http://tinyurl.com/b7qzv

$229....Hyundai ImageQuest B70A Siver & Black 17" 8ms LCD Monitor 300 cd/m2
700:1 0.264mm Pixel Pitch

I am getting ready to buy an LCD, but I like to get feedback from the
newsgroups first before I do.

Compared to what others have achieved 8ms is already considered slow for
LCDs which have a problem when animated images move across the screen. I
would try to spend the extra money on a ViewSonic.

<%= Clinton Gallagher
METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service"
NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://metromilwaukee.com/
URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/





"Gofer Jones" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:9XHqf.12$(E-Mail Removed)...
> http://tinyurl.com/b7qzv
>
> $229....Hyundai ImageQuest B70A Siver & Black 17" 8ms LCD Monitor 300
> cd/m2 700:1 0.264mm Pixel Pitch
>
> I am getting ready to buy an LCD, but I like to get feedback from the
> newsgroups first before I do.
>

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 01:16:03 GMT, "clintonG"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Compared to what others have achieved 8ms is already considered slow for
>LCDs which have a problem when animated images move across the screen. I
>would try to spend the extra money on a ViewSonic.

8ms is fast enough and I have read that the Hyundai is one of the best
bang-for-buck LCD's there is.

"Gofer Jones" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:9XHqf.12$(E-Mail Removed)...
> http://tinyurl.com/b7qzv
>
> $229....Hyundai ImageQuest B70A Siver & Black 17" 8ms LCD Monitor 300
cd/m2
> 700:1 0.264mm Pixel Pitch
>
> I am getting ready to buy an LCD, but I like to get feedback from the
> newsgroups first before I do.
>
When my lovely NEC CRT finally does die, I won't bother with a 17" display
any longer. For not much more money than you are considering, you could
move up to 19". Keep in mind that most LCD displays look best at their
native resolution, which is usually 1280x1024. If you have to run that res,
why not do it on a 19" or 21"?

No, I was looking at 15", but they do not come with 8ms response or 700:1
contrast ratio. I sit very close to my monitor, and I need something thinner
than my crt so that I can push it back further from my face. The 17" is
pushing it for my little table that I use.

Thank you for telling me about the native resolution. I did not know that.

"Dale Brisket" <[nospam](E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:uvJqf.38585$q%.(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Gofer Jones" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:9XHqf.12$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> http://tinyurl.com/b7qzv
>>
>> $229....Hyundai ImageQuest B70A Siver & Black 17" 8ms LCD Monitor 300
> cd/m2
>> 700:1 0.264mm Pixel Pitch
>>
>> I am getting ready to buy an LCD, but I like to get feedback from the
>> newsgroups first before I do.
>>
> When my lovely NEC CRT finally does die, I won't bother with a 17" display
> any longer. For not much more money than you are considering, you could
> move up to 19". Keep in mind that most LCD displays look best at their
> native resolution, which is usually 1280x1024. If you have to run that
> res,
> why not do it on a 19" or 21"?
>
>

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 01:16:03 GMT, "clintonG"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Compared to what others have achieved 8ms is already considered slow for
>LCDs which have a problem when animated images move across the screen. I
>would try to spend the extra money on a ViewSonic.
>
><%= Clinton Gallagher
> METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service"
> NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
> URL http://metromilwaukee.com/
> URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/
>


8 ms by the old standards is fast enough for gaming, getting
much lower than that one has to care about HOW they attained
the lower figure, it's either a compromise or the monitor is
significantly more expensive.

One cannot take ms values, at face value. There are several
ways the number is derived and they are no longer directly
comparable between different manufacturer measurement
methods or different panel technologies. It is more
important to consider other factors than response below 8ms.

A concise primer of some consumer grade LCD options,
http://forums.anandtech.com/messagev...readid=1745344

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 02:43:38 GMT, "Dale Brisket"
<[nospam](E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>"Gofer Jones" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:9XHqf.12$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> http://tinyurl.com/b7qzv
>>
>> $229....Hyundai ImageQuest B70A Siver & Black 17" 8ms LCD Monitor 300
>cd/m2
>> 700:1 0.264mm Pixel Pitch
>>
>> I am getting ready to buy an LCD, but I like to get feedback from the
>> newsgroups first before I do.
>>
>When my lovely NEC CRT finally does die, I won't bother with a 17" display
>any longer. For not much more money than you are considering, you could
>move up to 19". Keep in mind that most LCD displays look best at their
>native resolution, which is usually 1280x1024. If you have to run that res,
>why not do it on a 19" or 21"?
>

IMO, 1280x1024 on 21" looks too pixelated, some may prefer
either 19" or lower at that res. or higher res. for 21+"

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 04:39:10 GMT, kony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>8 ms by the old standards is fast enough for gaming, getting
>much lower than that one has to care about HOW they attained
>the lower figure, it's either a compromise or the monitor is
>significantly more expensive.

All fast response time LCD's use 6bits per pixel for color instead of
8bits.

"Gofer Jones" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:9XHqf.12$(E-Mail Removed)...
> http://tinyurl.com/b7qzv
>
> $229....Hyundai ImageQuest B70A Siver & Black 17" 8ms LCD Monitor 300
> cd/m2 700:1 0.264mm Pixel Pitch
>
> I am getting ready to buy an LCD, but I like to get feedback from the
> newsgroups first before I do.

Unless you are concerned about desk space or power consumption, then save
your money and buy a bigger, better CRT based monitor.

"Gofer Jones" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:j8Kqf.118$(E-Mail Removed)...
> No, I was looking at 15", but they do not come with 8ms response or 700:1
> contrast ratio. I sit very close to my monitor, and I need something
> thinner than my crt so that I can push it back further from my face. The
> 17" is pushing it for my little table that I use.
>
> Thank you for telling me about the native resolution. I did not know that.

You can get 'short' CRT monitors. Anything 17" or higher will do at least
1280x1024 and cost half the amount of an LCD and the picture will be far
better. You won't be able to take an LCD screen above 1024x768 or the larger
ones can do 1280x1024 (17", 19").