Prev: Asus Xonar: disabling DS3D GX [fixed]
Next: What abt using an all in one computer as an HDTV?
From: Daave on 10 Jan 2010 13:03
I have a Samsung SyncMaster 950p that is nearly 10 years old. Although
it has served me well, it is on its last legs. So I am looking to
replace it.

I run XP Home and I have the following graphics card:

MSI Radeon HD 3870 (PCI-e 2.0, 512MB)

http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:PWhNvMcrQmwJ:reviews.cnet.com/graphics-cards/msi-radeon-hd-3870/1707-8902_7-32784635.html+msi+radeon+hd+3870+site:cnet.com&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

(Google cache link provided since regular one is down)

Originally, I went to Newegg to look at LCD monitors with good ratings.
Since almost everything is wide screen (16:9) these days, that was my
starting point. I narrowed down my initial search to these four:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submit=Property&N=2010190020&PropertyCodeValue=3098%3A46865%2C3098%3A21326%2C2889%3A24672%2C2889%3A24671%2C4863%3A34435&bop=And&ActiveSearchResult=False&CompareItemList=N82E16824009179%2CN82E16824009162%2CN82E16824005125%2CN82E16824009201

I am surprised by how low these prices are!

A few questions...

The Acer H233 and Acer H235 are similar. Is the newer one worth the
extra $20? I see that the contrast ratio is significantly higher. (The
again, I woder how much of that is "fluff"...) Also the response time is
faster. But since I am not a gamer, I'm not sure this would be an issue.

Also, in what major way does the Acer P235 differ from either the H233
or H235? That is, what is the difference between the "P" model and the
"H" models?

Another question I have is the resolution. The recommended resolution
for these monitors is 1920 x 1080. However, when I notice the choices
when I bring up the Settings tab of Display Properties, the highest 16:9
setting listed is 1360 x 768. Is my card already obsolete? Or is there
an interaction with my current monitor that is producing these choices?
Or does XP have a limitation?

In other threads, I have noticed users saying that the recommended
resolution (in this case, 1920 x 1080) should be used (hence, the term
"recommended"!). But if this is not possible with my current card,
should I perhaps upgrade my graphics card? I'd rather keep my card, of
course, but I don't want to wind up being unhappy with the video I see
on the new monitor.

Thanks in advance.


From: Dave C. on 10 Jan 2010 04:17
On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 13:03:40 -0500
"Daave" <daave(a)example.com> wrote:

> I have a Samsung SyncMaster 950p that is nearly 10 years old.
> Although it has served me well, it is on its last legs. So I am
> looking to replace it.
>
> I run XP Home and I have the following graphics card:
>
> MSI Radeon HD 3870 (PCI-e 2.0, 512MB)
>
> http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:PWhNvMcrQmwJ:reviews.cnet.com/graphics-cards/msi-radeon-hd-3870/1707-8902_7-32784635.html+msi+radeon+hd+3870+site:cnet.com&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
>
> (Google cache link provided since regular one is down)
>
> Originally, I went to Newegg to look at LCD monitors with good
> ratings. Since almost everything is wide screen (16:9) these days,
> that was my starting point. I narrowed down my initial search to
> these four:
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submit=Property&N=2010190020&PropertyCodeValue=3098%3A46865%2C3098%3A21326%2C2889%3A24672%2C2889%3A24671%2C4863%3A34435&bop=And&ActiveSearchResult=False&CompareItemList=N82E16824009179%2CN82E16824009162%2CN82E16824005125%2CN82E16824009201
>
> I am surprised by how low these prices are!
>
> A few questions...
>
> The Acer H233 and Acer H235 are similar. Is the newer one worth the
> extra $20?

No.

> I see that the contrast ratio is significantly higher.
> (The again, I woder how much of that is "fluff"...) Also the response
> time is faster. But since I am not a gamer, I'm not sure this would
> be an issue.

Response time, brightness and contrast are all meaningless. If all was
equal, you would want low response time, high brightness and high
contrast. But these numbers are all pretty much made up, as various
manufacturers have different ways of measuring them.

>
> Also, in what major way does the Acer P235 differ from either the
> H233 or H235? That is, what is the difference between the "P" model
> and the "H" models?

There doesn't seem to be any difference between the P and H models.
Most likely, the panel itself was just sourced from a different
factory. No difference to you, the end user.

>
> Another question I have is the resolution. The recommended resolution
> for these monitors is 1920 x 1080. However, when I notice the choices
> when I bring up the Settings tab of Display Properties, the highest
> 16:9 setting listed is 1360 x 768. Is my card already obsolete? Or is
> there an interaction with my current monitor that is producing these
> choices? Or does XP have a limitation?

Windows will only display resolutions that your current monitor can
handle, unless you jump through hoops to make it display other settings
(which is NOT recommended, btw). So you are seeing a limitation of
your current monitor.

>
> In other threads, I have noticed users saying that the recommended
> resolution (in this case, 1920 x 1080) should be used (hence, the
> term "recommended"!). But if this is not possible with my current
> card, should I perhaps upgrade my graphics card? I'd rather keep my
> card, of course, but I don't want to wind up being unhappy with the
> video I see on the new monitor.
>
> Thanks in advance.

You should have no problem with your current graphics card. At worst,
you might have to install a driver for your new monitor, if windows
doesn't recognize it right away. But then you will have a 1920 X 1080
resolution that you can select. (and yes, you will have to use that
exact resolution, unless you want to go blind in a short time)

I'd advise you to buy the cheapest Acer on your list. Acer is a good
brand of monitor. And the cheapest one on the list says it has a 3
year warranty, which is really good. The other monitors have
better claimed specs. but they will all have excellent picture
quality. I'm pretty sure you'd love the H233. It has excellent
specifications, and your current video card should handle it fine.
-Dave
From: Flasherly on 10 Jan 2010 17:15
On Jan 10, 1:03 pm, "Daave" <da...(a)example.com> wrote:
> I have a Samsung SyncMaster 950p that is nearly 10 years old. Although
> it has served me well, it is on its last legs. So I am looking to
> replace it.
>
> I run XP Home and I have the following graphics card:
>
> MSI Radeon HD 3870 (PCI-e 2.0, 512MB)
>
> http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:PWhNvMcrQmwJ:reviews.cnet.com/gra...
>
> (Google cache link provided since regular one is down)
>
> Originally, I went to Newegg to look at LCD monitors with good ratings.
> Since almost everything is wide screen (16:9) these days, that was my
> starting point. I narrowed down my initial search to these four:
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submit=Property&N=2...
>
> I am surprised by how low these prices are!
>
> A few questions...
>
> The Acer H233 and Acer H235 are similar. Is the newer one worth the
> extra $20? I see that the contrast ratio is significantly higher. (The
> again, I woder how much of that is "fluff"...) Also the response time is
> faster. But since I am not a gamer, I'm not sure this would be an issue.
>
> Also, in what major way does the Acer P235 differ from either the H233
> or H235? That is, what is the difference between the "P" model and the
> "H" models?
>
> Another question I have is the resolution. The recommended resolution
> for these monitors is 1920 x 1080. However, when I notice the choices
> when I bring up the Settings tab of Display Properties, the highest 16:9
> setting listed is 1360 x 768. Is my card already obsolete? Or is there
> an interaction with my current monitor that is producing these choices?
> Or does XP have a limitation?
>
> In other threads, I have noticed users saying that the recommended
> resolution (in this case, 1920 x 1080) should be used (hence, the term
> "recommended"!). But if this is not possible with my current card,
> should I perhaps upgrade my graphics card? I'd rather keep my card, of
> course, but I don't want to wind up being unhappy with the video I see
> on the new monitor.
>
> Thanks in advance.

Used to use a Syncmaster, sits on the floor for a rare troubleshooting
or quick pwr-up test these days. Sold off a little Acer, but kept the
Samsung because I like the vertical sliding and full-page swivel
aspect. Use a 32" now, HDtuner/VGA port at 1368x768, which I believe
is factory rated or native. Older AGP board and 3rd party, add-on
drivers to get it. Looks pretty much great, main thing being the
hefty size. Paid twice the price a 32" sells now, 5 years ago when it
came out, but if I had it to replace it, I'd do the research and try
to come up with half-decent quality in another 32". Whatever floats
the boat, though I'm not looking back or quibbling over gaming
responses and color temperatures for pictures in 21-23" offerings --
pretty sad, those little monitors, imo.
From: Daave on 10 Jan 2010 17:34
Dave C. wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 13:03:40 -0500
> "Daave" <daave(a)example.com> wrote:
>
>> I have a Samsung SyncMaster 950p that is nearly 10 years old.
>> Although it has served me well, it is on its last legs. So I am
>> looking to replace it.
>>
>> I run XP Home and I have the following graphics card:
>>
>> MSI Radeon HD 3870 (PCI-e 2.0, 512MB)
>>
>> http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:PWhNvMcrQmwJ:reviews.cnet.com/graphics-cards/msi-radeon-hd-3870/1707-8902_7-32784635.html+msi+radeon+hd+3870+site:cnet.com&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
>>
>> (Google cache link provided since regular one is down)
>>
>> Originally, I went to Newegg to look at LCD monitors with good
>> ratings. Since almost everything is wide screen (16:9) these days,
>> that was my starting point. I narrowed down my initial search to
>> these four:
>>
>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submit=Property&N=2010190020&PropertyCodeValue=3098%3A46865%2C3098%3A21326%2C2889%3A24672%2C2889%3A24671%2C4863%3A34435&bop=And&ActiveSearchResult=False&CompareItemList=N82E16824009179%2CN82E16824009162%2CN82E16824005125%2CN82E16824009201
>>
>> I am surprised by how low these prices are!
>>
>> A few questions...
>>
>> The Acer H233 and Acer H235 are similar. Is the newer one worth the
>> extra $20?
>
> No.
>
>> I see that the contrast ratio is significantly higher.
>> (The again, I woder how much of that is "fluff"...) Also the response
>> time is faster. But since I am not a gamer, I'm not sure this would
>> be an issue.
>
> Response time, brightness and contrast are all meaningless. If all
> was equal, you would want low response time, high brightness and high
> contrast. But these numbers are all pretty much made up, as various
> manufacturers have different ways of measuring them.
>
>>
>> Also, in what major way does the Acer P235 differ from either the
>> H233 or H235? That is, what is the difference between the "P" model
>> and the "H" models?
>
> There doesn't seem to be any difference between the P and H models.
> Most likely, the panel itself was just sourced from a different
> factory. No difference to you, the end user.
>
>>
>> Another question I have is the resolution. The recommended resolution
>> for these monitors is 1920 x 1080. However, when I notice the choices
>> when I bring up the Settings tab of Display Properties, the highest
>> 16:9 setting listed is 1360 x 768. Is my card already obsolete? Or is
>> there an interaction with my current monitor that is producing these
>> choices? Or does XP have a limitation?
>
> Windows will only display resolutions that your current monitor can
> handle, unless you jump through hoops to make it display other
> settings (which is NOT recommended, btw). So you are seeing a
> limitation of your current monitor.
>
>>
>> In other threads, I have noticed users saying that the recommended
>> resolution (in this case, 1920 x 1080) should be used (hence, the
>> term "recommended"!). But if this is not possible with my current
>> card, should I perhaps upgrade my graphics card? I'd rather keep my
>> card, of course, but I don't want to wind up being unhappy with the
>> video I see on the new monitor.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>
> You should have no problem with your current graphics card. At worst,
> you might have to install a driver for your new monitor, if windows
> doesn't recognize it right away. But then you will have a 1920 X 1080
> resolution that you can select. (and yes, you will have to use that
> exact resolution, unless you want to go blind in a short time)
>
> I'd advise you to buy the cheapest Acer on your list. Acer is a good
> brand of monitor. And the cheapest one on the list says it has a 3
> year warranty, which is really good. The other monitors have
> better claimed specs. but they will all have excellent picture
> quality. I'm pretty sure you'd love the H233. It has excellent
> specifications, and your current video card should handle it fine.
> -Dave

Thanks so much for your very thorough answer, Dave. :-)


From: wayneP on 10 Jan 2010 18:10
If you're considering an LG monitor, check out a LED backlit monitor at a
B&M shop. Newegg has one listed in the price range your considering. It is
16:10 instead of 16:9 but this isn't that important unless your a heavy
gamer. They are absolutely stunning especially in a side by side comparison
with the traditional backlit LCD monitors.

Additionally, they use less power. This may not be important on a individual
basis, but it can add up to significant power/cost saving when deployed
widely. In fact, LED back lit LCD panels are fairly common in the HDTV
field - partly to comply with California standards.

"Daave" <daave(a)example.com> wrote in message
news:NradnchYQeMci9fWnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d(a)cavtel.net...
> I have a Samsung SyncMaster 950p that is nearly 10 years old. Although it
> has served me well, it is on its last legs. So I am looking to replace it.
>
> I run XP Home and I have the following graphics card:
>
> MSI Radeon HD 3870 (PCI-e 2.0, 512MB)
>
> http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:PWhNvMcrQmwJ:reviews.cnet.com/graphics-cards/msi-radeon-hd-3870/1707-8902_7-32784635.html+msi+radeon+hd+3870+site:cnet.com&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
>
> (Google cache link provided since regular one is down)
>
> Originally, I went to Newegg to look at LCD monitors with good ratings.
> Since almost everything is wide screen (16:9) these days, that was my
> starting point. I narrowed down my initial search to these four:
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submit=Property&N=2010190020&PropertyCodeValue=3098%3A46865%2C3098%3A21326%2C2889%3A24672%2C2889%3A24671%2C4863%3A34435&bop=And&ActiveSearchResult=False&CompareItemList=N82E16824009179%2CN82E16824009162%2CN82E16824005125%2CN82E16824009201
>
> I am surprised by how low these prices are!
>
> A few questions...
>
> The Acer H233 and Acer H235 are similar. Is the newer one worth the extra
> $20? I see that the contrast ratio is significantly higher. (The again, I
> woder how much of that is "fluff"...) Also the response time is faster.
> But since I am not a gamer, I'm not sure this would be an issue.
>
> Also, in what major way does the Acer P235 differ from either the H233 or
> H235? That is, what is the difference between the "P" model and the "H"
> models?
>
> Another question I have is the resolution. The recommended resolution for
> these monitors is 1920 x 1080. However, when I notice the choices when I
> bring up the Settings tab of Display Properties, the highest 16:9 setting
> listed is 1360 x 768. Is my card already obsolete? Or is there an
> interaction with my current monitor that is producing these choices? Or
> does XP have a limitation?
>
> In other threads, I have noticed users saying that the recommended
> resolution (in this case, 1920 x 1080) should be used (hence, the term
> "recommended"!). But if this is not possible with my current card, should
> I perhaps upgrade my graphics card? I'd rather keep my card, of course,
> but I don't want to wind up being unhappy with the video I see on the new
> monitor.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Asus Xonar: disabling DS3D GX [fixed]
Next: What abt using an all in one computer as an HDTV?