The Official PC building thread -3rd Edition

Here's some new information comparing real world performance of XP, Vista and Win 7. I would have been nice if they had done it on a more modern computer, but you takes what you can get. Win 7 is more than twice as fast as either XP or Vista in these tests!

http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=3236

Russ

 

Sophocles,
I don't quite agree the statement that "That's true on paper", although I do agree that there are other factors that will appear to improve the overall sharpness, and that contrast is one of them. I also don't agree that the difference in pixel pitch is as small a difference with this particular monitor. It has far more to do with the focal range than anything. What looks good from 10 feet away, doesn't necessarily look good from a normal working distance of about two feet. It's a bit like taking a picture through a very close chain link fence with a link right in the middle of the lens. Open the F stop enough and the link disappears from the picture, because you've widened the focal range enough that the link is almost washed out completely. The down side is that the detail of the overall picture suffers because of it. It lacks a certain sharpness and clarity to it.

At 1920x1080 there are 2,073,600 pixels on the screen. In the case of the VH222H, it has a slightly smaller screen area than a true 22" at 21.6" diagonal, but the picture pixels have to cover a larger area on the 22" than they do on the 21.6", and the closer you get to the screen, the more apparent the difference becomes because the larger screen has to increase the size of the pixel pitch by .034" for each pixel separation to be able to spread the picture elements enough to cover the entire screen, and that's a bit more unlit real estate 2 feet or so away, from in front of your eyes. It's one of the reasons that screens with a matte finish don't look quite as sharp and bright as the Glossy screens like the VH222H has, do.

While it won't be readily apparent by itself, if you put the two side by side, you will see the difference right away. Side by side the VH222H will appear to be brighter, sharper and show more detail than a conventional 0.282 TN panel. You will see things on the VH222H, that you simply don't see at all on the conventional screen, no matter how you adjust it or what kind of tricks you apply. It's one of the first things I noticed when comparing the CrystalBrite Widescreen on the Acer laptop I had, to one with the cheaper Acers with a same size conventional TN screen. You see the same picture, but the CrystalBrite screen was superior in the detail you could actually see. Granted, it won't look terribly different, but it is a difference you can see and appreciate.

To me the difference is not theoretical, as it would be on paper, but an actual physical difference that would be noticeable to anyone with halfway decent eyesight. I don't have the best eyesight, but I can see the difference. Please don't take this as an argument because it is not meant to be one. This is purely a technical discussion to try and understand the how and why better. This is just how I see things, coupled with the desire to learn more.

Sincerely,
Russ

 

You have a right to disagree although I don't think that you're right. The inherent problem with the monitor is that it is still a TN panel, and TN panels tend to look a bit washed out even up close because they have the worst color contrast of all monitors. The best for color contrast is generally S-PVA and then S-IPS. Dot/pixel pitch makes a modest difference but the real difference in the apparent sharpness of a monitor is the difference between extreme whites and blacks. The reason for the reduced pixel pitch in the Asus monitor is because it was needed to get 1920 by 1080 pixels into a given space otherwise it couldn't happen. A 24 inch S-PVA has better color contrast even though its dot pitch is larger so it's going to look sharper with 1080P playback. Look at some of the larger 1080P TV's with a BD disc and you will find the ones with greater color contrast are going to look sharper even though the pixel density of a 1080P color TV (1920 by 1080) is about the same as that of a 24 inch LCD (1920 by 1200).

Edit:

 

Sophocles,
Thank you. Now I'm understanding what you mean. In fact it reflects back to something you said quite a while ago about high contrast ratios not being all that. It puzzled me when I saw the S-PVA 24" screens with low contrast ratios of 800 to 1 or 1000 to 1, that cost around $1000 or more. Compare that to the 24" LG with a 10,000 to 1 contrast ratio at $370, and I can now understand why the S-PVA is better. The inability of the TN panels to yield better blacks and whites seems to be the determining factor. What I'm understanding out of all of this is you can't enhance what isn't there to begin with, and if it is there, it needs no enhancement!

Thanks again,
Russ

 

oh god yeah, TNs and black levels.... EUGH!!!!

lolll

ill be using my PS3 with mates aswell, being viewd from many angles, im not sure a TN is the way to go, but ill try it and if its no good, i can return it and excahnge it for somthing else

 

I don't know about either monitor you are you are looking at but I have a 19" ProView PL926WBi Widescreen hooked up to Oxi, and while the specs don't indicate a very good viewing angle at 150x130 or give a clue to the type of panel used, it's extremely viewable from anywhere in the room. Sitting, standing and moving around, the color barely washes out at all I've tried getting right up to it and going as extreme as about 170 degrees and it just doesn't white out like so many other inexpensive monitors do. I know it came from Walmart and was about $170, but I didn't buy it. I did some computer repairs in exchange for it, and with how good it looks, it looks like I got a good deal for a couple of hours of work at no cost to me but time!
http://www.proview.net/Product/Product_Spec.aspx?sn=429π=2011&ii=2719

Russ

 

You guys will remember that I recommended the 1080P 22 inch Asus LCD monitor for gaming and basic HD movie viewing. The discussion that Russ and I had about pixel pitch was about dissecting its individual traits on overall picture quality. Since when does a video game represent true colors of an image since the images are all drawings? They are all made up, so who can say which shade of blue or red is just right? Games look good on any panel type for that reason, but they also move more frames per second than a movie does. So if we take a TN panel's latency measures and see that they are fast for gaming, and with no clear color prototype to match them too, then who cares? But when one is playing or editing HD videos using natural skin tones and vegetation that we are all familiar with, then it becomes a priority. Video games are made to look good on even the most basic monitors, but movies are made to look good on the big screen with natural colors that we can all identify with.

 

i know, but its veiwing angles im worried about plus id like a bigger screen as ill eb sitting quiet a bit away form it. i might go get a 28" 1920x1200 pannel

 

Guys Purchased this monitor the other day and movies and games are a real joy.Before i purchase this i was using a top of the range Hyundai 19inch 6ms.This is topping my Hyundai on performance and is a geat price check it out.
http://www.aria.co.uk/SuperSpecials...+Piano+Black+with+HDMI+&+DVI+?productId=34348

 

i saw that.

was thinking of this though.

http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?NOV-LCD28D#

or

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/150178

 

Curious, Do you guys think ill of the samsung 30" (Linky)? Is it simply too expensive, or just not justified? Is it worth it for somebody with a little money to buy this, or by a 42" HDTV with 1920 1080 resolution, for the larger size for the same or better price. Depends on what you use it for I wager, HUH?
Lets say for the sake of argument that 2 different lcds are the same manufacterer. The only differences (NOT PRICE) are resolution and size. Would you buy a 42" HDTV Bluray cert, or a 30" MONITOR with substantially higher resolution (2560 x 1600)?

 

I never really look on novatech website as i think there always a little bit expensive but to be honest that looks value for money. To be honest 26 inch was the best price i could find for the money i wanted to spend. I could have purchased a 24 inch for quite a bit less but me heart was set on something bigger than 24 inch. I paid £241.00 in total for mine the Novatech 28" LCD Monitor would have cost me about £284.00 including delivery. As my limit was £300. I would of probably gone for this although it's 3ms and not 2ms what difference is 1ms.

Panel Size : 26"WideScreen TFT LCD
Resolution : 1920 x 1200 (WUXGA)
Pixel Pitch : 0.2865 x 0.2865 mm
Display Colors : 16.7M
Brightness (cd/m2) : 400cd/m2
Contrast Ratio : 1200:1
Scan Frequency : H:30-80KHz V:56-75Hz
Response time : 2ms
Viewing Angle, H/V : 170 degree(H) / 160 degree(V)
OSD language : English, French, Spanish, German, Italian, Dutch, Traditional Chinese
Input Signal : VGA (D-sub 15pin), DVI-D, HDMI
Internal Speaker : Built-in Stereo Speakers(5W*2)

Panel Size : 28"WideScreen TFT LCD
1920 x 1200 (WUXGA) Optimum Resolution
16.7 Million Colours
800:1 Contrast Ratio
3ms Response Time
500 cd/m2 Brightness
Viewing Angle (H/V): 170°/ 170°
One HDMI Input (Supplied with HDMI to DVI lead for connection to DVI on PC)
One Analogue Input
Integrated Speakers (2.5W x2)
3 Years Manufacturer On-Site Warranty

Spec wise not much difference but 28 inch yeh why not the bigger the better hey.

 

depends how close you are to it.

IMO for PC the 2560 (and hopefully if you are gaming, your GPU can handle it ) but for TV watching or blueray watching from a sofa, or further than 1m away, the 42"

 

The general consensus in this part of the world for gaming would be the HannsG. A lot of gamers around here have them and love em!

Russ

 

Prices are well coming down at the minute i remember my first LCD monitor cost me around £240,00 for a 17 inch look at the prices now. My mate paid over £1000.00 for a 42 inch LCD tv a while ago six months ago i picked up the same for £450.00. Soon we will all be buying 30 inch monitors for our PC's for next to nothing.

 

yeah russ its top of my list aswell


its a shame it doesnt do 16:9 scaling (leaving black bars at top and bottom with a 1080p input) because then it will be stretching any blu rays or PS3 games i will play up and down

i could go for the 1080p Dell S2409W 24" but i feel that i need a bigger screen for playing far away if i do have the money, the hanns-G, if not the dell.

If only i had the money for the 2709W

 

At least until the economy picks up! LOL!! My guess is that they will be reasonably cheap until then!

Russ

 

LOCO. does that give ya 4 gigs of mem now? if so let me know how much of it windows actually see's for you? im wanting to get 2 more sticks of these muskin i have now. giving me 4 gigs. i know i might have to drop back down to 800mhz from the 1066 i have these 2 sticks OC'd at. but im with you convertXtodvd use's way to much mem...
oh i just thought of something your a vista user, arent you???lol


Question for all...
i just got 3 of them antec tricool fans(yes red ones)for $5.99 each.will i be able to use the speed control on them if i have them hooked into the mobo instead of the PSU directly???


EDIT: to add
just a FYI. there is a new version of everest ultimate out. version 4.60 has alot of new things in it from v4.50

4.60 link

 

If loco is using a 64 bit version of Vista then it will show it all, but if it's a 32 bit version then it will show only about 3.25 Gb plus or minus a little. The reason is that 32 bit systems can only use a total of 4 Gb of memory. That includes all memory used by the system so if one has a Nvidia GTX260 which has almost 900 mb of memory then that will be subtracted from the total available RAM. Then there's the cache memory on ones hard drive and CD Roms and well I think that you get the idea. This is why I think that it is time that the world dropped 32 bit systems and started using 64 bit system. A 64 bit system can use 128 Gb of memory which well beyond that which can be stored in any motherboard I've ever seen.