From a 19" TFT to a 20" WideTFT

RumbleBee

RumbleBee

RumbleBee

Associate
Joined
22 Dec 2002
Posts
1,190
Location
Teesside, UK
I'm currently runing a Viewsonic 19" and up until recently I've been perfectly happy with it. There are no problems with it, but I've started to show an interest in Widescreen gaming and now I'm just not sure if it's worth the upgrade to a 20" widescreen TFT.

I'd really appreciate a bigger screen for particular games and also for using photoshop occasional, but mainly gaming and internet use.

So then. I'm not keen on spending £650+ on a 24" screen. Well it would take some serious thinking to go this route. What I am interested in is a 20" widescreen TFT, however is this upgrade actually worth it

Has anybody upgraded from 19" TFT to a 20" WideTFT. Do you feel like it's a gain even with the loss of physical hight.

By the way my current rez is 1280 x 1024
 
I haven't upgraded 'yet' but will do shortly...

I tried the NEC widescreen 20" out that a family member has and compared to my 19" CRT it's almost the same vertical height but aprx 3 inches wider. With a 19" LCD you will lose vertical height aprx an inch or so but it doesn't really matter imo. The extra screen res of a 20" wide makes up for it.

I run my desktop at 1280x960 on the CRT and am looking forward to the extra screen real estate of 1680x1050. It will be a significant boost I feel. And games are a lot nicer in widescreen. I also use apps like photoshop and some music sequencer programs. I think the extra width will benefit them too.

I never bought a 5:4 LCD coz I felt it a bit too restrictive. I've always felt the 4:3 aspect ratio the best....but after seeing the widescreen in action I'm kinda sold on that now :)
 
you gain pixels in both direction so there is no real height loss. I run a 19" and 20" NEC widescreen side by side and the pixel height is far more important than the physical height.
 
Kreeeee said:
you gain pixels in both direction so there is no real height loss. I run a 19" and 20" NEC widescreen side by side and the pixel height is far more important than the physical height.
Click to expand...
Physically the screen is smaller vertically though which makes a difference. Obviously a higher resolution is good but I find the loss of vertical size very noticable.

To do a good 19" 4:3 to widescreen transition you really need to maintain the same vertical size and in effect just extend horizontaly to give you a widescreen version of the original monitor.

Unfortunatly you're looking at a 23" or 24" screen to do this.
 
Athanor said:
Physically the screen is smaller vertically though which makes a difference. Obviously a higher resolution is good but I find the loss of vertical size very noticable.
Click to expand...
I find the pixel height far more important and since it takes up less vertical space the dot pitch is a lot lower and provides a much better picture.

The only disadvantages I have is application specific problems with dual monitors (and the cost :o ).
 
This is the thing really, pyhsical size can be an issue if you like your pixels bigger. 19" LCDs are essentially a blown up 17" LCD, same native res. Usually around .29x dot pitch whereas 20" wides like the NEC are .258 dp
 
Ozzie Dave said:
This is the thing really, pyhsical size can be an issue if you like your pixels bigger. 19" LCDs are essentially a blown up 17" LCD, same native res. Usually around .29x dot pitch whereas 20" wides like the NEC are .258 dp
Click to expand...
Who wants bigger pixels? :confused: :confused:
 
Thanks for the kind advice everyone. I've took the plunge with the Dell 2007 Widescreen and will hopefully take delivery tomorrow or Wednesday. The hefty price of the larger model, the fact I'd have needed a GFX upgrade and your replies have convinced me I've made the right choice.

Theres always next year's upgrade :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom