As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

22 inches or 24 inches? Also: Gaming Hardware

RevolutionaryRevolutionary Registered User regular
edited November 2007 in Help / Advice Forum
I decided to get an LCD widescreen monitor. I have two choices.

22 inches - $350 (Australian!)
24 inches - $800 (Australian!)

Now, it seems pretty straightforward to get the 22 inch one, yeah? One thing the computer-store-guy told me makes it harder. Apparently HD is better optimized to 24 inches or higher, so I'll notice the difference more. Am I being lied to? A brief Google search yields no answers.

Second problem, my hardware. It works fine, but on Garrys Mod 10 it lags a little when I push my luck*. My specs:

2GB RAM
Nvidia (I'm fine with it) 7600GS Silent video card
4.2GHZ Dual Core processor

Where am I weak?

*the settings are as low as I'm prepared to lower them. By pushing my luck I meant when I pile in NPCs and props in by the dozen.

Any help appreciated.

Revolutionary on

Posts

  • Options
    falsedeffalsedef Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    HD? What? Monitors have been higher def than HD for many years.

    Your vid card or memory speed is your limiting factor. Your processor and amount of RAM is fine, of course.

    falsedef on
  • Options
    Nakatomi2010Nakatomi2010 Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Agreed... Computer monitors have always been higher quality than TV "HD" ratings... I've got a 22" at home at a 24" on display at work... While the 24" is massively gorgeous, where I've got my monitor I actually can't see the top portion properly due to the size of the screen.... So there is such a thing as "too big".... I think 22" is the sweet spot right now...

    And for that price difference you could get a 22" and a kick ass video card...

    Nakatomi2010 on
    Check out me building my HTPC (NSF56K) (Updated 1-10-08)
    Movie Collection
    Foody Things
    Holy shit! Sony's new techno toy!
    Wii Friend code: 1445 3205 3057 5295
  • Options
    RevolutionaryRevolutionary Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    What? I thought there was CRT, along with LCD and plasma that are both high definition.

    Well, you know what I mean, right?

    Revolutionary on
  • Options
    Nakatomi2010Nakatomi2010 Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    What? I thought there was CRT, along with LCD and plasma that are both high definition.

    Well, you know what I mean, right?

    Computers are a whole other beast... With a computer a 22" monitor you can get 1650x1280, while a 1080P TV can hit what, 1920x1080.... And 720P is what, 1280x720P? And these resolutions carry up to a 50" TV, at 1920x1080, while a 22" monitor hits 1680x1280, a 24" should hit a much higher resolution, but at the same time games all perform differently at the actualy computer resolutions than TV resolutions....

    I dunno... I make shit up on the fly and figure its accurate enough...

    Nakatomi2010 on
    Check out me building my HTPC (NSF56K) (Updated 1-10-08)
    Movie Collection
    Foody Things
    Holy shit! Sony's new techno toy!
    Wii Friend code: 1445 3205 3057 5295
  • Options
    RevolutionaryRevolutionary Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    So will I get a better image at 24"? Or is it just the same thing but bigger?

    Revolutionary on
  • Options
    Nakatomi2010Nakatomi2010 Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    So will I get a better image at 24"? Or is it just the same thing but bigger?

    It'll look nicer, but at that high a resolution you'll also need a powerful video card in order to get that sharp an image... On my machine here 22" monitor is the limit I have, if I had a 24" monitor and tried for higher resolutions I'd probably start seeing performance hits in games....

    Like I said, I'd buy the 22" and spend the extra money on a kick ass video card...

    Nakatomi2010 on
    Check out me building my HTPC (NSF56K) (Updated 1-10-08)
    Movie Collection
    Foody Things
    Holy shit! Sony's new techno toy!
    Wii Friend code: 1445 3205 3057 5295
  • Options
    mooshoeporkmooshoepork Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    go with the 22". check out chimei if you haven't already.

    edit: ooo a fellow melbournian :O

    mooshoepork on
  • Options
    RevolutionaryRevolutionary Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    go with the 22". check out chimei if you haven't already.

    edit: ooo a fellow melbournian :O

    Melbourne? *hug* *love*

    Ok guys I'll pick up a 22" LCD monitor and a video card. I'm a few weeks from buying that 24" and a few months until I can buy a video card to support it.

    Thanks for the help. Truly appreciated.

    Revolutionary on
  • Options
    WeretacoWeretaco Cubicle Gangster Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    I'd actually look more at 20" or 24"

    most 20" lcds are 1680x1050 just like the 22" so with those extra inches you are getting larger pixels and not as sharp an image. The 20" panels also tend to be higher quality since basically every reasonably priced 22" is a TN (or lowest quality) lcd panel.

    My advice.. dual 20" lcds or 1 24" for the money.

    Weretaco on
    Unofficial PA IRC chat: #paforums at irc.slashnet.org
  • Options
    ruzkinruzkin Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Yo, if you find any good monitor deals in Melbourne then hook me up. My little 15 inch is looking ready to die.

    ruzkin on
    g4OlSIF.jpg
  • Options
    mooshoeporkmooshoepork Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    ruzkin wrote: »
    Yo, if you find any good monitor deals in Melbourne then hook me up. My little 15 inch is looking ready to die.

    Check static-ice, that's what I used.

    mooshoepork on
  • Options
    EggyToastEggyToast Jersey CityRegistered User regular
    edited November 2007
    The super short answer is that he lied to you -- HD doesn't "get better" above a certain size.

    More impressive, sure, but typically "big" TVs go in big rooms. If you had a very high resolution 15" LCD, and you sat a foot closer, it would probably look as good as a 22" from further away.


    One important thing to keep in mind is that technology is not even across all monitor sizes. For quite some time a few years ago, 17" monitors were the "sweet spot" because even though 19"+ cost a LOT more money, the contrast sucked and the resolutions were shit.

    The other way to think about it is that you need very high resolution monitors with high quality displays to do computer work -- text display, fine mouse control, and so on. To watch a movie, you want a sharp, crisp display, but you don't need exceedingly high detail. So while you could plug a computer into a 42" LCD TV, you'd display everything at the highest "p" setting (since computers are inherently progressive). So you'd have 1280x720 on a 42" screen.

    My 17" LCD on my computer is 1280 x 1024. That's higher resolution than the HD TV.

    EggyToast on
    || Flickr — || PSN: EggyToast
  • Options
    Manic205Manic205 Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Weretaco wrote: »
    I'd actually look more at 20" or 24"

    most 20" lcds are 1680x1050 just like the 22" so with those extra inches you are getting larger pixels and not as sharp an image. The 20" panels also tend to be higher quality since basically every reasonably priced 22" is a TN (or lowest quality) lcd panel.

    My advice.. dual 20" lcds or 1 24" for the money.

    Seconded. Dual monitors is pretty amazing. I usually have Warcraft on my 20" widescreen with my media player and message windows on the 19" 3:4 beside it. Only wish they were both wide.

    Manic205 on
    1365887IzMnK.png
  • Options
    AridholAridhol Daddliest Catch Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    I also would go with 2 20" monitors.
    It's not a tonne more than a 22", maybe about half the 24" and it's huge fun!

    I bought the dell 24" widescreen ($750) though and then added a 20.1" LG LCD for only $200


    Dual monitors is the shit.

    Aridhol on
  • Options
    gneGnegneGne Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Yeah, LG and Samsung make some kickass screens.

    gneGne on
    pasigcopyox6.jpg
  • Options
    vonPoonBurGervonPoonBurGer Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    EggyToast wrote: »
    The super short answer is that he lied to you -- HD doesn't "get better" above a certain size.
    It's kind of hard to tell without specs for the monitors in question. If the 22" panel is 1680x1050 native, and the 24" panel is 1920x1200, then 1080i and 1080p content will likely look a lot better on the 24" panel, because it doesn't have to be scaled as much. Part of the reason that quality HD plasmas and LCD TVs are expensive is that they include beefier hardware that handles scaling input to match the native resolution of the display. LCD monitors have much more basic scaling hardware, because they are built with the expectation that you'll most likely have your computer outputting a signal that perfectly matches their native display resolution.

    To the OP, whether or not the 24" monitor is worth it depends entirely on what you're plugging into it. If you're plugging an HD-capable console directly into the monitor, for example, then the 24" may be the best choice, if cost isn't a huge issue. If you're just going to be attaching your computer to the monitor (regardless of whether or not you're passing any console video feeds through your computer), then the 22" is probably fine for your needs.

    vonPoonBurGer on
    Xbox Live:vonPoon | PSN: vonPoon | Steam: vonPoonBurGer
  • Options
    RevolutionaryRevolutionary Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Guys I've just ordered a 22" monitor. Too late for change.

    As for the video card, I'm getting an nvidia geforce 8800 GTS with 320mb of ram. I'm told 640mb is a waste of money.

    Revolutionary on
  • Options
    gneGnegneGne Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Get the 8800GT instead if you still can.

    gneGne on
    pasigcopyox6.jpg
  • Options
    SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    gneGne wrote: »
    Get the 8800GT instead if you still can.
    Seriously, it costs about the same as the GTS, but is almost as powerful as the GTX

    Spoit on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    RevolutionaryRevolutionary Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    What? The guy said it was like $700, and that the GTS was $350.

    Typing this from my new 22" monitor, by the way.

    Revolutionary on
  • Options
    TychoCelchuuuTychoCelchuuu PIGEON Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    I don't care what that guy said, get an 8800GT. Buying any other card now is ludicrous. He probably thought you meant GTX.

    TychoCelchuuu on
  • Options
    zerg rushzerg rush Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Here's a side by side comparison from newegg. They are from the same company, and are as close to similar specs/price as I could muster.

    GTX - $539.99, 600MHz, 768MB
    GTS - $299.99, 580MHz, 320MB
    GT - $289.99, 640MHz, 512MB

    Now I'm sure someone who knows more about video cards is going to school me about how I should be comparing them using stream processors or the memory hertz or something. But the basic rule is that the GT is better and cheaper than the GTS, while also being a fraction of the price of the GTX with very similar performance.

    So, if you can possibly switch to the GT, you should.

    zerg rush on
  • Options
    blizzard224blizzard224 Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    What? The guy said it was like $700, and that the GTS was $350.

    Typing this from my new 22" monitor, by the way.

    Guy is wrong.

    www.msy.com.au
    www.cpl.com.au
    www.lmc.com.au

    All have stores in Melbourne around the Box Hill area.

    The three of them together should be able to net you an 8800GT for under 350 bucks (They change prices pretty much every half-week) and an excellent Chimei 22" for 295 bucks.

    EDIT: Didn't see you already had the monitor there, need to learn to read! :p

    blizzard224 on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    RevolutionaryRevolutionary Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    There's such thing as a GT?

    I thought there were only the GTS 8800 and the GTX 8800.

    I'll look into this, thanks.

    Revolutionary on
  • Options
    ComahawkComahawk Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Before you buy, check the refresh rate on the monitors. You want a rate of 2ms if you are gaming.

    Comahawk on
  • Options
    falsedeffalsedef Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Comahawk wrote: »
    Before you buy, check the refresh rate on the monitors. You want a rate of 2ms if you are gaming.

    Monitor refresh rate should be around 85hz. Latency should be <8ms.

    falsedef on
  • Options
    RevolutionaryRevolutionary Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    F. 60ghz.

    I'm 5ms, which is good.

    Edit: Apparently refresh rate is only to not flickering. As long as it doesn't flicker I'm good, right?

    Revolutionary on
  • Options
    gneGnegneGne Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    LCD screens don't work with refresh rates, just leave at default.

    gneGne on
    pasigcopyox6.jpg
  • Options
    falsedeffalsedef Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    F. 60ghz.

    I'm 5ms, which is good.

    Edit: Apparently refresh rate is only to not flickering. As long as it doesn't flicker I'm good, right?
    If you can't notice, you're fine. It's less noticeable on LCDs, but I wouldn't be comfortable reading with 60hz on a CRT.

    falsedef on
  • Options
    DeusfauxDeusfaux Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    the guy originally giving advice meant that 24" are at 1920x1200, another higher class of resolution than the 22"s, which are at 1680x1050.

    You can't play 1080p content on 22"s in the native resolution. the image how to be downscaled and lose quality.

    thats why 24"s are so much more expensive.

    also most are better panel types. nearly all 22"s are TN panels, which are the worst for visual quality.

    you dont need ridiculously low response time. anything under 16 will likely be undetectable by you.

    I'd go for a 20" non-tn panel if budget is tight, or a full proper 24". 22" give you nothing over 20" except hte ability to sit a bit further back. and using a TN panel, you might want to anyways :P


    secondly, GT is not, by a rule, better than the GTS. if anything, the GTS on name alone should make it an improved product, and its forthcoming revision might place it back above the GT. But for the time being, the GT outperforms it, at a fraction of the price, so it is a killer buy.

    Deusfaux on
Sign In or Register to comment.