Hii MikeAfter checking Toms web site I'm confused a little bit.Here is the article ; On LCD monitors image quality depends on how rapidly these LCD diodes can be turnded ON and OFF again , this rapidity known as THE RESPONSE TIME . ( article from Toms website )Can you inform me the following ;If so , When I buy a new LCD monitor ; Should I go for higher Response time ( ms ) value like 25-30 ms OR lower ms like 16 ?? All my besthasan

That's interesting Cruachan. How big-scanned slideslook on the screen. How are the blacks?How's the dwell on the screen appear to be?Peter Sydney Australia

Hi Hasan,I do understand your confusion. You have the manufacturers to blame for that for there is as yet no common standard for the calculation and quoting of response times.Many understand the 'response time' as a measurement of the time it takes for a single pixel to go from black to white and back to black again. Slow response times are likely to produce a smearing or trailing effect of fast moving objects as they travel across the screen. Unfortunately several manufacturers use a different method of calculating the value largely, of course, to compete and improve the prospects of their monitors selling in the marketplace. Some may quote response times of <20ms wheres in actual fact the true value is higher. The converse, of course, also applies in other examples. All very confusing for the prospective buyer.In general these days you should look for a monitor with a response time of 20ms or less. This becomes more important if you play games involving lots of fast moving images. I have a 20ms monitor and I can assure you games like Quake III, Unreal Tournament, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Star Wars Racer; Sims like FS2004, FS2002, FalconSP (Falcon 4), IL2 Sturmovik/IL2 Sturmovik FB and RealFlight G2 all perform well and look great.If you are unable to persuade your vendor to allow a trial period I would suggest the next best thing is to take along a small display utility called 'Monitors Matter CheckScreen'on a floppy disk. It is a few years old but still seems to run without any problems under XP. I've had version 1.1 for a few years now but I see there is a version 1.2 and can be downloaded at:http://www.benchmarkhq.ru/english.html?/be_monitor.htmlThere are 2 files in the zipped archive. The one you will be interested in is the 32bit one: 'CSInst32.exe' This is the installer.If your vendor is unenthusiastic about allowing you to install this software then refer him/her to the above link. It is a very popular and highly respected utility and the installation on HD is < 1MB in size.The point about all this is that you can check visually the LCD TFT Monitor's response time for yourself. Just select the 'LCD Display' tab and then click the 'Smearing' button and by clicking the left mouse button you can cycle through white, red, green and blue. I have just downloaded and installed this version and it works fine (just as it did in version 1.1). You will note a small square colour block travelling rapidly and diagonally across the screen. Try to focus your attention on the area of the screen following the block and you should see no more than a very faint brief trace of after image. If you see a definite trail and the block appears smeared as it traverses the screen, then the response time is too slow (25ms or greater). Refer to the Program's Help option for more information.If the vendor still refuses to cooperate then I suggest you walk away and try another!On a different point, the 'Native Resolution'. Generally this is the resolution at which the monitor works best and will be recommended by the manufacturer. In my case it is 1280x1024x32. The monitor will display at a few other resolutions and at a higher refresh rate but the quality of image tends to be poor. In practice, however, you will not need or want to change from the native resolution. As others have suggested you will quickly encounter, as I did, the 'problem' whereby certain games will offer 1280x960 but not 1280x1024. In fact, in every case, by posting on the relevant forums I was able to employ workarounds to enable 1280x1024.For example, FalconSP (Falcon 4.0) allowed higher resolutions by simply adding a switch to the executable viz., 'FalconSP.exe -hires'Another example, Bethesda Softwork's 'Morrowind' required adjustment of a couple of dwords in the registry:"Screen Width"=dword:00000400 <--------changed to 500 (1280)"Screen Height"=dword:00000300 <--------changed to 400 (1024)Without exception, I have managed to get all my software to display at 1280x1024x32. Some, of course, were written to display at a smaller resolution, say 800x600, in which case they will display in a smaller 'window' surrounded by a black border within the 1280x1024 screen area.Hope all this helps.Good luck,Mike

Hi Peter,"That's interesting Cruachan. How big-scanned slideslook on the screen. How are the blacks?How's the dwell on the screen appear to be?"Now your getting technical on me...LOLI did say I am no expert but I do like what I see and, indeed, much prefer the image quality (whatever the source), colour accuracy and purity on my 17" Hyundai ImageQuest Q17 than I did on my trusty Sony G200 Multiscan 17". This also applies to the printed photographic image after displaying and/or adjustment in my preferred editor, Paint Shop Pro.The blacks seem very good to my eyes. However, if I can refer you to the CheckScreen utility mentioned in my other thread I've just run a test. Under 'LCD Tests' I can check for uniformity and accuracy of Colour across the whole screen area. Selecting 'Black' produces a convincing deep black across the whole screen under ambient soft fluorescent lighting which, I would agree, is far from being ideal. If I switch off the room light (at night) and the viewing angle of the monitor is adjusted accurately then this reveals the black to have less depth (more of a very dark grey) with lighter areas around the screen perimeter. I imagine this is where CRT's will perform better. But, for the less discerning amateur such as myself this doesn't seem at all significant when the overall image quality seems so good subjectively under normal viewing conditions. I do believe this is what is important for the majority although there are bound to be professional users and some fanatical obsessives who will disagree. Sorry, I don't which to imply that I am including you in this latter category. Indeed, in the final analysis, what pleases is surely what is best for most of us."How's the dwell on the screen appear to be?" ...haven't a clue as I don't know what you are talking about - please elaborate and I'll try to respond further.Cheers!Mike

That was fantastic help , Thank you Mike..Most of the forums was comparing LCD monitors as 17"I could not find any for 18" or 19", did you read any comparision test for those monitors ?(In general these days you should look for a monitor with a response time of 20ms or less. This becomes more important if you play games involving lots of fast moving images. I have a 20ms monitor )Your monitor with 20 ms what size is it ? RgdsHasan

HiiWhat size is yr Sony ?What size are the LG's ?( Easy to find 16 ms at 17 " but not very easy at 18" or 19 " !! )I'm looking for minimum 18 " or 19 " good LCD...All advises are welcomeRgdsHasan

For Response time ( ms )some producers say as : R:15 ms / F:15 ms R: Rise / F : FallThats mean this LCD is 15 ms or 30 ms ??RgdsHasan

"Your monitor with 20 ms what size is it ?"....17inch (now very good value for money), and this is the beauty of LCD Monitors - quoted screen size = actual viewable area, unlike CRTs.Mike

"For Response time ( ms )some producers say as : R:15 ms / F:15 ms"If my definition is the one they are using then I would assume this to be a 30ms response time, i.e. old technology and probably best avoided.Mike

I am giving away my CRT 19 " sony.For the same usable size I must buy at least 18 " ..I can not find 18" as powerfull as 17" ,those you have mentioned .What is yr advise for 18" ( or even if I hv no chance then 19 " )Or Not buy now wait couple of months ???May be new capable 18" will come to the market ??All advises are most welcomeRgdsHasan

Hi Hasan,Choosing your monitor is a very personal matter and I wouldn't presume to make such a decision for you.If I had to make the decision I would first ask myself what I could afford. If you are going for an 18" or 19" then expect to pay a premium. Yes, it might pay to hang on for a month or two as prices of the larger LCD TFT Panels will likely come down as more and more people are seduced away from CRTs ;)In my case it would be important for the monitor to have digital (DVI-D) capabilities. If you have a graphics card that supports digital output then you should expect better image quality over the analogue alternative. many monitors, like mine, support both.Secondly, because I am into flight simming and my system has multimedia capabilities with fast moving video, etc. I would be looking at a response time of 20ms or less to eliminate image smearing. 16ms response times are becoming more common so, if you are looking for choice, again holding off for a month or two might prove beneficial.1280x1024x32 is a very popular native resolution and is more than satisfactory for general use with LCD TFT Panels as they are so sharp and text is so easy to read. The same cannot be said of many CRTs at higher resolutions, unless you are prepared to pay for it, of course. I've no doubt panels capable of higher resolutions are available but command a significantly higher price premium. Again, this will change in time.Question boils down to just how impatient you are to switch to an LCD TFT Panel now?If your browser will support it, and I guess it will, you should have the Google search engine installed. If it is not installed, go to www.google.com and you will see how to go about integrating it. Click on 'Services and Tools' and then browse down the page to 'Google Tools'. Google is invaluable for problems such as this that demand much research as part of the decision making process.Prior to posting I did a quick search and came up with the link below which might interest you. I hasten to add that this is not a recommendation. I know nothing about this particular monitor other than the fact it is an 18" model and is made by a manufacturer of good repute and is known to build good, reliable equipment. You will have to make your own further enquiries before deciding. In the search I used the following keywords: 'Best 18" LCD Monitors'http://www.buy.com/retail/computers/topSellers.asp?loc=15243(Number 2 on the page of the list of Top Sellers)Best of luck!Mike