I am in the process of building a new rig for FSX I have the CPU( i5 2500k), GPU ( GTX 460 1024GB) and am debating on whether to upgrade the monitor Now i am quite picky on image quality and currently i have a Samsung 206BW 20" 1680*1050 monitor which i use for gaming and watching Blue-Ray movies. The monitor is 4+ years old and has excellent picture quality and FSX looks great on it. No problems of dead pixels either.Question here is i would like to have a bigger display for simming ( especially helpful in virtual cockpits ) Would i see an improvement inimage quality?( i find that the smaller the screen , the more the pixels are packed into the display - thus increasing image quality). For example also - a 22" screen at 1900*1080 will give you a better picture than a 24" with the same resolution. I would like to watch Blue ray movies on my PC in full HD 1080P , but the main use will be gaming. I am impressed with Samsung screens and will probably stay with that. Plus the 16:10 1900*1200 ones our out of my price range... Also, the Samsung i have has a 2ms response rates , the others i am considering are 5ms. for Flight simming , i don't think this makes a difference. Suggestions appreciated !Thank you

I always was of the opinion that a monitor meant for a PC, as opposed to those meant for TV woudl be of better qualtiyI have two DELL 24" that have a res of 1920x1200 and is superb I had a 1900x1080 (TV with RGB input from computer) and found it less crisp I suspected that the RGB input was the culprit of lesser image quality then the regular PC inputs. I found the 32 inch HDTV too big and made some lines zigzaggyish-like more pronounced close up

Hi planechaser, I had a 21" monitor for the past 5-6 years, with a resolution similar to what you have now. I recently bought a Samsung 27" widescreen with 1080p resolution. I dwelled on this for weeks- I wanted something with a 120Hz refresh rate- potentially for 3D (the Samsung does not readily work with the NV 3D format, but there are tweaks that you can do that will get it to work- this monitor is designed for the ATI cards as far as 3D is concerned), but more so for the increased smoothness (if you disable vSync in the fsx,cfg file- assuming you have Bjoto's tweaks to the /cfg file that include the "VSync Fix"). But I couldn't get anything (several months ago now) in 27" with 120 Hz and a good lag time with a higher resolution that 1080p that I liked. So- to your question- the ppi in my new monitor is lower, since the increase in resolution was far outweighed by the incraese in screen size. For the first day or so I wondered if I had made the wrong choice- but now that I am used to it I love this monitor- and for an aging prune like me (just turned 60), the decrease in ppi actually makes things readable and mouse spots clickable. And the color depth and appearance of the monitor are great, like a whole new world.... Just my 2c worth- others may disagree- I think that unlike CPU and GPU's, and other hardware, where the performance is measured in a more objective way, I think that monitors (like speakers in a good sound system) are very subjective and you will get as many opinions as there are people that you ask. Good luck, Bruce.