It's a 20-inch screen with a 16ms latency - does anyone have one, or has
anyone actually laid eyes on one?
I haven't seen that one, but you may want to compare it to the Dell FP2001.
Same 20", 16ms response time. It has full color, dunno about the ViewSonic.
A good review of the Dell is at AnandTech:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1918
I've been using the Dell for all the usual sim suspects since Xmas and I'm
very happy with it. Whatever you get, remember to run it at the native
resolution. And if you're using the DVI connection, be sure your video card
puts out a good DVI signal. Apparently pushing 1600x1200 is getting close to
the DVI spec's limit, so the card has to implement it properly. Some of the
previous generation nVidia cards were so-so. Here's and ExtremeTech article
that explains the issue:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1367926,00.asp
...Klinn
I work with with a bunch of people with the Dell 2001FPs they love them,
especially when dell has the special and they only cost around $759
Compusa is now stocking the Viewsonic VP201 for around $1000. SO if you have
one local (ie if your a yank) then you can check them out
I am tossing up between the 2 myself
Brad
www.tomshardware.com
-Larry
> I work with with a bunch of people with the Dell 2001FPs they love them,
> especially when dell has the special and they only cost around $759
> Compusa is now stocking the Viewsonic VP201 for around $1000. SO if you
have
> one local (ie if your a yank) then you can check them out
> I am tossing up between the 2 myself
> Brad
> > "John Simmons" wrote in ...
> >> It's a 20-inch screen with a 16ms latency - does anyone have one, or
has
> >> anyone actually laid eyes on one?
> > I haven't seen that one, but you may want to compare it to the Dell
> > FP2001.
> > Same 20", 16ms response time. It has full color, dunno about the
> > ViewSonic.
> > A good review of the Dell is at AnandTech:
> > http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> > I've been using the Dell for all the usual sim suspects since Xmas and
I'm
> > very happy with it. Whatever you get, remember to run it at the native
> > resolution. And if you're using the DVI connection, be sure your video
> > card
> > puts out a good DVI signal. Apparently pushing 1600x1200 is getting
close
> > to
> > the DVI spec's limit, so the card has to implement it properly. Some of
> > the
> > previous generation nVidia cards were so-so. Here's and ExtremeTech
> > article
> > that explains the issue:
> > http://www.racesimcentral.net/,3973,1367926,00.asp
> > ...Klinn
Bear in mind that you need much, *much* more computing horsepower to run a
20" LCD 'cuz they have a native rez of 1600x1200, or half again as many
pixels as a 19" LCD.
So unless you've got a 3.4-GHz P4 and an ATI X800, stick w. 19" or smaller.
(Or, if you really think bigger is better, get a projector.)
Very true. At least 1600x1200 is a proper 4:3 aspect ratio instead of
1280x1024 which is a bizarre 5:4 ratio.
I just built a BRD Race Frame Pro V2/Speed7 pedals/Classic V2 wheel
and was looking for a good monitor.
After seriously considering a Cornerstone 21" CRT, I read the GamePC review
and decided that with the improved resale of a LCD over a CRT, I'd buy it.
I got it from Newegg (and even wrote a review there).
I love it!
I've never used a LCD for any length of time, but set myself up to be
disappointed.
But, it was all I could hope for.
I highly recommend it. No lag, no issues, etc.
And I really expected about seven screwed pixels since the policy is eight.
But, not one damaged pixel!
I've looked and looked and relied on other, younger eyes...
I'm even trying to scratch enough together to put one on my web computer.
After owning it about 2-3 weeks, I'm absolutely sold on it.
Get it, enjoy it, regards....... :-)
> Very true. At least 1600x1200 is a proper 4:3 aspect ratio instead of
> 1280x1024 which is a bizarre 5:4 ratio.
On a sidenote, i wonder how well a 1600x1200 monitor can interpolate
1024x768. It works better than i thought on my NEC 1880sx, but of
course it's not perfect.
regards,
raphael
> > Very true. At least 1600x1200 is a proper 4:3 aspect ratio instead of
> > 1280x1024 which is a bizarre 5:4 ratio.
> I work around this by playing at 1280x960 without stretching the
> image, so i get a clean 4:3 ratio and a small black area (~1cm) on top
> and bottom. Most games support 1280x960, but not all. Just make sure
> your monitor is able to switch off image stretching, or else every
> circle will be egg shaped no matter what resolution you use.
> On a sidenote, i wonder how well a 1600x1200 monitor can interpolate
> 1024x768. It works better than i thought on my NEC 1880sx, but of
> course it's not perfect.
> regards,
> raphael
You never mentioned which LCD monitor "it" is that yer so happy with....
> I just built a BRD Race Frame Pro V2/Speed7 pedals/Classic V2 wheel
> and was looking for a good monitor.
> After seriously considering a Cornerstone 21" CRT, I read the GamePC
review
> and decided that with the improved resale of a LCD over a CRT, I'd buy it.
> I got it from Newegg (and even wrote a review there).
> I love it!
> I've never used a LCD for any length of time, but set myself up to be
> disappointed.
> But, it was all I could hope for.
> I highly recommend it. No lag, no issues, etc.
> And I really expected about seven screwed pixels since the policy is
eight.
> But, not one damaged pixel!
> I've looked and looked and relied on other, younger eyes...
> I'm even trying to scratch enough together to put one on my web computer.
> After owning it about 2-3 weeks, I'm absolutely sold on it.
> Get it, enjoy it, regards....... :-)
> > It's a 20-inch screen with a 16ms latency - does anyone have one, or has
> > anyone actually laid eyes on one?
Viewsonic VP201b... the one in the topic.
Sorry 'bout that.
But, I do highly recommend it.
Also, I don't really notice any problems at
1280x960/1152x864/1024x768.
Looks great, but I haven't done any real critical analysis.
Regards.................
> > >> Bear in mind that you need much, *much* more computing horsepower to
> run a
> > >> 20" LCD 'cuz they have a native rez of 1600x1200, or half again as
many
> > >> pixels as a 19" LCD.
> > > Very true. At least 1600x1200 is a proper 4:3 aspect ratio instead of
> > > 1280x1024 which is a bizarre 5:4 ratio.
> > I work around this by playing at 1280x960 without stretching the
> > image, so i get a clean 4:3 ratio and a small black area (~1cm) on top
> > and bottom. Most games support 1280x960, but not all. Just make sure
> > your monitor is able to switch off image stretching, or else every
> > circle will be egg shaped no matter what resolution you use.
> > On a sidenote, i wonder how well a 1600x1200 monitor can interpolate
> > 1024x768. It works better than i thought on my NEC 1880sx, but of
> > course it's not perfect.
> > regards,
> > raphael
-Larry
>Viewsonic VP201b... the one in the topic.
>Sorry 'bout that.
>But, I do highly recommend it.
>Also, I don't really notice any problems at
>1280x960/1152x864/1024x768.
>Looks great, but I haven't done any real critical analysis.
>Regards.................
Kevin Miller
"Either way, it is bad for Zathras."