My monitor just melted

[elmuerte]

Ok, it didn't melt. But my secondary monitor is now sort of dead and thus I need a new one.

Anybody got some recommendations for a monitor suitable for gaming?

I really don't want a 19:6 resolution. Other than that I'm flexible.

[elmuerte]

After reading these two reviews, I think I'm going for the Dell UltraSharp U2412M:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2412m.htm

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1312883832

It has an IPS panel, which has great colors. But people often warn about those panels for gaming because of the ghosting and input lag. But if I would believe those two reviews, this Dell does quite well on that level. In fact, it's probably better than my current main monitor which is a Dell E207WFP.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Glad we could be of help!

[elmuerte]

Sorry. I didn't expect to find a suitable monitor with good reviews which was on stock in such a short notice.

[Nappi]

I have had HP ZR24w for a while now and I have no complaints. I expect this monitor to have a relatively low input lag, as my friend owns the same model and he usually does quite a lot of research before purchasing electronics. Also he games.

[James]

Sorry. I didn't expect to find a suitable monitor with good reviews which was on stock in such a short notice.

Well I prefer 16:10, so those links you posted might be useful. This thread has some value!

[ThunderPeel2001]

Sorry. I didn't expect to find a suitable monitor with good reviews which was on stock in such a short notice.

I just found it amusing.

Well I prefer 16:10, so those links you posted might be useful. This thread has some value!

I thought Elmuerte was referring to 4:3 at first. Why is 16:10 preferred over 16:9?

[Jake]

I thought Elmuerte was referring to 4:3 at first. Why is 16:10 preferred over 16:9?

I thought the same thing! "Only on the Idle Forums am I going to find some dude still insisting on 4:3." Or not!

16:10 is traditionally preferred because you can get a 16:9 image on screen and still have room for playback controllers or an editing toolbar. I like it for games because it's just a little less wide.

Edited November 2, 2011 by Jake

[Erkki]

WUXGA!

[Chris]

I also prefer 16:10. It's a bit more multipurpose.

[brkl]

I want a 3:2 monitor.

[elmuerte]

5:4 is great for a second and third monitor; I now have 2x16:10. the most extreme left is almost outside of my passive FOV.

16:9 is just means I have to scroll more. Most non-video content is vertically oriented

[elmuerte]

Oh right... I just hooked up the monitor. I guess I need to increase the mouse speed even more now considering my desktop is even larger. I went from 1280×1024+1680×1050 to 1680×1050+1920×1200

So far I can recommend it.

[Kolzig]

Just buy a Philips Cinema 21:9.

Games would look quite weird in that.

[Jayel]

All my monitors are now 16:9. I moved the task bar to the left side to regain some of the vertical estate, but I can't break the habit of looking at the bottom right corner whenever I want to know the time. So I put a clock widget there.

Anyway, it's great that IPS made its way into public awareness now (maybe thanks to iPad?). It's funny how it used to be a lot easier to find non-TN displays 5+ years ago, but then people simply didn't know/care and there was a race to the bottom until all LCD display was shit. Now IPS and other better technologies are slowly making a comeback... not in laptops though, funnily enough.

[elmuerte]

I don't agree that IPS panels have gather more public awareness. It's just that IPS panels have increased in performance, and decreased in price a lot. This makes them more suitable for general purpose usage.

It's still difficult to find non-TN panels when looking for TFTs, it's rarely mentioned what panel type they use.

I didn't know iPad used IPS. It is probably the best choice considering the extreme angles people look at the thing.

[Jayel]

You may be right. Although in my personal experience it was a lot easier to find IPS panels in the past, then there was a complete drought for a few years, then it became easier to find them again (in desktops at least). It was pretty easy to find them on laptops too. old IBM thinkpads used to have them. Now none of them does (except x220 confusingly). I blame Lenovo and their cost cutting measures.

[Erwin_Br]

My Dell wfp2407 is almost 5 years old now, and I'm still incredibly happy with it. My next monitor will definitely be a Dell again.

[Gwardinen]

How did you get on with that monitor, elmuerte? I'm looking at some myself with the intention of perhaps asking for contributions to a monitor fund for Christmas. I already have a 5:4 monitor so I'm looking for something widescreen (16:9 or 16:10) to complement it for games and videos and such.

The monitor you got is probably somewhat over my budget, but if you like the brand I might take a more serious look at Dell. I'd also be interested in everyone else's feedback. I'm looking in the 22-24" size range, I think, and ideally for something capable of 1920x1080 so that I can use whichever resolution actually runs well in games rather than being hamstrung by my monitor.

Anyone know of any somewhat affordable but still decent screens that fit the bill?

[elmuerte]

I'm really happy with the monitor. I could recommend it to anybody (including gamers) that has the budget and room for this large monitor. As far as I know there isn't a smaller brother of this monitor type. Dell doesn't really make a series of similar monitors of the same type, or at least, not in the UltraSharp series. The WFP series of Dell does have displays with similar features/performance in different sizes, but the WFP are simple TN panel based screens. You might find a better and cheaper TN panel based screen from Samsung or Iiyama.

[Gwardinen]

Found a decent deal on the Acer S240HLBID on Amazon during Cyber Monday week, does anyone have any experience with this monitor or know of a good site that has a review of it?

[elmuerte]

Unless it's a high profile screen you probably won't find any quality reviews.

I did find this review for the S243HL: http://reviews.cnet.com/lcd-monitors/acer-s243hl/4505-3174_7-33826419.html#reviewPage1

And it didn't come out very good.

I don't know if it's the same screen or a completely different considering it's a US screen they tested.

[Gwardinen]

Unless it's a high profile screen you probably won't find any quality reviews.

I did find this review for the S243HL: http://reviews.cnet.com/lcd-monitors/acer-s243hl/4505-3174_7-33826419.html#reviewPage1

And it didn't come out very good.

I don't know if it's the same screen or a completely different considering it's a US screen they tested.

I -think- it's a different screen, but who knows how much technology is shared? It seems really difficult to get considered opinions on monitors. I myself have no real frame of reference for them, and there are dozens at the size and price point I'm looking at. It's not even the case that each major company has one, each major company seems to have between three and six of the bloody things at any given size and type and price.

[Nappi]

My secondary monitor (one at my parents' house) broke down a while ago. First, it became increasingly hard to turn on the power, and then after a couple of days the power LED just flickered for a while and the thing stopped working permanently. It was quite good 3+ year old 24" LG with MVA-panel that I didn't want to give up on just yet.

So I fixed it! Poor thing had simply fell victim of the notorious capacitor plague and after a bit of soldering, it was good as new. Looking forward to barely surviving a house fire tonight!

The lesson: There might be hope for your broken monitor yet.

[Salacious Snake]

I'd have thought people around here would know not to play Freedom: First Resistance, since I can only assume that was the cause of all these dead monitors.