LCD Panel for gaming PC

[Joe Smith]

I am thinking of putting together an economic gig for gaming. Ran into a
problem with LCD panels. The cheaper kind have only analog connection,
whereas the more expensive kind have both--analog and DVI. My question is:
if I go with the cheaper ones, the ones with ONLY the analog connection,
will the picture quality really suffer?

I am looking at some of the 17'', 8 ms response, Samsung LCD panels.

Your input is appreciated.

 

[John Doe]

I am thinking of putting together an economic gig for gaming. Ran
into a problem with LCD panels.

Did you mean "ergonomic"?

 

[Hackworth]

I am thinking of putting together an economic gig for gaming. Ran into a
problem with LCD panels. The cheaper kind have only analog connection,
whereas the more expensive kind have both--analog and DVI. My question is:
if I go with the cheaper ones, the ones with ONLY the analog connection,
will the picture quality really suffer?

I am looking at some of the 17'', 8 ms response, Samsung LCD panels.

Well, I've got a 19-inch Samsung 915N
(http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824001185R), and I
can't see any difference whatsoever. While I didn't really want to pay extra
for the DVI input if I didn't need it, I based this purchase on quality,
value, and user feedback... in that order. (It's not axiomatic that DVI =
Quality.) I've purchased two of these monitors so far for my own/family
use, and compared to all of the systems I've put together over the past year
(around 15 or so) and all of the various monitors that folks have asked for,
I just can't see any difference.

 

[Conor]

I am thinking of putting together an economic gig for gaming. Ran into a
problem with LCD panels. The cheaper kind have only analog connection,
whereas the more expensive kind have both--analog and DVI. My question is:
if I go with the cheaper ones, the ones with ONLY the analog connection,
will the picture quality really suffer?

I haven't noticed any with my HP one.

 

[BillL]

I haven't noticed any with my HP one.



--
Conor

"You're not married, you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen
Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart, Extras.

Should be fine (mines analogue image quality is good) but be aware that the
native resolution of the monitor is probably going to be 1280 x 1024 so make
sure your video card can handle those resolutions when gaming (particularly
recent titles e.g. HL2, FEAR, CoD2 etc.). You can run games at a lower
resolution but they can look pretty blurry etc. (I'm speaking from what I've
experienced using a 17" LG LCD - Analogue input btw).

HTH

BillL

 

[The Outsider]

Should be fine (mines analogue image quality is good) but be aware that the
native resolution of the monitor is probably going to be 1280 x 1024 so make
sure your video card can handle those resolutions when gaming (particularly
recent titles e.g. HL2, FEAR, CoD2 etc.). You can run games at a lower
resolution but they can look pretty blurry etc. (I'm speaking from what I've
experienced using a 17" LG LCD - Analogue input btw).

HTH

BillL

One of the reasons CRT is superior for gaming. I have both LCD and CRT
but for gaming I use CRT - all resolutions are sharp.

 

[Brad Houser]

I am thinking of putting together an economic gig for gaming. Ran into a
problem with LCD panels. The cheaper kind have only analog connection,
whereas the more expensive kind have both--analog and DVI. My question is:
if I go with the cheaper ones, the ones with ONLY the analog connection,
will the picture quality really suffer?

I am looking at some of the 17'', 8 ms response, Samsung LCD panels.

Your input is appreciated.

Analog is not the issue with LCD. Persistence and ghosting are the problems
with LCDs and DVI doesn't fix it. Because of high persistence, fast moving
images will appear blurry. There is a free test app calle Pixel Persistence
Analyzer here: http://www.benchmarkhq.ru/english.html?/be_monitor.html

Brad H

 

[johns]

Depends on the video card as much as anything, but YES, DVI is
far superior to analog on the LCD monitors, especially on the 4ms
monitors.

johns

 

[johns]

Notice some of these answers are misleading. An analog
connection on LCD is very very contrasty. If you want good
color resolution on LCD, you must use DVI. Also, in games,
only the DVI is fast enough to prevent smearing and ripping
of the picture. And if you don't believe me, go out and buy
a Viewsonic 924 ... their new 4ms monitor .. and hook
analog to that !!!!! You'll send it back.

johns

 

[wlz101]

I appreciate the answer from everybody!

Joe Smith

 

[BillL]

Notice some of these answers are misleading. An analog
connection on LCD is very very contrasty. If you want good
color resolution on LCD, you must use DVI. Also, in games,
only the DVI is fast enough to prevent smearing and ripping
of the picture. And if you don't believe me, go out and buy
a Viewsonic 924 ... their new 4ms monitor .. and hook
analog to that !!!!! You'll send it back.

johns

Bollox - DVI vs Analogue has nowt to do with the response time of the
monitor. As well as getting an excellent picture (analogue) I get no
smearing or ripping in games or movies whatsoever! The quoted response time
of my monitor is 25 ms and would be 25 ms irrespective of a DVI or analogue
input!

 

[Peter]

I think it makes no difference for gaming other than the price of the
monitor. With a low response time and a good grafics card like a 6800 you
can use the native resolution and get good results. I have and analog plug
on 6600gt card and 8ms res time.Watch out for small print.