20.1" or 19" TFT for gaming?

Scoobie Dave · 16 Jan 2006 at 14:45

Im going to be getting my first TFT screen in the next couple of months or so. . .
Im really interested in the Viewsonic 20" VX2022w when it's finally released as it comes with a 3ms Response Time which should mean that I should not notice any ghosting (hopefully). I think the VX2022w will retail around £380.
My point is is it really worth paying the extra cash for another inch when I could get a Samsung 19" SM-930BF and save around £130. Im aware that TFT's work best using their native resolutions (1680x1050), is there good support for widescreen gaming?

20.1" or 19" TFT what would you choose?

Cheers.

Raymond Lin · 16 Jan 2006 at 15:03

It's more than another inch, for 1 thing, you'll have 1/3 more desktop space, with your spec I would see NO problem running at 1680x1050 res and lots of games now support widescreen res.

Jezza101 · 16 Jan 2006 at 17:00

as a long term vaguely 'competative' gamer Ive always prefered smaller screens. Guess it depends on what your into I guess, maybe bigger screens suit strategy games but I always found the smaller screens better from an fps (eg UT) point of view.

In fact, dare I say it, 17 is my preferred size - I tried playing on a 21 inch (crt so prob smaller than the TFT?!) screen for a bit and found it quite difficult I must say. The larger size was really hard to take in and I found my eyes working harder to see everything going on. Gave me mega headaches and blurred vision!

The solution was to sit back from the screen but that kinda defeated the point

! Actually I ended up playing games in a window.

Anyway, thats just my experience, some people swear that bigger screens are an advantage but common sense says that there must be an optimum size. For me thats 17, about 19 for aps and anything after that is just good for watching telly - but each to their own, see if you can test some out...?

james.miller · 16 Jan 2006 at 17:02

Raymond Lin said:
It's more than another inch, for 1 thing, you'll have 1/3 more desktop space, with your spec I would see NO problem running at 1680x1050 res and lots of games now support widescreen res.

actual screen size is an inch, and it's almost double the price which IMO put's a 20" out of the question.

Apatche64 · 16 Jan 2006 at 18:21

he's getting at the resolution the 19" widescreens go at, you lose a lot of space on the desktop because of this, if you want a widescreen for everything other than dvd playing it's gotta have at least 1680x1050 as apposed to 1440 x 900 which is the typical for 19"

Scoobie Dave · 16 Jan 2006 at 18:31

Apatche64 said:
he's getting at the resolution the 19" widescreens go at

Well actually I was taking about 20" widescreens.

If I was going for a 19" then I would just get the regular size.

breamster · 16 Jan 2006 at 21:08

I'm no expert and I'm looking at a new TFT (my first - had a 17" CRT for 4 years now).

People are telling me to go for something greater than a 19" TFT simply because the resolution can go higher.

Gregeff · 16 Jan 2006 at 21:42

The actual viewable area of a 19" and 20" Wide screen is about the same, as the 19" is 5:4 compared to 16:9, so has a higher erea per diagnal inch. However the 20" Wide screen has a larger resolution and will be effectivly bigger for wide screen films too.

Scoobie Dave · 16 Jan 2006 at 22:20

Gregeff said:
The actual viewable area of a 19" and 20" Wide screen is about the same, as the 19" is 5:4 compared to 16:9, so has a higher erea per diagnal inch. However the 20" Wide screen has a larger resolution and will be effectivly bigger for wide screen films too.

So better to spend a bit more and go for the widescreen. At the end of day I want to make the right choice as im going to be staring at it for the next 4-5 years.