Monitor noob needs help, 26"+ gaming?

MichaelM · 2 Jan 2011 at 23:16

Well i've been looking around and 24" seems the sweet spot for monitors right now but i'm using a 22" currently and fancy something 26" or above for a decent desktop view on 1080/1200 resolution and gaming.

So i'm looking for a PC monitor with a focus on high fps gaming but I would sacrifice 120hz for size.

What is the best interface? Assuming displayport is not seen on many monitors currently I assume its between HDMI and DVI. With DVI-D being the best of those?
Response times? 8ms, 5ms, 2ms, 1ms...obviously lower is better but I doubt there be much of a difference between 5ms and 2ms at that point?
16:9 = 1920x1080?, 16:10 = 1920x1200? best to go for something which supports 16:10?
TFT vs LCD?

As far as makes are concerned Samsung Syncmaster seems a pretty solid model, Iiyama pro lite is meant to be pretty good as well but what about Asus?
Dell is obviously expensive but is that reflected in quality that only a graphic designer will appreciate or is the tech also helpful to gaming?

My net is very wide at the moment so any help to narrow down a choice will be greatly appreciated.

antran · 2 Jan 2011 at 23:41

here you go

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/

Aleksandrs · 2 Jan 2011 at 23:52

I might add.. Personally I prefer whatever it is in 16:9, so 1920x1080. The 16:10 monitors just look a bit too... squarish for me, but then again I am really used to 16:9.

Orcvader · 2 Jan 2011 at 23:57

Displayport seems to be the best at the moment, but in terms of picture quality, there's hardly any difference between DP and HDMI/DVI.

There's no difference between HDMI and DVI. HDMI is litterally DVI, except it can carry sound signals.

Personally I would go for the lowest response time, but depending on the games you play there won't really be a difference between 5ms and 2ms. But in first person shooters I really do prefer the lower response time.

16:9 or 16:10... really this just falls for personal preferences. 16:9 will give a more wider feel, but you will be able to see more with 16:10.

Selekt0r · 4 Jan 2011 at 20:49

I was in exactly your position late last year.

I considered the Hanns.G HZ281HPB, however as far as I could determine this doesn't support 1:1 pixel mapping so could end up with stretched image if using a console, or for any games which don't support 1920x1200 resolution. Also, Iiyama has historically had a better reputation for quality (although I've got a Hanns.G monitor on one of my kid's PCs which has been pretty good).

Samsung did have a bit of a reputation for using cheap capacitors in their monitors and TVs, resulting in a lot of failures. I'm not sure whether this is the case (the PC Pro reliability awards for 2010 indicate that maybe things have improved http://www.pcpro.co.uk/html/awards-2010/index.php?pageId=5 ) however I decided to avoid.

I ended up going for an Iiyama E2710HDS ( http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-065-IY&groupid=17&catid=1120&subcat= ) when it was on offer at OcUK in late November, and am very happy with it. The only slight downside is the non-adjustable stand, however I didn't feel the extra £35 for the B2712HDS (basically the same monitor but with a better stand from the 'business' range) was worth it.