**Baddass' Ultimate TFT FAQ and Reviews! (20" and Above Models)**

Originally posted by chucky
is the 172x still the top of the pile, or has another one knocked it off its top place?
Click to expand...

was it ever top of the pile?!

in some ppl's opinions it is still one of the best, and i would def have to agree. there are a lot of competitors for that crown tho, and there is certainly no "best" TFT to go for, its all a matter of opinion really
 
Hi, up to now I’ve always used a CRT monitor for my computer. Space is not too much of a problem and I haven’t looked at LCD’s before. After reading a few reviews of the Medion MD41630 my 21” CRT didn’t seem quite as big as it used to, so I decided to get one. Unfortunately I can’t seem to get hold of this model any more. The only Medion 30” I can find is the MD40803, which has a 25ms response time.

I’ve been looking around for a similar TFT/LCD TV and the only one I can find that has a 16ms response time and is within my price range (£1000-£1500) is the Viewsonic Nextvision N3000w LCD TV Display. The TV bit isn’t too important for me as it will be used to play pc games on mainly so I’m most interested in how it performs as a computer monitor. So far I haven’t found any reviews so anybodies opinions on this or any other similar 30” TFT would be greatly appreciated.
 
I just bought a 172x after hunting allover for one. The monitor is excellent, much better than I thought. I do have a 22inch flat screen diamondtron CRT though, and it isnt quite upto that quality....the TFT looks too....digital i guess, whereas the CRT looks like a painting.

I do have one problem though - 1 dead pixel and 1 stuck on blue :(

I dont know if its worth me trying to return it as it took me so long to get my hands on one in the UK! I am a bit spoiled by my CRT's perfect picture, so am wondering if im being too much of a perfectionist.

What to do you guys think?

EDIT: You can only see them on a completely black background though...weird....
 
Originally posted by sp00d
I just bought a 172x after hunting allover for one.
Click to expand...

Well done m8. Im thinking of getting one of those near Xmas.
Another thing is that at that price u get the wall mount for *free* :)

Is there any info on a price drop?
 
Well I dunno, but i got mine for £324 inc delivery, which I thought was pretty cheap!

Wow, 50 subpixels is a LOT....you definately need a replacement there!
 
Ok, i did some checking. Most, if not all, display manufacturers are trying to adhere to ISO 13406-2 - Ergonomic requirements for work with visual displays based on flat panels -- Part 2: Ergonomic requirements for flat panel displays.

Samsung adhere to this, and it allows for 1-5 pixel or subpixel faults per 1million pixels. ISO class 1 is for perfect LCD displays, and currently no consumer manufacturer adheres to this as costs are prohibitively expensive.

I have noticed that I have 3 "lit pixels", but no dead ones. They are unoticable on white, but on darker colours, eg dark blue and especially black, I see 1 faint grey dot, 1 darker grey dot, and one blue dot.

I am still unsure as to whether to try and send the monitor back in light of it adhering to the iso standard, the fact it looks so damn sexy, and the fact that they are such a nightmare to get hold of.
 
I was gonna buy a 172x but i spend too long thinkin about it and the place i was gonna buy it from was sold out! (there had been one left for a **** a week)

So i ordered a LG 1730B instead, hoping it will be good. I can post pics if anyone wants.
 
Oh yeah....just thought of another question for you guys:

For my samsung 172x TFT, and a radeon 9800pro - I only have analog monitor cables (d-sub to d-sub). I do have a d-sub to DVI adapator though. Now if i bought ANOTHER dvi adaptor, and connected the DVI port on my graphics card to the DVI port on my TFT with this "analog" cable, is this the same as having a "true" DVI cable or not? Or is it the same as d-sub to d-sub? Or is it somewhere in between?. I would be pleased if it is true digital, as DVI adaptors for d-sub connectors are much cheaper than me buying a DVI cable.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
no it wouldnt be the same, you would be converting between analogue and digital and thats just what the straight VGA to VGA connection does anyway,

if anything it would make it worse as theres even more conversions being thrown in!!

just get a DVI-D cable, can be had for about £15
 
Anyone have/know about the Sharp LL-171G, found one review on another site, who now make you register to view articles:mad:

Can be had for fairly cheap but slightly lower contrast at 430:1. Rated at 20ns as well. Hydis panel or sharp own brand??
 
Hi all,

A slightly different question to the other million asked here I hope so no one screams at me ;) - I need a 17-19" TFT but my primary concern is colour reproduction. It has to be as close as possible to being perfect with a full contrast range as I do a lot of professional design work all day. I'm willing to sacrifice gaming speed if necessary as I usually play while totally off my face and everything is blurry anyway :D Can anyone recommend the best monitor for my needs? Ive been looking at the iiiiiiiiiyama prolite 17 and 19" but am unsure.

Thanks in advance guys and gals :)
 
a 19inch panel using a IPS or VA type panel would prob be the best as they tend to offer superior colour repro and viewing angles, when compared to TN film panels. most of the decent 17inch panels will use TN, but once you get to 19inch u will see the other panels used. they arent as good for gaming, but for colours they are better

working on a 19inch TFT guide as we speak, so if you wait a couple of days it will be up online, to help u decide which one to get and to tell u a bit more about the diff panels used :)

Prime, tbh i havent heard of the Sharp panel and personally i would be inclined to leave it alone and go for one of the many excellent and now very affordable models covered in the sticky, inc LG1710B and Q17+
 
Hi badass, im itching for this 19" review thing.
im stuck between two atm.
the viewsonic VX910 (£360) and the sharp LL-T191D1-B (£305)
the viewsonic has a better response time, but the sharp has better contrast ratio and brightness.
the sharp is on special offer at £305 so its quite a bargain, any help prior to your 19" guide?
 
backslang.......sorry for the delay in it. Ive been working on it all last week or so, shoudl hopefully have the last bits tidied up 2moro and will make sure the Sharp and Viewsonic u mention are at least up and covered by then if i can :) hard to find much info on the Sharp tbh tho, as not many ppl on here have it (if any!), might be a good bargain at that price tho, ill post the new info asap :)

EDIT: Ok ive emailed u with the info so far :D more info and full guide will be posted soon, almost finished it all!

EDIT EDIT!!: well i did email to one in your trust, but it bounced. email me in my sig and ill send u the info again!
 
Last edited:
Found this on some forums today:

Why response times of LCDs are misleading

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoted response times by manufacturers are largely meaningless and misleading.

.....because it measures the time it takes for full white to black or full black to white pixel transitions. So unless you have your monitor set to maximum brightness & contrast (so that the picture is so bright it burns your eyeballs out) and only use your monitor for flipping blank screens from white to black, and back again, whether the monitor has a 8ms response time or 100ms response time, it doesn't mean an awful lot.

It's the same reason why monitors based on the 20ms Hydis panel outperform the 12ms Samsung panel, the 16ms AU Optronics panel, the 16ms LG/Phillips panel.......

In real world use, the vast majority of monitors (over 95% of them) don't perform anywhere near the quoted response times. That's why you see streaking on the 12ms Samsung panel - its performing at 25-30ms.

Let me try and explain further.

Look at the response times for the so called 'fast' Samsung 172X which is based on a '12ms' panel:-

gr2-2.gif


Since most people have their monitors set to medium brightness (about 80-180 on the grey level scale on the graph) and many applications - particularly games use grey to grey pixel transitions (or one colour to another colour) - the typical response time is somewhere between 25-30ms. Not quite 12ms is it?

Now look at the same response time graph for the Acer AL1721 - a mid level TFT with claimed 16ms response time:-

a21-grey.gif


The graph is much flatter, so across brightness and contrast levels, you're going to get consistent response times. At most common user settings, the "slower" 16ms is actually faster than the "quicker" 12ms panel.

Not quite as straightforward as the manufacturers would like you to think. The problem is, by that time, most people have parted with their money. When I was first looking to buy a TFT monitor, I thought that Kustom PCs were a bit mad to stock the Acer monitors in preference to others. However, it's only on further examination that you discover they perform very very well in games - for example, the AL1731M is based on the Hydis panel - and will in fact, outperform the so called 'faster' TFT panels.

From Toms Hardware Guide:-


"For games, the Hydis 20ms panel is still the one to beat. It's not yet perfect, but we know of no other that is faster (based on our tests, of course, and not manufacturers' specifications). Once again, we must insist strongly that the manufacturers' specifications are not to be trusted. "
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/di...326/lcd-08.html

"The response times suppliers associate with their panels vary, anywhere from 16 ms to 25 ms. The only problem is that these figures mean nothing. Or at least, not a lot. An article published in 2001 that can be viewed at Xtremtech explains the situation pretty well, and we have summarized it for you in the section entitled "RT between colors". But this isn't the only problem..."
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/di...any_old_stuff_i
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/di...105/lcd-05.html




I'm so confused - I was going to get the 172x before seeing that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom