We are going to purchase a 24 inch widescreen monitor strictly for gaming in the next couple of weeks. There are not many choices at the moment but we are focusing on the new Dell 2407 and the Sammy Syncmaster 244T. We've also looked into the Viewsonic VP2330wb.

The Dell is being sold in the UK and the specs/features for the 2407 that I found at the Dell UK site appear to be pretty awesome. Are the specs for response time "liberal" or pretty accurate based on those folks that have a Dell monitor. I think I read on the web that the monitor will be for sale in the US at the end of this month.

The Samsung 244T has fewer features for the money, but we like the looks of their panels and found them to provide a spectacular picture. The response time is slower than that of the Dell. This monitor appears costly for one that has few features.

I mention the Viewsonic because its specs are good as well and it is Vista compliant as are the other two. I have a Viewsonic VX2000 now that has provided years of flawless service.

Price is not a concern but future use with a new 64-bit PC running Vista on a monitor with HDCP is.

Are there other monitors that we should consider? Does anyone have any input with regard to these choices. Thanks.

Diane

I have the Dell 20.1" 2005FPW widescreen, and absolutely love it. Everything is crisp and bright, and response time is great. Not Vista compliant I know, but I've heard the previous generation 24"ers were great as well, so I'd expect the new one to live up to the hype.

When they mention Vista compliant I take it they are meaning it supports HDCP/HDMI? Which would only be needed for Protected HD Video playback?

DMP and anyone else in his shoes: The longer you can stand to wait before making this purchase...the better off you will be.

It's not a matter of the display being "Vista compliant," but rather an issue of a display being HDCP-compliant so HDCP-material can be displayed in full resolution. All other sources, like PC games and Windows itself will display at any resolution on a non-HDCP display.

I'll stay with Apple nd OSX, and when my games no longer run becuase i dont have vista, I'll quit. At age 43 it's not worth the bother. At age 23 when gaming was really important, maybe.

I like making music and movies with the mac more than gaming now.

^ I don't recall that being asked, but thanks for sharing anyway.

I'll stay with Apple nd OSX, and when my games no longer run becuase i dont have vista, I'll quit. At age 43 it's not worth the bother. At age 23 when gaming was really important, maybe.

I like making music and movies with the mac more than gaming now.


And you are in the minority but whatever floats your boat.

Any answers on this yet? I too am about to jump for the Samsung 244T or the Dell 2405 or the Dell 2407.

I certainly want HDCP.
Must be 1920x1200.
Hope for no lag.

All 3 fit the bill, eh?

Prices: 2405 ($759) < 2407 ($949) < 244T ($999)

As the 2405 is missing HDMI, I'll pass on it.

A month ago, when the 2407 was released, there was talk about it having banding and such. It seemed to be rumors only. Now that it's been out a month, I'm looking for testimony on the quality of it. Has anybody else used a 2407 yet that can speak from experience? Also when I check it on the dell website, it lists the 2407 with a max res of 1680x1050, while the 2405 is 1920x1080. What happened here?

Here is 2407 link for proof:
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4335

Any answers on this yet? I too am about to jump for the Samsung 244T or the Dell 2405 or the Dell 2407.

I certainly want HDCP.
Must be 1920x1200.
Hope for no lag.

All 3 fit the bill, eh?

Prices: 2405 ($759) < 2407 ($949) < 244T ($999)

As the 2405 is missing HDMI, I'll pass on it.

A month ago, when the 2407 was released, there was talk about it having banding and such. It seemed to be rumors only. Now that it's been out a month, I'm looking for testimony on the quality of it. Has anybody else used a 2407 yet that can speak from experience? Also when I check it on the dell website, it lists the 2407 with a max res of 1680x1050, while the 2405 is 1920x1080. What happened here?

Here is 2407 link for proof:
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4335


No HDCP on the 2405, so count that one out if that is a must have for you.

Also, the link you posted says 20" in the specs, so I'm sure it is a mistake on the res as well.

No HDCP on the 2405, so count that one out if that is a must have for you.

Also, the link you posted says 20" in the specs, so I'm sure it is a mistake on the res as well.


The link is to the Dell 24" 2407. Max Resolution is 1920x1200 Pixels at 60 Hz which sounds good to me.

The link is to the Dell 24" 2407. Max Resolution is 1920x1200 Pixels at 60 Hz which sounds good to me.

Well, obviously they fixed it.

Oddly enough, the Dell 2407 actually seems to be half a step backwards from the 2405. Take a look at those specs and do a side by side comparision on Dell's website and see if you come away with the same impression about that I did.

After that, comes the Dell 2007, which looks appealing, or the aforementioned and uber expensive Samsung 244t.

I have the Samsung 213T, but I would love to upgrade to a WS monitor and have HDCP compliance as a bonus option. From everything I'm reading and seeing, the Samsung 244t is probably the overall new king out there right now. But it's just too damned expensive.

Overall, I see a very limited and, imho, still overpriced marketplace.

There's also the Hewlett Packard HP L2335. This is essentially a Dell 2405 clone with a few extra wrinkles that's been getting a lot of praise. Read: http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2467






I'll stay with Apple nd OSX, and when my games no longer run becuase i dont have vista, I'll quit. At age 43 it's not worth the bother. At age 23 when gaming was really important, maybe.

I like making music and movies with the mac more than gaming now.

No one cares. This couldn't be less helpful or useful to anyone.

I noticed that Samsung slipped out this 215tw monitor in May and it's kind of been under the radar.

See here: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824001078


This is the first LCD monitor from them that I've seen with a 5 behind it so I'm halfway wondering if this 244t is going to be seeing an upgrade before the year is out, since it came out in November of 2005. (Although I'm not sure what kind of meaningful upgrades they could really do on the 244t, at least on paper.)

Besides widscreen, one appreciable difference I see, again on paper, between any of the monitors discussed in this thread vs. my Samsung 213t are the response times. Now, I know that one can't hang their hat on these figures, since there isn't a concrete, universal standard, but my Samsung 213t is rated at 25 ms while everything in this thread is 8ms or possibly even 6 ms if Samsung isn't BS'ing about the 244t's capabilities.

Even if the figures are fudged a bit, I've got to believe THAT much of a difference has to count for something.

I noticed that Samsung slipped out this 215tw monitor in May and it's kind of been under the radar.
Under this forum's radar. Try another (http://www.hardforum.com/search.php?).

Under this forum's radar. Try another (http://www.hardforum.com/search.php?).


Yup!

I've been lurking at Hard OCP and the widescreen gaming forums for this whole past week. Both are great places!

I'm kind of suffering from information overload! :eek:


The consensus I'm getting, overall is: These WS monitors are still in that early adopter phase.

That being said, the Samsung 215T is coming out looking solid across the boards. I'd have to say that it's probably near the top of my list right now.

It's a pity that 244t is plagued with a critical lag issue. I guess they'll have to try and get it right with the 245T and this supposed LED backlight variant I've read about.


Outside of that...the Dells and possibly even one or two Phillps screens could be contenders.

The NEC's intruige me, but I'd need to see that glossy screen in person before making a purchase like that.

I guess I'm just going to have to wait. It doesn't seem like this market is anywhere where it needs to be yet. :(

Today I checked Dell's website and the 2407 is listed at 15% off of the price that it was earlier this week! I put in an order for the 2407 with the 5 year warranty (which is only about 40 bucks more than w/o warranty).

It does concern me that the dell web page makes no mention of HDCP, but I'm going to believe all the posts on the Internet that says it is supported, just forgotten on the web page.

LAG... the pixel response time of 6ms or 8ms is great. Looking forward to that. But what I am worried about is the "input lag" - which has been reported as being around 45 ms on this monitor. I'd think that'd be noticable.

But then I read 10 times more posts from happy users that see no lag, and play battlefield 2 at 1920x1200 without delays.

So is there input lag or isn't there? I guess it doesn't matter, the order is placed, and in several weeks I'll know for certain.

^^ Let us know how it goes!

The 2407 arrived on Tuesday (Wow! I ordered it Friday, with 3 day ground, and the provided ship date wasn't even until next week).

Immediate impressions are amazing. This thing is slick and beautiful to look at. And then when powered on it is even better. I compared it to the 3.5 year old 19" Mag Innovision LCD that it'll be replacing (well, actually, I got Wife Approval to keep dual displays). I thought the Mag had a good picture at a native 1280x1024, but geez after seeing it side-by-side, it really was blurry, dim, and lacking resolution and contrast compared to the 2407.

I appear to have a firmware fixed model. “Desktop” mode is fixed for horizontal banding in the horizontal dithered images., but the vertical dithered image shows a bit of banding. It leaves horizontal step lines every 1/8th inch or so, slightly noticeable, but not bad enough to be a deal breaker. It’d be tough to capture with a camera. It’s really not bad, however the same images on my 3 year old 19” LCD don’t have either type of banding.

Now onto the other 2 modes – “multimedia” and “gaming”. When viewing the dithered images on these modes, the banding is horribly ridiculous, both H and V. It’s hard to believe that Dell’s Quality Control even tested this area, because nobody could get away with a product that did that. The really strange part was when I used the mouse wheel to scroll the image up or down about 1 inch at a time - for the next second after letting go, the dithering hopped around before becoming stable. Extremely horrible. The good news is that this horridness is completely not there when in “Desktop” mode. I now wonder what those other 2 modes are good for.

It really does make it look like the desktop mode has been fixed, and the banding is so minor compared to the beauty of the monitor – the contrast ratio is great, the brightness is perfect, the resolution is unrivaled, and ghosting is non-existent.

I can whole-heartedly tell everybody to go buy one (or two) of these! But there’s a bit more that I must disclose…

I tried Battlefield 2 at 1920x1200. PC is AMD64 3000+, 1 Gig RAM, ATI 9800Pro DVI. All graphic details were set to low, texture filtering off, AA at low. Something scary here… there is what feels like a full half second lag between moving the mouse before the screen updates. Now I’ve played battlefield 2 at the wrong graphics settings so it’s so choppy the frame rate isn’t playable, but in this state the frame rate is still smooth, yet there’s this strange delay. This delay makes it unplayable as you can’t straighten out a vehicle after turning! I then create another custom icon for Battlefield 2, one at 1280x720 (16:9). Same low graphic details. This time the feel of the game is back to normal. If there is an “input lag”, it’s so minute that for 1920x1200 comparison purposes, I’ll say it’s not there. The test continues… I create another icon for 1600x1000, it still feels normal. I continue playing as a sniper at this super duper high resolution and get ultra easy headshots for the rest of the night. Oh no did I give away my secrets? To be fair to the 1920 test, I really need a computer and video card that can pump out higher details at that resolution. But from what I saw and can deduce, the 2407 induced some kind of input lag at 1920x1200. For the record, I used Desktop mode at 1920x1200, and then tried Gaming mode during hte other resolutions. I didn't even know that there was a banding problem on Gaming Mode, as it certainly wasn't visible while playing. I need to do more testing, mixing display modes with various video card resolutions (and faster PC).

Attached is a zip file with 3 images that show the banding. Images were on the Dell forum. See this link to the Dell forum regarding their official stance on the banding issue and what they’ve done to correct it:
http://forums.us.dell.com/supportforums/board/message?board.id=dim_monitor&message.id=59082

I tried Battlefield 2 at 1920x1200. PC is AMD64 3000+, 1 Gig RAM, ATI 9800Pro DVI. All graphic details were set to low, texture filtering off, AA at low. Something scary here… there is what feels like a full half second lag between moving the mouse before the screen updates. Now I’ve played battlefield 2 at the wrong graphics settings so it’s so choppy the frame rate isn’t playable, but in this state the frame rate is still smooth, yet there’s this strange delay. This delay makes it unplayable as you can’t straighten out a vehicle after turning! I then create another custom icon for Battlefield 2, one at 1280x720 (16:9). Same low graphic details. This time the feel of the game is back to normal. If there is an “input lag”, it’s so minute that for 1920x1200 comparison purposes, I’ll say it’s not there.But from what I saw and can deduce, the 2407 induced some kind of input lag at 1920x1200.

The input-lag is really because textures are being swapped between your video and system RAM and your hard drive. The little amount of video RAM and system RAM that you have cannot bypass hard drive access.

One thing I'm getting the idea on is that, for gaming, a S-IPS based monitor is probably the way to go...

The input-lag is really because textures are being swapped between your video and system RAM and your hard drive. The little amount of video RAM and system RAM that you have cannot bypass hard drive access.

Last week I updated the 9800Pro to an x1600Pro. Now I can play BF2 at 1920x1200 without that nasty delay. It's a 512 Meg card, and more or less maxes out the performance I can get out of this AGP system. I still have textures set to medium, AA at 2x, and texture filtering on Low.

So to correct an original assumption - I now don't believe the Dell 2407 causes any more lag at high resolutions than it does at lower resolutions. The PC must be beefy enough to put out smooth graphics at high res.

No display is going to be the cause of that kind of lag. Battlefield 2 is a real memory hog and was the first game to have everyone start recommending 2GB of system RAM.

Guys...Dell 2407 $788, 24" diagonal...1920x1200 rez....no HDCP compliance....no speakers.

Or....Westinghouse 37" 1920x1080p, 37" Diagonal...same 1000:1 CR....$995.00 refurbed, HDCP compliant, speakers.

Guys...Dell 2407 $788, 24" diagonal...1920x1200 rez....no HDCP compliance....no speakers.

Or....Westinghouse 37" 1920x1080p, 37" Diagonal...same 1000:1 CR....$995.00 refurbed, HDCP compliant, speakers.

not 2407,
Samsung 244t for $840-880 shipped (it's no longer way more expensive than 2407) or wait and see what else comes out.

westing is a bit imposingly large as a desktop monitor, although the size is more impressive for AV. never tried it.

Dell still has issues, banding is not fixed (and it actually can show up as less subtle shading when viewing photos or DVDs), some don't care at this point, I still found it pretty annoying. You can set Samsung to anywhere from dimmest to brightest setting and it doesn't do much shadow or highlighting clipping, if any, while 2407 quickly loses shadow details. It also has weird shimmer artifact when dragging gray objects over white backgrounds when using DVI. 2407 is good for FPS as it has super low lag for a wide LCD, but bad for photo, design, viewing websites that use gradients and DVDs and HDTV at the utmost quality.

compare images side by side and they look better on 244t.

If you have the real estate....the Westy is a nice option......

Refurbed price of course....not brand new, although if you're spending 900+ on a 24" monitor....maybe its worth looking into the new 37".

Today I checked Dell's website and the 2407 is listed at 15% off of the price that it was earlier this week! I put in an order for the 2407 with the 5 year warranty (which is only about 40 bucks more than w/o warranty).

It does concern me that the dell web page makes no mention of HDCP, but I'm going to believe all the posts on the Internet that says it is supported, just forgotten on the web page.

LAG... the pixel response time of 6ms or 8ms is great. Looking forward to that. But what I am worried about is the "input lag" - which has been reported as being around 45 ms on this monitor. I'd think that'd be noticable.

But then I read 10 times more posts from happy users that see no lag, and play battlefield 2 at 1920x1200 without delays.

So is there input lag or isn't there? I guess it doesn't matter, the order is placed, and in several weeks I'll know for certain.


The LAG is there and yes, it can be 45ms on 6ms display, read more:
behardware [dot] com [slash] articles [slash] 632 [slash] page1.html

2 frames behind can get you killed if you are PFS pro gamer, choose wisely.
Counter Strike snipers are dissappointed (those with better skills)

If you are a FPS pro gamer, you have no business buying a flat panel monitor. Period.

FPS pro gamer plays at low rez with all eye candy turned of. Most will even turn off most texturing also if they can, so they still use CRT's.

I thought they played at mad high resoultions. so they can individually target the pixels on a persons face....go right for "eye shots only". :P

If you are a FPS pro gamer, you have no business buying a flat panel monitor. Period.

I've read Acer AL2423W is the fastest 24" and still offers best possible picture quality and unnoticable ghosting, no banding. I wonder what the lag would be, 1 frame or 2 or 3?

Some say the only option for FPS gamers is Apple Cinema Display 23" - any comments?

Honestly....I think nobody here is a pro FPS gamer so the discussion is moot :)

I use a 37" 1080p display that ghosts with dark-on-light objects (but not anytime else that I can see)...I've learned to live with it...and I'm happy.

I have the Acer 22" widescreen LCD. I don't notice any ghosting at all. Pretty great display for $300 (fully HDCP-compliant also).

I have the 2405 and the 2407. I dont see no ghosting. The 2407's colors are brighter and it is HDCP compliant.

Is Acer 26 LCD AL2623W about the same as 2423 (which is great display), just bigger?

I have a Dell 2407, and I like it; only thing is that it's too damn bright at stock settings, and turning the brightness down seems to crush blacks.

Also, some banding here and there, but otherwise, it's pretty good.

If you are a FPS pro gamer, you have no business buying a flat panel monitor. Period.

So...what if you just want to play games at home like the OP? Are you allowed to buy a flat panel, or should we check with you first? :confused:

If you're a "just want to play games at home" person then youre a casual gamer. You do not need to check with HeadRusch. He is also not a pro gamer. I'm sure the 37" isnt tube based.

Theres no monitor police here. And most people cannot move faster than modern LCDs. Youre dead anyway around the corner.

So...what if you just want to play games at home like the OP? Are you allowed to buy a flat panel, or should we check with you first? :confused:

Wooooah, take it easy there Tonto......I'm just saying few LCD's will live up to the "perceived expectations" of a Pro gamer.........and if you're a pro gamer, you'll be using a CRT so that lag and ghosting aren't a problem.

Also, by perceived I mean alot of them buy equipment that far surpasses their skill level......ie: when they die, they blame the inferior equipment and not the fact that someone else's hand-eye coordination (which is all pro gaming is anyhow) is ever-so-slightly better than theirs is.

To agree with HeadRusch -

I can't even believe what is going on. LCD monitors? EWW These things are trash. Between the banding, ghosting, latency, "sweet spot" viewing angle for color accuracy.... how can you guys even take these things seriously?

Where did the CRT monitors go? I use an old Samsung 900nf monitor. No LCD that I have seen (I'm in and out of computer stores weekly, I work in high profile software sales engineering) at any price gets within 50% of this ~$500 aperture grill CRT monitor's performance.

Some day, some manufacturer is going to start making real monitors again. I can't wait, because I'd like widescreen on my desk.

In Korea, Starcraft competition is as big as pro sports are here. You will NEVER see an LCD monitor in one of those arena. They are terrible for gaming. This entire thread is comparing a "giant douche" to a "turd sandwich."

For gaming, it is CRT or nothing. I know this is not what many people want to hear, but it is the truth.

The funny thing is, for a game like Starcraft, why *not* use a high rez LCD monitor?

You dont have to worry about:
Color Accuracy
Ghosting
Latency, etc.

CRT's are dead, nobody wants a 100lb monitor on their desk anymore taking up valuable real-estate. For anything that requires hyper accuracy, sure, for everything else, there's LCD.

Plus, and I'll say this with some annoyance, my first 21" monitor in 2000 cost me $600 bucks. It lasted exactly two years. Got it replaced with a refurb under warranty, that one lasted exactly one year. Then, I replaced it with a 19" Flatscreen CRT...that lasted a year and a half before its contrast went to **** and I couldn't get any brightness out of the thing (and it was a high-end NEC/Mitsubishi Flatscreen, too).

For me, CRT's were always unreliable hunks of ****.....I mean if you were like me and had your PC on like 8+ hours of every single day, checking email, gaming, surfing the web, whatever....then monitors would burn through their hours in no-time. Monitors are simply NOT meant to last, CRT's that is. At least with an LCD....you're likely to get more than a couple years of service out of one.

24" LCD's are great for desktop gaming; and monitors may have an advantage in response time, but neither is the way to go.

You want a DLP HDTV, 1080P even. 50"+. Don't kid yourself with these peewee screens. The effect large screens have on PC gaming is immense. Immersion people. Add a nice receiver, 7.1 of course, and your in heaven.

Wireless 2.4Ghz keyboard with Gyration air mouse. Any issues you have in response times are completely trivial in this setup. Unless your competing for money of course...

I have 1 72" 1080p DLP, it's awesome...

P.S.
If you have a CompUSA going out of business near you may soon be able to get the Gateway 24" LCD (1920x1200, 6ms) for a good price. I've been looking at it closely but I am thinking that 27"-30" is the optimum size for a desktop monitor these days.

I can't wait, because I'd like widescreen on my desk.


So did I and I got myself used Sony CRT 24" Widescreen for $200 :D
But still lookind after 22" (TN 0-10ms input lag) or 24" (up to 30ms input lag) LCD display, not decided yet.

SO I've been playing BF2 on the 24" Dell for over half a year now. A little story goes along with it.
- 1920x1200 intruduced about a 2 fps delay. Impossible to snipe a moving target. Leading the target would sometimes actually get me a hit, but way to unreliable and annoying.
- dropped to 1200x800 and the lag dropped to 1 fps delay. Easier, but still noticably different vs using a CRT.
- dropped mouse sensitivity within BF2 to .6, and that helped the most at making it playable again. With high (or normal) mouse settings, the simple act of splinning around was impossible as the feedback to the user was not real time. Slowing the mouse signifantly gave me the illusion that the mouse response was real time again.

So in summary, I've learned to live with the slowdown. Upon starting a gaming session, in choosing between this monitor, a 19" CRT, or a 135" projection, I easily choose the Dell 24", it's bright and gorgeous! If only the delay were 0, it'd be perfect.

SO I've been playing BF2 on the 24" Dell for over half a year now. A little story goes along with it.
- 1920x1200 intruduced about a 2 fps delay. Impossible to snipe a moving target. Leading the target would sometimes actually get me a hit, but way to unreliable and annoying.
- dropped to 1200x800 and the lag dropped to 1 fps delay. Easier, but still noticably different vs using a CRT.
- dropped mouse sensitivity within BF2 to .6, and that helped the most at making it playable again. With high (or normal) mouse settings, the simple act of splinning around was impossible as the feedback to the user was not real time. Slowing the mouse signifantly gave me the illusion that the mouse response was real time again.


Are you sure it's the monitor introducing the lag, not your PC? I was getting mouse lag on CRT when I set too high resolution, my PC wasn't powerfull enough. (but now I'm ready for high res gaming on 24" LCD, bought Core2Duo and 8800GTX for that)