LCD Display - ViewSonic VP201b

It's a 20-inch screen with a 16ms latency - does anyone have one, or has anyone actually laid eyes on one?

"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.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 am interested in this LCD as well - Game PC (Tech article http://www.gamepc.com) did a review of this monitor and said it was great - Maximum PC did one and said it was not great for gaming and the Dell 2001FP was better 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 $1000. SO if you have one local (ie if your a yank) then you can check them out I am tossing up between the 2 myself Brad "Klinn" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NHRGc.9134$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (27 lines)

> "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.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 > >

Toms Hardware has also tested some LCD's recently with gaming in mind. www.tomshardware.com -Larry "Braddo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:40ec0ba3$[email hidden]... > I am interested in this LCD as well - Game PC (Tech article > http://www.gamepc.com) did a review of this monitor and said it wasgreat - > Maximum PC did one and said it was not great for gaming and the Dell2001FP > was better > > 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 youhave

Quoted text (12 lines)

> one local (ie if your a yank) then you can check them out > > I am tossing up between the 2 myself > > Brad > > > > "Klinn" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:NHRGc.9134$[email hidden]... > > "John Simmons" wrote in ... > >> It's a 20-inch screen with a 16ms latency - does anyone have one, or

has

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >> 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 gettingclose

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > 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 have both a 18" Dell and a 17" Viewsonic and there's no comparison. The Dell is clearly superior for gaming. The only LCD in the same league as the Dell, IMO, is the NEC-Mitsu LCD1960NX (also LCD1980NX), which has a native rez of 1280x1024. 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.) "Klinn" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NHRGc.9134$[email hidden]... > "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 DellFP2001. > Same 20", 16ms response time. It has full color, dunno about theViewSonic. > 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 videocard > puts out a good DVI signal. Apparently pushing 1600x1200 is getting closeto > the DVI spec's limit, so the card has to implement it properly. Some ofthe > previous generation nVidia cards were so-so. Here's and ExtremeTecharticle > that explains the issue: > http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1367926,00.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. Very true. At least 1600x1200 is a proper 4:3 aspect ratio instead of 1280x1024 which is a bizarre 5:4 ratio.

Hi John... 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....... :-) "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > It's a 20-inch screen with a 16ms latency - does anyone have one, or has > anyone actually laid eyes on one?

Damien Evans wrote: >> 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

The interpretations look better in games than they do in typefaces, but still show *considerable* visual degradation. I mean, why bother paying an extra $400 for a hi-rez monitor only to run it at a lower rez where it looks crappy? "Raphael Barabas" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Damien Evans wrote: > >> Bear in mind that you need much, *much* more computing horsepower torun a

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >> 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

Um, Glas? You never mentioned which LCD monitor "it" is that yer so happy with.... "Glaspak" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ep2Hc.11729$[email hidden]... > Hi John... > > 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 GamePCreview

Quoted text (11 lines)

> 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.

Quoted text (14 lines)

> 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....... :-) > > "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > 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................. "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:PNbHc.17032$[email hidden]... > Um, Glas? > > You never mentioned which LCD monitor "it" is that yer so happy with.... >

Correction: interpolations, not interpretations (doh!). "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DLbHc.16996$[email hidden]... > The interpretations look better in games than they do in typefaces, but > still show *considerable* visual degradation. I mean, why bother payingan > extra $400 for a hi-rez monitor only to run it at a lower rez where itlooks

Quoted text (8 lines)

> crappy? > > "Raphael Barabas" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Damien Evans wrote: > > >> 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

Quoted text (19 lines)

> > >> 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 > >

LOL! Here we go again :) -Larry "Damien Evans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Bear in mind that you need much, *much* more computing horsepower to runa

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > 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. > >

On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 14:41:39 GMT, "Glaspak" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >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................. >

Just to add my two cents, I just got a VP201B, and am thrilled with it. It scales pretty well, too. Kevin Miller "Either way, it is bad for Zathras."