Our testing methods
To test the LCDs, I broke out Matrox's Parhelia-512 graphics card and a decent test system to ensure the monitors themselves would have every chance to produce the best image quality. The Parhelia's digital and analog outputs are rated for far higher resolutions and refresh rates than these LCDs can display, so the graphic card shouldn't be a limiting factor in testing. I ran screens side by side using Parhelia's Clone mode to make comparisons a little easier, and I switched monitor inputs between Parhelia's output ports, just to make sure I was observing a true picture.

Motherboard

Albatron KX400+ Pro
Processor

AMD Athlon XP 2100+
Front-side bus

2x133MHz
Chipset

VIA KT333
North bridge

VIA VT8367
South bridge

VIA VT8235
Memory size

512MB (2 DIMMs)
Memory type

CAS 2.5 PC2700 DDR SDRAM
Graphics

Matrox Parhelia 512
Networking

D-Link 10/100MBit NIC (two cards)
Storage

IBM 60GXP 40GB 7200RPM ATA/100 hard drive
Operating System

Windows XP Professional SP1

Since we love to mix synthetic and real-world tests here at TR, I rounded up a couple of monitor testing applications and a few more challenging games for the LCDs to tackle. I also, grudgingly, forced myself to watch DVDs on the monitors. Oh, the things we put ourselves through for reviews like these!

As far as the game tests go, I chose Unreal Tournament 2003 for its frantic pace; it should stress pixel response times. Battlefield 1942 is in as a slower-paced game example, and quite a popular one, at that. Jedi Knight II makes the cut because it actually supports 1280x1024 screen resolutions, which means we don't have to deal with scaling while looking for other visual effects. Finally, we have Soldier of Fortune II, whose night missions should give the LCDs plenty of opportunity to try and reproduce a true black and other dark shades. On top of all that, each monitor went through all sorts of everyday use including the usual web browsing and playing around in office applications. We used the following applications to test monitor performance:

I would have loved to include gorgeous digital pictures of the picture quality of each monitor, but taking good pictures of images displayed on LCD screens is difficult, especially if you're trying to show subtle details like color grain, banding, and levels of black. Unfortunately, I don't have a really high-end digital camera, and try as I might, I was unable to coax a set of useful picture quality shots out of what I do have. More advanced color spectrum testing equipment also exists, and would have been nice to include, but that kind of equipment is generally restricted to optics labs, which my basement suite isn't. In the end, I'm left with making subjective comments on the picture quality of each monitor. It's not an altogether bad place to be, since I wouldn't recommend anyone buy an LCD without spending some time sitting in front of a few screens to get a good feel for what the options are.

The test systems' Windows desktop was set at each LCD's optimal resolution. Vertical refresh sync (vsync) was disabled for all tests. Most of the 3D gaming tests used the high detail image quality settings in 32-bit color.

All the tests and methods we employed are publicly available and reproducible. If you have questions about our methods, hit our forums to talk with us about them.