How to Pick a Good LCD

Picking an LCD goes well beyond brand recognition. Below, we have a small introduction to a few different facets of shopping for an LCD - in our order of importance. Generally, we find a price point and then choose an LCD based on the properties detailed below. For example, if we only have $500 to spend, we consider all of the monitors for $500 or less and go through the following checklist.

Input Type: DVI, DVI, DVI. We insist that when you buy a new LCD monitor, you buy a model with DVI capability. Even if you don't want to buy a DVI-capable video card right now, it is still a wise decision to get a DVI-compatible LCD. When DVI first appeared in the industry, there were a few issues with the quality of the connectors and thus, sometimes viewing a signal over a DVI connector would give you a worse signal than over a 15-pin D-Sub connector. However, in the last 3 or 4 years, most of those problems have been fixed, and virtually every new video card is more than capable of producing a clean digital signal. None of the LCDs that we review today (except the Samsung 910V) are limited to only analog connectors, but be aware that they exist.

Resolution, Aspect Ratio: If you buy a 4:3 LCD, the resolution had better be 4:3 as well. That is, a 19" LCD should have an aspect ratio of 1600x1200, 1280x960, or some derivative thereof. Most 19" and 17" LCDs have an aspect ratio of 5:4 (1280x1024). This is OK, but you're looking at a 5:4 signal crammed in a 4:3 box. Our Dell 2001FP, on the other hand, measures exactly 16" by 12" and runs at a resolution of 1600x1200. Generally, a skew aspect ratio is not enough to notice, but if you do any sort of graphic work, all of your circles will look like ovals. This goes the same for widescreen LCDs - buy a widescreen LCD with a widescreen resolution; a 30" wide format LCD with a resolution of 1024x768 will not look correct no matter what you do to the signal.

Response Time: Response time is an unusual preference and always a trade off. Typical response time (TrTf - Time rising, Time falling) refers to the time that it takes the LCD subpixel to twist from the fully "on" position to the fully "off" position and then back again. Response time has absolutely nothing to do with framerate. Pixel response times are independent of each other, and it does not take the entire screen 25ms to refresh if a monitor is labeled as a 25ms response time LCD. The time that it takes the LCD to go from black to white may be 15ms while the time that it takes the LCD to go from black back to white may be 10ms. Furthermore, your monitor is generally rendering a color that is not on end of the color spectrum. The time that it takes your LCD subpixel to twist from one half of a tone to another may be more or less than 15ms. The TrTf response time is normally a pretty useless measurement - but it makes for an easy specification in which to market LCDs.

The second method in measuring response time is "gray-to-gray" (GTG) response time. The measurement of GTG response time is actually more useful to LCD buyers, but it is harder to convey and is usually just conveyed as one number (which is incorrect). Gray to Gray response time refers to the time that it takes for a pixel to twist from some arbitrary position to another. On a 6-bit LCD, that's the time it takes the subpixel to twist from 1 of 64 different positions to one of the other 63 positions. GTG response times are useful if the manufacturer expresses the average of all the GTG response times, but that is rarely the case.

Everyone's preferences on response time are different. If you play a lot of games and feel that the few ms difference between a 6-bit LCD and an 8-bit LCD are worthwhile, then it's a worthy investment. Most people can't tell the difference - and that's not just most people who aren't gamers, but most people in general have to be shown the differences between two displays that differ by single digit transient response times.

Index How to Pick a Good LCD (continued)
Comments Locked

97 Comments

View All Comments

  • KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Interesting, let me look into this. My 2001FP is A00 as well and i've had mine for over a year now. (No problems though).

    Do you know how much of a delay there is?

    Kristopher
  • Cat - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    My boss's is A00. I'm assuming mine is as well, since I bought it a few days after he did. This was about a month and a half ago.
  • KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Angry Kid: We couldnt get a VP912B in time for the roundup. I am working on doing an individual review on that one though.

    Cat: On the back of your monitor near the serial it should say the REV number, like A01 or A00. Can you tell me which number it says on all those monitors?

    Kristopher
  • blackmetalegg - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    And what's the color depth for the VP912b? It's not mentioned anywhere on Viewsonic's website and google didn't turn up anything. I'm torn between VP912b(supposed 8-bit panel) and FP937S(6-bit)...
  • KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Ensign: Fixed.

    Kristopher
  • KingofFah - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    #19, I have no clue when it comes to LCDs, so thanks for giving me that information. How many images are drawn on an LCD in a second (if they even do that at a fixed rate, i dont know)?

    If there is no refresh rate given, I assume that the response time could be equated to the gaming performance of the monitor. In that case I'd want the fastest possible response times, and I do not think that the price would justify it. I think image quality, speed, and clarity go to a CRT. Size, power usage, and eye care seem to be the concern for LCDs. I've got plenty of space, don't use the computer that often, and don't care about power usage.
  • Araemo - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Is the NuTech L921G an 8 bit or 6 bit panel? it doesn't say in the specs.

    How about the Planar PE191M? or the Samsung SyncMaster 193P?

    I'm not trying to nitpick guys, but I've been burnt by missing specs before ("Well, the review didn't mention it, so it must not be a problem..."), so I don't want to simply assume they're 8-bit when you didn't mention them(Since that wasn't stated in the intro)
  • Angry Kid - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Agree with many of the others - why were none of the more recent, more high-end 19" LCDs tested?

    It would've been nice to see the ViewSonic VP912B FEATURED IN THE NOVEMBER GAMER BUYER'S GUIDE included.

    =/
  • garfieldonline - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    I have been working with order people, and I can say many of them prefer their resolution around 1024x768. I may be wrong, but as for LCD monitors, if they are not running at their optimal resolution, the screen tends to look a bit blur. This is not a problem with CRT monitor, things are sharp as long as the resolution is within the limit.
  • Araemo - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    "It's the same friggin reason why people buy a 50" TV instead of a small 20""

    I doubt it, since most people I know buy a 50" so they can sit 20 feet away and still pick out the super-model's pimples. But not many computer users sit 20 feet back from their monitors(Or even signifigantly further back with bigger screens)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now