refresh rate: LCD Vs .....the big fat thing :p

Nameless · January 15th, 2003, 11:26

I'm going for a great offer of an LCD screen from LG but I'm worried about the refresh rate. I didn't check it out yet but my laptop's screen was 60Hz max. In any case, how much does it affect? How bad will it be?

__________________
--To every problem, there is a solution (other than death, of course

). So, just smile!!.....okay that's a load of crap but you already know that. 3 years and still fighting!!

Systems:
- Modified Mac Mini: 2GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 100GB 7200RPM HD, Dual-Boot Mac & XP
- HP Tablet PC TC1100: 1.1GHz Centrino, 1GB RAM, 60GB 7200RPM HD, Vista Ultimate

felinusz · January 15th, 2003, 14:31

LCD screens tend to have a much worse refresh rate then "vacuum tube" moniters. 60 Hz max is really hard on your eyes and all in all unpleasant to use. I would buy a moniter with a 100Hz refresh rate at 1024x768 MINIMUM.

Anything higher then about 80-100HZ is more or less appearing to be the same (at least to me...) . Before you buy your monitor from whoever get the specs of it, they will tell you the max refresh rate at each resoloution if they are complete (although if you have a junky 4mb video card they will be much less...

).

**Demigod** · January 15th, 2003, 15:35

I find LCDs more pleasing to look at a lower refresh rate. You don't really get tired looking at an LCD and it won't ruin your eyes like CRTs (shooting beams of light at you and all). You should test it for yourself. Go to some computer stores, find a comparable LCD and work with it for a while. The best way to test refresh rate effects is to use a bright white screen (open a blank web page in IE full screen). If you find it pleasing to look at (don't see a horizontal scrolling effect or otherwise see the screen refreshing, either straight or on an angle) then get the LCD.

__________________
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 Mobo: Intel DX48BT2 Memory: 4096 MB PC10600 DDR3 Videocard: PNY Geforce 9800 GX2 Soundcard: On-board SigmaTel High Definition Audio Hard drive: 120 GB OCZ RevoDrive PCI-E SSD & 1 TB Hitachi Optical drive: LG GGW-H20L (2x BD-R DL) PSU: Nexus 1000 Watt PSU OS: Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate (64-bit)

Proud millionaire folder of the NGEmu folding team

Mr Urt · January 15th, 2003, 20:30

it depends on what you're going to use it for. if you want it for gaming, then LCD probably isn't your best bet as you're going to pay extra for a lower resolution and size. not to mention the fact that LCD monitors tend to be washed out and leave trails on fast-moving objects. however, if the pc is going to be used mainly for word processing and other apps, then it might be preferable for you to use a LCD screen for it's compact size.

**Demigod** · January 15th, 2003, 22:26

The trailing effect isn't that bad (make sure to get active-matrix). My roommate played Counter-Strike on his laptop and it was pretty decent. It can also give games a unique look sometimes (kinda like motion blur that PCs lack). And who really cares if it can't do 1600+ resolutions. Most people I know use 1024x768 or lower, usually with FSAA and/or AF to improve quality.

__________________
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 Mobo: Intel DX48BT2 Memory: 4096 MB PC10600 DDR3 Videocard: PNY Geforce 9800 GX2 Soundcard: On-board SigmaTel High Definition Audio Hard drive: 120 GB OCZ RevoDrive PCI-E SSD & 1 TB Hitachi Optical drive: LG GGW-H20L (2x BD-R DL) PSU: Nexus 1000 Watt PSU OS: Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate (64-bit)

Proud millionaire folder of the NGEmu folding team

Chinoz · January 16th, 2003, 11:24

IMO, i find LCD's more pleasant to look at (especially when doing late night jam sessions :-)). CRT's tire the eyes fast even @ 75Hz refresh rate...

Nameless · January 16th, 2003, 12:56

Thanks, what's so special about active-matrix? And yeah, It's much better to play at top speed with all FSAA and AF options to 6X on 1024 * 768 then do so on 1600* whatever

Espcially not with a crappy 4MB card

__________________
--To every problem, there is a solution (other than death, of course

). So, just smile!!.....okay that's a load of crap but you already know that. 3 years and still fighting!!

Systems:
- Modified Mac Mini: 2GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 100GB 7200RPM HD, Dual-Boot Mac & XP
- HP Tablet PC TC1100: 1.1GHz Centrino, 1GB RAM, 60GB 7200RPM HD, Vista Ultimate

felinusz · January 16th, 2003, 17:28

Oh yeah, I KNEW that someone like you (a cat) wouldnt have a crappy 4mb card!

trust me, for gaming go with a CRT monitor, they are much nicer with motion and such...

**Demigod** · January 16th, 2003, 19:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Nameless
Thanks, what's so special about active-matrix? And yeah, It's much better to play at top speed with all FSAA and AF options to 6X on 1024 * 768 then do so on 1600* whatever Espcially not with a crappy 4MB card

There are basically two types of LCDs, passive-matrix and active-matrix. Passive matrix is cheaper and less power-consuming but leaves a huge trailing effect and generally has a bad refresh rate. It's primarily used in cheap laptop, although it's quickly going out of style. Active-matrix has a much faster refresh rate and the trailing effect is reduced significantly. Most, if not all desktop LCDs are active-matrix so you shouldn't worry much about it too much.

If I had the money I'd go for a 17" LCD. It's much lighter and smaller, doesn't hurt/deteriorate your eyes and is sharper and clearer (since it's digital). Analog monitors tend to get blurry at higher resolution, especially with Nvidia cards using cheap filters. Using an LCD with a DVI interface circumvents that (either that or get a Matrox). They're so damn expensive though. A Viewsonic 20" LCD (TFT, 1600x1200) is around $1400 USD ($2100 CAD).

__________________
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 Mobo: Intel DX48BT2 Memory: 4096 MB PC10600 DDR3 Videocard: PNY Geforce 9800 GX2 Soundcard: On-board SigmaTel High Definition Audio Hard drive: 120 GB OCZ RevoDrive PCI-E SSD & 1 TB Hitachi Optical drive: LG GGW-H20L (2x BD-R DL) PSU: Nexus 1000 Watt PSU OS: Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate (64-bit)

Proud millionaire folder of the NGEmu folding team

Nameless · January 16th, 2003, 21:26

U know, I actually HATE cats!!!

and BTW, my laptop's default resolution is 1600 * 1200.

Wow, that's a high price. LG here r selling 17" for 750 RS (200+ $) and Panasonic r selling 17" for 1200-1500 RS (350-420$). That's why I think it's a bargin. And going over 17" is too much of a luxury and besides, it'll burn one hell of a hole in my savings

__________________
--To every problem, there is a solution (other than death, of course

). So, just smile!!.....okay that's a load of crap but you already know that. 3 years and still fighting!!

Systems:
- Modified Mac Mini: 2GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 100GB 7200RPM HD, Dual-Boot Mac & XP
- HP Tablet PC TC1100: 1.1GHz Centrino, 1GB RAM, 60GB 7200RPM HD, Vista Ultimate

takwu · January 17th, 2003, 06:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Demigod
. . . it won't ruin your eyes like CRTs (shooting beams of light at you and all).

CRTs don't shoot beams of light at anyone. It shoots at the screen from behind to illuminate the stuff on it.

__________________
Latest toy: Sharp LCD TV Monitor LL-M17W1U

Player-X · January 17th, 2003, 14:22

Does 85Hz+Motion blur similar to LCDs caused by the glass filter sound untireing?

felinusz · January 17th, 2003, 15:07

17" flatscreen for around 200 usd? that IS a very good deal...

Only thing is, I didnt know that LG made monitors untill now :/
you might be better off buying that panasonic for 150$ more...

**Demigod** · January 17th, 2003, 17:26

Quote:

Originally posted by takwu
CRTs don't shoot beams of light at anyone. It shoots at the screen from behind to illuminate the stuff on it.

The beams don't completely stop right at the monitor screen; some of it gets through. As such, long exposure to a monitor or TV at a close distance can damage your eyes. And what I meant by "shooting beams of light at you" is that the gun shoots out beams in your general direction, not directly at you. LCDs on the other hand don't shoot out beams at all.

__________________
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 Mobo: Intel DX48BT2 Memory: 4096 MB PC10600 DDR3 Videocard: PNY Geforce 9800 GX2 Soundcard: On-board SigmaTel High Definition Audio Hard drive: 120 GB OCZ RevoDrive PCI-E SSD & 1 TB Hitachi Optical drive: LG GGW-H20L (2x BD-R DL) PSU: Nexus 1000 Watt PSU OS: Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate (64-bit)

Proud millionaire folder of the NGEmu folding team

Last edited by Demigod; January 17th, 2003 at 17:32..

Nameless · January 18th, 2003, 10:04

Err, that's 350$ felinusz but yeah, I think it's still good. I'm holding a 2002/2003 Panasonic TV catalouge right now to see what's new

Want me to send u one?

__________________
--To every problem, there is a solution (other than death, of course

). So, just smile!!.....okay that's a load of crap but you already know that. 3 years and still fighting!!

Systems:
- Modified Mac Mini: 2GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 100GB 7200RPM HD, Dual-Boot Mac & XP
- HP Tablet PC TC1100: 1.1GHz Centrino, 1GB RAM, 60GB 7200RPM HD, Vista Ultimate

January 15th, 2003, 11:26	#1
Nameless r u really that bored? :P Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Saudi Arabia Posts: 1,925	refresh rate: LCD Vs .....the big fat thing :p I'm going for a great offer of an LCD screen from LG but I'm worried about the refresh rate. I didn't check it out yet but my laptop's screen was 60Hz max. In any case, how much does it affect? How bad will it be? __________________ --To every problem, there is a solution (other than death, of course ). So, just smile!!.....okay that's a load of crap but you already know that. 3 years and still fighting!! Systems: - Modified Mac Mini: 2GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 100GB 7200RPM HD, Dual-Boot Mac & XP - HP Tablet PC TC1100: 1.1GHz Centrino, 1GB RAM, 60GB 7200RPM HD, Vista Ultimate

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

January 15th, 2003, 14:31	#2
felinusz overclocking magus Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,372	LCD screens tend to have a much worse refresh rate then "vacuum tube" moniters. 60 Hz max is really hard on your eyes and all in all unpleasant to use. I would buy a moniter with a 100Hz refresh rate at 1024x768 MINIMUM. Anything higher then about 80-100HZ is more or less appearing to be the same (at least to me...) . Before you buy your monitor from whoever get the specs of it, they will tell you the max refresh rate at each resoloution if they are complete (although if you have a junky 4mb video card they will be much less... ).

January 15th, 2003, 15:35	#3
Demigod これはバタスです Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 6,332	I find LCDs more pleasing to look at a lower refresh rate. You don't really get tired looking at an LCD and it won't ruin your eyes like CRTs (shooting beams of light at you and all). You should test it for yourself. Go to some computer stores, find a comparable LCD and work with it for a while. The best way to test refresh rate effects is to use a bright white screen (open a blank web page in IE full screen). If you find it pleasing to look at (don't see a horizontal scrolling effect or otherwise see the screen refreshing, either straight or on an angle) then get the LCD. __________________ CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 Mobo: Intel DX48BT2 Memory: 4096 MB PC10600 DDR3 Videocard: PNY Geforce 9800 GX2 Soundcard: On-board SigmaTel High Definition Audio Hard drive: 120 GB OCZ RevoDrive PCI-E SSD & 1 TB Hitachi Optical drive: LG GGW-H20L (2x BD-R DL) PSU: Nexus 1000 Watt PSU OS: Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate (64-bit) Proud millionaire folder of the NGEmu folding team

January 15th, 2003, 20:30	#4
Mr Urt gone postal Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,569	it depends on what you're going to use it for. if you want it for gaming, then LCD probably isn't your best bet as you're going to pay extra for a lower resolution and size. not to mention the fact that LCD monitors tend to be washed out and leave trails on fast-moving objects. however, if the pc is going to be used mainly for word processing and other apps, then it might be preferable for you to use a LCD screen for it's compact size.

January 15th, 2003, 22:26	#5
Demigod これはバタスです Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 6,332	The trailing effect isn't that bad (make sure to get active-matrix). My roommate played Counter-Strike on his laptop and it was pretty decent. It can also give games a unique look sometimes (kinda like motion blur that PCs lack). And who really cares if it can't do 1600+ resolutions. Most people I know use 1024x768 or lower, usually with FSAA and/or AF to improve quality. __________________ CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 Mobo: Intel DX48BT2 Memory: 4096 MB PC10600 DDR3 Videocard: PNY Geforce 9800 GX2 Soundcard: On-board SigmaTel High Definition Audio Hard drive: 120 GB OCZ RevoDrive PCI-E SSD & 1 TB Hitachi Optical drive: LG GGW-H20L (2x BD-R DL) PSU: Nexus 1000 Watt PSU OS: Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate (64-bit) Proud millionaire folder of the NGEmu folding team

January 16th, 2003, 11:24	#6
Chinoz ... Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Desa Park, Key Ell, Malaysia Posts: 2,307	IMO, i find LCD's more pleasant to look at (especially when doing late night jam sessions :-)). CRT's tire the eyes fast even @ 75Hz refresh rate... __________________ System specs P4 2.6c \| Abit AI7 \| Radeon 9800pro \| 1024mb kingston ddr400 \| 120gb seagate sata \| 40mb wd \| And all the minor bits and pieces 3dMark2001SE

January 16th, 2003, 12:56	#7
Nameless r u really that bored? :P Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Saudi Arabia Posts: 1,925	Thanks, what's so special about active-matrix? And yeah, It's much better to play at top speed with all FSAA and AF options to 6X on 1024 * 768 then do so on 1600* whatever Espcially not with a crappy 4MB card __________________ --To every problem, there is a solution (other than death, of course ). So, just smile!!.....okay that's a load of crap but you already know that. 3 years and still fighting!! Systems: - Modified Mac Mini: 2GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 100GB 7200RPM HD, Dual-Boot Mac & XP - HP Tablet PC TC1100: 1.1GHz Centrino, 1GB RAM, 60GB 7200RPM HD, Vista Ultimate

January 16th, 2003, 17:28	#8
felinusz overclocking magus Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,372	Oh yeah, I KNEW that someone like you (a cat) wouldnt have a crappy 4mb card! trust me, for gaming go with a CRT monitor, they are much nicer with motion and such...

January 16th, 2003, 21:26	#10
Nameless r u really that bored? :P Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Saudi Arabia Posts: 1,925	U know, I actually HATE cats!!! and BTW, my laptop's default resolution is 1600 * 1200. Wow, that's a high price. LG here r selling 17" for 750 RS (200+ $) and Panasonic r selling 17" for 1200-1500 RS (350-420$). That's why I think it's a bargin. And going over 17" is too much of a luxury and besides, it'll burn one hell of a hole in my savings __________________ --To every problem, there is a solution (other than death, of course ). So, just smile!!.....okay that's a load of crap but you already know that. 3 years and still fighting!! Systems: - Modified Mac Mini: 2GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 100GB 7200RPM HD, Dual-Boot Mac & XP - HP Tablet PC TC1100: 1.1GHz Centrino, 1GB RAM, 60GB 7200RPM HD, Vista Ultimate

January 17th, 2003, 14:22	#12
Player-X Banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: From Kuching in Malaysia now stuck in Houston Texas Posts: 9,111	Does 85Hz+Motion blur similar to LCDs caused by the glass filter sound untireing?

January 17th, 2003, 15:07	#13
felinusz overclocking magus Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,372	17" flatscreen for around 200 usd? that IS a very good deal... Only thing is, I didnt know that LG made monitors untill now :/ you might be better off buying that panasonic for 150$ more...

January 18th, 2003, 10:04	#15
Nameless r u really that bored? :P Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Saudi Arabia Posts: 1,925	Err, that's 350$ felinusz but yeah, I think it's still good. I'm holding a 2002/2003 Panasonic TV catalouge right now to see what's new Want me to send u one? __________________ --To every problem, there is a solution (other than death, of course ). So, just smile!!.....okay that's a load of crap but you already know that. 3 years and still fighting!! Systems: - Modified Mac Mini: 2GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 100GB 7200RPM HD, Dual-Boot Mac & XP - HP Tablet PC TC1100: 1.1GHz Centrino, 1GB RAM, 60GB 7200RPM HD, Vista Ultimate