Mid-Range to High-End Buyer's Guide, January 2006
by Jarred Walton on January 2, 2006 1:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
Display Recommendations
I've left the displays for last, and since this is Mid-Range and above, the choices will be confined to LCDs. Your eyes have to stare at the computer screen for hours at a time (at least, if you use a computer as much as most of us at AnandTech do), so skimping on the display is a poor choice. I've always been a proponent of overspending on displays, from my first 21" CRT 10 years ago to my recent upgrade to a Dell 2405FPW. There's no such thing as having a display that's "too big" if you ask me...although, dropping a 32" LCD TV on your desk is probably getting close to proving me wrong. It's too bad that LCD TVs are mostly limited to 1366x768 or lower resolutions, as otherwise, they could be a cost-effective alternative for large computer LCDs. Most of us can only dream of owning the 30" Apple Cinema displays, unfortunately.
Mid-Range LCD Recommendation: Acer AL1914smd 19 inch 8ms LCD
Price: $293 shipped (Retail)
Other than a slight drop in price, our LCD recommendation remains with the Acer AL1914smd 19" display. There are better 19" LCDs out there, but they all cost quite a bit more. One thing that you really need to look for is actual color depth. There are many low response time LCDs that only have 6-bit color depths and use dithering to approximate 24-bit color. The result can range from satisfactory to mildly annoying, and I would sacrifice a bit in the way of response times for better colors. The Acer certainly isn't the best in terms of colors, but the documentation appears to indicate that it is a native 8-bit panel, so at least dithering won't be required, and the price is right.
If you're looking for guaranteed 8-bit panels and are willing to spend a bit more money, upgrading to a 20" LCD - 1600x1200 standard aspect ratio or 1680x1050 widescreen - would be a better choice than looking at more expensive 19" panels. The Dell 2005FPW and 2001FP are both good choices. If you don't want to buy a Dell LCD, you might look at the Samsung 204T (20" 4:3 AR) or the Philips 200W6CB/27 (20" WS) or 200P4VS/74 (20" 4:3 AR), although you can almost certainly get a Dell on sale for less money than any of those. All five of these - the Dell, Samsung, and Philips models - are 16ms displays, but response times become less important once you get below 20ms. I don't have issues with most 16ms displays when gaming, but you might want to try out a display in person before making a purchase, as some people still feel that there's too much "motion blur" when gaming.
High-End LCD Recommendation: Acer AL2416Wd 24 inch 6ms LCD
Price: $980 shipped (Retail)
The High-End display choice is really high-end, so if spending $1000 on a quality display is too much, you might want to go back and read that last paragraph again. You can get two good quality 20" LCDs for the price of a single 24" LCD, but I've always preferred a single large display. Acer gets the recommendation again, though there are quite a few reasonable alternatives. First, the good points of the Acer. You can find it for $980 online, without any need to wait for a sale. It's a 24" 1920x1200 panel, and it boasts a 6 ms pixel response time - the best of any current 23/24" LCD, though there is definitely an element of marketing in the various manufacturer response times. $1000 is a lot of money to spend on just the display, but hopefully, the display will last you at least five years, and your eyes might thank you later.
Let's look at some of the other alternatives. The Dell 2405FPW is actually better in several areas: it has S-VIDEO, Composite, Component, DVI, and VGA connections, and you can switch between the five at the press of a button. (I have mine connected to two different PCs, and I've found this feature to be very useful.) If you can find the Dell on sale, you can get it for less money than the Acer, but you might end up waiting months for the right opportunity. The HP L2335 and Philips 230W5VS are 23" LCDs that are similar in price to the Acer, give or take $50. The extra inch of display size is going to be difficult to notice, but paying more for less is questionable. Warranties on most large LCDs are 3 years from the manufacturer, though you'll want to double-check on pixel defect policies before buying most likely. Sony also has a 23" display, the SDM-P234, but at $200 more than the HP and Philips, you're just paying extra for the name.
In the end, the decision comes down to the Dell and the Acer. The Acer wasn't around when I purchased my 2405FPW, or else it would probably be sitting on my desk. Still, if you're living in an apartment or dorm room and don't have a lot of space for a TV and a computer, the Dell can multitask between the two, with 720p and 1080i/p support. For a high-end system, there is nothing as likely to inspire awe and envy as a great looking display, and the 24" LCDs are the display to have these days. A friend came over with his 7800 GTX SLI system sporting an X2 4800+ a few months ago, and upon seeing the 2405FPW connected to my "pathetic" 6800GT/3200+, he was ready to return a few parts just so that he could upgrade monitors. Four years from now, any current CPU/GPU combination is going to be outdated, but you can still continue to run a 24" LCD happily until it finally breaks down. Money well spent, if you ask me.
I've left the displays for last, and since this is Mid-Range and above, the choices will be confined to LCDs. Your eyes have to stare at the computer screen for hours at a time (at least, if you use a computer as much as most of us at AnandTech do), so skimping on the display is a poor choice. I've always been a proponent of overspending on displays, from my first 21" CRT 10 years ago to my recent upgrade to a Dell 2405FPW. There's no such thing as having a display that's "too big" if you ask me...although, dropping a 32" LCD TV on your desk is probably getting close to proving me wrong. It's too bad that LCD TVs are mostly limited to 1366x768 or lower resolutions, as otherwise, they could be a cost-effective alternative for large computer LCDs. Most of us can only dream of owning the 30" Apple Cinema displays, unfortunately.
Click to enlarge.
Mid-Range LCD Recommendation: Acer AL1914smd 19 inch 8ms LCD
Price: $293 shipped (Retail)
Other than a slight drop in price, our LCD recommendation remains with the Acer AL1914smd 19" display. There are better 19" LCDs out there, but they all cost quite a bit more. One thing that you really need to look for is actual color depth. There are many low response time LCDs that only have 6-bit color depths and use dithering to approximate 24-bit color. The result can range from satisfactory to mildly annoying, and I would sacrifice a bit in the way of response times for better colors. The Acer certainly isn't the best in terms of colors, but the documentation appears to indicate that it is a native 8-bit panel, so at least dithering won't be required, and the price is right.
If you're looking for guaranteed 8-bit panels and are willing to spend a bit more money, upgrading to a 20" LCD - 1600x1200 standard aspect ratio or 1680x1050 widescreen - would be a better choice than looking at more expensive 19" panels. The Dell 2005FPW and 2001FP are both good choices. If you don't want to buy a Dell LCD, you might look at the Samsung 204T (20" 4:3 AR) or the Philips 200W6CB/27 (20" WS) or 200P4VS/74 (20" 4:3 AR), although you can almost certainly get a Dell on sale for less money than any of those. All five of these - the Dell, Samsung, and Philips models - are 16ms displays, but response times become less important once you get below 20ms. I don't have issues with most 16ms displays when gaming, but you might want to try out a display in person before making a purchase, as some people still feel that there's too much "motion blur" when gaming.
Click to enlarge.
High-End LCD Recommendation: Acer AL2416Wd 24 inch 6ms LCD
Price: $980 shipped (Retail)
The High-End display choice is really high-end, so if spending $1000 on a quality display is too much, you might want to go back and read that last paragraph again. You can get two good quality 20" LCDs for the price of a single 24" LCD, but I've always preferred a single large display. Acer gets the recommendation again, though there are quite a few reasonable alternatives. First, the good points of the Acer. You can find it for $980 online, without any need to wait for a sale. It's a 24" 1920x1200 panel, and it boasts a 6 ms pixel response time - the best of any current 23/24" LCD, though there is definitely an element of marketing in the various manufacturer response times. $1000 is a lot of money to spend on just the display, but hopefully, the display will last you at least five years, and your eyes might thank you later.
Let's look at some of the other alternatives. The Dell 2405FPW is actually better in several areas: it has S-VIDEO, Composite, Component, DVI, and VGA connections, and you can switch between the five at the press of a button. (I have mine connected to two different PCs, and I've found this feature to be very useful.) If you can find the Dell on sale, you can get it for less money than the Acer, but you might end up waiting months for the right opportunity. The HP L2335 and Philips 230W5VS are 23" LCDs that are similar in price to the Acer, give or take $50. The extra inch of display size is going to be difficult to notice, but paying more for less is questionable. Warranties on most large LCDs are 3 years from the manufacturer, though you'll want to double-check on pixel defect policies before buying most likely. Sony also has a 23" display, the SDM-P234, but at $200 more than the HP and Philips, you're just paying extra for the name.
In the end, the decision comes down to the Dell and the Acer. The Acer wasn't around when I purchased my 2405FPW, or else it would probably be sitting on my desk. Still, if you're living in an apartment or dorm room and don't have a lot of space for a TV and a computer, the Dell can multitask between the two, with 720p and 1080i/p support. For a high-end system, there is nothing as likely to inspire awe and envy as a great looking display, and the 24" LCDs are the display to have these days. A friend came over with his 7800 GTX SLI system sporting an X2 4800+ a few months ago, and upon seeing the 2405FPW connected to my "pathetic" 6800GT/3200+, he was ready to return a few parts just so that he could upgrade monitors. Four years from now, any current CPU/GPU combination is going to be outdated, but you can still continue to run a 24" LCD happily until it finally breaks down. Money well spent, if you ask me.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
67 Comments
View All Comments
tjpark1111 - Tuesday, January 3, 2006 - link
never mind my post above I just read a recommendation for a 19" widescreen above and I am pleased now. However, I have a laptop with a widescreen too and there are still black bars on dvds and the top and bottom, but the bars are only like a quarter of an inch or so. I read some reviews for widescreen LCDs and it seems all of widescreen LCDs, at least computer LCDs are 16:10. What is the reason for that, because a very large part of widescreen, is watching widescreen movies in their native format and what's the point if there's still black bars on the screen? Is there a video-playing app that'll remove those bars or something? thank you. also, any comment on that viewsonic widescreen 19"? user reviews?Anton74 - Tuesday, January 3, 2006 - link
I'm not sure about the 16:10 ratio, but the reason you'll often keep seeing black bars watching movies is that there are several aspect ratios that are wider even than 16:9 which are commonly used (for movies). You should find it on the back of the DVD cover; there's 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 for example, and especially the latter is wider than 16:9 (which is ~1.78:1).The thing that bugs me about all this is that they see fit to modify movies to 4:3 for some DVDs, VHS, and network/cable broadcast, but I've never seen a movie modified to fit 16:9, which to me seems the logical thing to do (at least as an option). When (finally) I buy HD equipment, I'm going to make sure that either the TV or the DVD player can zoom to make these wider-screen formats fit 16:9 (without destroying the aspect ratio, thankyouverymuch).
tjpark1111 - Thursday, January 5, 2006 - link
nope not at all, it says it's 16:10 on the Viewsonic Website. As I understand it, with the help from the fellows of AVSForum and Videohelp, it seems most dvds are encoded in 16:9 native. Now some DVDs, are encoded into aspect ratios such as those that you mentioned. The Matrix Series is a common DVD to test response times and dark scene performance, and that DVD is certainly not encoded in 1:85:1 or 2:35:1, and there still are black bars. 16:10 will therefore leave black bars on ANY DVD or HD Material unless there is some app from viewsonic that will stretch all video content. Stretching for this case will not look bad at all since it is such a small stretch. I find this whole thing to be VERY stupid because again, widescreen in the first place was largely from theatres being widescreen, so consumer display devices tried to copy that widescreen format, with movies following along.dlerious - Monday, January 2, 2006 - link
That Benq DQ60 has to be the worst burner out there right now. I'd put anything but that ine on the list.JarredWalton - Tuesday, January 3, 2006 - link
Hm. I bought a few of them last month. I haven't had any serious problems, but then I don't really think too much about my optical drives anymore. I've got Imation 8X DVD+R discs that work fine when I need them.Anton74 - Monday, January 2, 2006 - link
Jarred - am I correct in assuming from your description of the Acer 19" panel that you guys have not actually laid eyes on it?I'm trying to find out some more info on this, but the Acer web site doesn't seem to be all that helpful. While I can find several AL1914 models, I don't see an AL1914smd (the closest thing I see is the AL1914s-8). I can't gather from their descriptions or specifications whether these are 6 or 8 bit panels.
Great article otherwise, and I agree with your thoughts on SLI and getting a good monitor (although, for many non-office uses I'd personally rather stick with a good CRT, provided the desk space is available).
JarredWalton - Tuesday, January 3, 2006 - link
I'll take a decent LCD over a similar CRT for most tasks, but there's personal preference. 21/22" CRTs are just so HUGE (in depth), plus they weigh a ton. Anyway, I purchased three of the 1914smd from Newegg about 5 months ago, and they all worked well. I couldn't spot any dithering, but then my eyes aren't the greatest. (Irregular astigmatism = noncorrectable = sucky double vision.) I got them http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82...">at Newegg for $350, and the same displays are now under $300.My one gripe with LCDs is the refresh rate. 60 Hz or 75 Hz means that you do see tearing in 3D games - unless you enable vsynch. A nice CRT with a 100 Hz refresh rate doesn't usually show that problem.
Anton74 - Tuesday, January 3, 2006 - link
Thanks much, this is useful info. I also saw the 1914smd on newegg, and was considering one of these among others (...for non-gaming office use :).JarredWalton - Tuesday, January 3, 2006 - link
I put four systems with those in a dental office. If you want to do wall mounts, there are probably better choices, but they were primarily for the desk and a couple mounted on clamps so the patients could watch videos or whatever. :)abravo01 - Monday, March 20, 2006 - link
Hi there.Great guide, as usual: still my key source for system upgrade/renovation.
I am based in Portugal and this model is not yet on the market. What would be your thoughts about these two Acer displays: AL1951AS and AL1951Cs? Acer is selling them as "gaming line"... whatever that means... price wise it's pretty much the same.
One other question: for working and gaming would you say that WS is worth the premium?
Thanks.
André.