920x1200. It's bloody fantastic for production too.

Anything over 24" is just not cost effective though.

Would be nice to run a 30" Dell monitor at an insane res but that would cost tens of thousands of dollars to setup the whole system.

Posted by r5a on Oct-25-2008 07:26:

24" is probably the biggest you want to go.

I have a 24" Viewsonic native at 1920x1200 and a Samsung Syncmaster at 20" 1680x1050

WiC has dual screen and same with Supreme Commander.
Tried both, its probably not the dual screening your thinking of though.

Posted by Fledz on Oct-25-2008 08:12:

Yea definitely. I see no need for anything above 24" unless, like I said, you have money to burn and are just building the craziest PC you can.

I would have a use for dual screen in production and games like Eve Online and maybe Far Cry 2, but generally it's not needed.

Posted by Project-K on Oct-25-2008 14:24:

Depends on a lot of things like how your desk is set up, the lighting in the room, etc. I have a 19" widescreen LCD. I find it somewhat too big, but I couldn't find a 17" in a model I liked. I tend to prefer smaller monitors because you can run games at very low resolutions (thus maximizing performance for the same hardware) without having it look too ugly.

Posted by Zild on Oct-25-2008 15:05:

I personally wouldn't go back to anything that runs at less than 1920x1200. So I vote for 24".

Posted by Moongoose on Oct-25-2008 15:43:

I have a 19" LCD that im quite happy with, however about a year ago a friend of mine bought himself a 30" monster (i think, it might be even bigger), and that thing is absolutely insane. He's a programmer and a designer so its good for work, but every so ofter he like to play games as well. Combine that huge monitor, with his awesome sound system and you get a fucking awesome gaming experioence. IO was playing Test Drive Unlimited and it felt like i was actually in the fucking car due to the view before me

Posted by Project-K on Oct-25-2008 17:15:

quote:
Originally posted by Zild
I personally wouldn't go back to anything that runs at less than 1920x1200. So I vote for 24".

That's another thing. I was perfectly happy back when I was running everything at 800x600. Now it just looks akward. Resolutions are addictive.

Posted by Zild on Oct-25-2008 18:44:

quote:
Originally posted by Project-K
That's another thing. I was perfectly happy back when I was running everything at 800x600. Now it just looks akward. Resolutions are addictive.

I remember when webpages used to say shit like best viewed at 800x600 or higher.

Posted by shaw on Oct-26-2008 04:43:

this thing is a 26". I'm conflicted, because it's soooooo much better for everything other than gaming, but I'm definitely getting the sense that for that, it's too big (and like you mentioned, you really can't run low resolutions on it without having everything look like crap).

when I mentioned dual monitor support, I had in mind something along the lines of an active game view on one side & a map/radar, stats, chat, etc. on the other monitor.

Posted by Darkarbiter on Oct-26-2008 05:00:

Posted by bluE_Neon on Oct-26-2008 17:46:

For the longest time I had an Viewsonic VP930b which in my opinion is 1 of the best LCD monitors on the market. Finesse functionality, finesse colours & native 1280x1024 resolution with DVI-I connection. Now I have 2 9800GX2's and have full HD support.
Comparing both DVI-I & HD, I'd say the HD wins. Currently I own the Samsung Syncmaster T220HD which is an LCD HDTV & I game, browse, etc. on the the video cards. I can use the 720p or 1080p setting though it isn't necessary coz this LCD's native resolution is 1680x1050. I play any game on this setting & the fps are almost flawless.
All in all, HD is the next generation resolution technology & it's superior from it's precedors.

Posted by shaw on Oct-27-2008 14:55:

I got the 260hd