TR Forums

Which of those monitors are better ?

Viewsonic E96 FSB 19 IN .25 Flat

KTC 9002FD 19 IN .26 Flat Black



Thanks in advance

I've never heard of a KTC but I love my viewsonic.

Usually the finer the dot pitch the better, but it also depends on the brightness.

Usacomp2k3 wrote:

Usually the finer the dot pitch the better, but it also depends on the brightness.

But which one have finer dot pitch ?

The Viewsonic has a better dot pitch at .25.

Is there a spcecific reason you're wanting a CRT rather than LCD?

Taddeusz wrote:

The Viewsonic has a better dot pitch at .25.

Is there a spcecific reason you're wanting a CRT rather than LCD?

It sounds like he already has them and needs to know which to use, I say the Viewsonic based on the given info.

king_kilr wrote:

Taddeusz wrote:

The Viewsonic has a better dot pitch at .25.

Is there a spcecific reason you're wanting a CRT rather than LCD?

It sounds like he already has them and needs to know which to use, I say the Viewsonic based on the given info.

In that case I would suggest hooking them both up and deciding which one looks better to him. You can get as technical and clinical as you want but in the end it comes purely down to him. We can suggest which one should look better but only he can be the final judge.

Never heard of KTC and a quick search showed up only foreign (to me in the US) sources, but it also showed CTX offering a CRT with the same model number & specs, so assuming it is similar to CTX (which is actually pretty good from my experience), pick the Viewsonic. Viewsonic has better image quality, and both should last 'forever'. Still have my Viewsonic 15E (or E15?) from the mid-90's on my server.

Mike.

Taddeusz wrote:

The Viewsonic has a better dot pitch at .25.

Thank you

Is there a spcecific reason you're wanting a CRT rather than LCD?

LCD:
- Expensive
- Poor contrast ratio
- blurry at low resolution

It sounds like he already has them and needs to know which to use, I say the Viewsonic based on the given info.

No, I want to buy one

Here is the website that I'm going to buy from
http://www.pcandparts.com/price.htm

There is a viewsonic monitor that have dot pitch at 0.24, but it is only 17 inch. Do you think that this is a better deal ?

maroon1 wrote:

LCD: - Expensive
- Poor contrast ratio
- blurry at low resolution

Almost all modern LCD's don't suffer from the 2 latter problems.
As for price, here's a 19" widescreen LCD for $199 shipped. Not a bad deal at all.
You can get a Dell 20" for $243 shipped

You mention blurry at low resolutions, LCD's look blurry when they are run at non native resolutions, if you run an LCD at it's native resolution it will look fine, and you can compensate for the size by increasing the DPI.

king_kilr wrote:

You mention blurry at low resolutions, LCD's look blurry when they are run at non native resolutions, if you run an LCD at it's native resolution it will look fine, and you can compensate for the size by increasing the DPI.

The interpolation of my Dell 20" and 24" are actually quite good. Anything 1024x768 or more should look pretty good. While not as sharp as native, for gaming it's more than adequate.

The bigger problem with blurriness is non-aspect scaling. Say you run at 1024x768, but regular 17" and 19" run at that evil 1280x1024. So not only the image is upscaled, the aspect ratio is wrong also, making the image even worse.

Most modern LCDs like Dell 20" and 24" have 1-to-1 pixel mapping so even running at non-native resolutions will not look blurry.

Flying Fox wrote:

The bigger problem with blurriness is non-aspect scaling. Say you run at 1024x768, but regular 17" and 19" run at that evil 1280x1024. So not only the image is upscaled, the aspect ratio is wrong also, making the image even worse.

Aspect scaling is a wonderful thing

this seems like an awesome deal. not sure about the brand, but the specs look even better than dell's offerings. 300cd/m2 brightness, 1000:1 contrast ratio... and 20.1" which i think is a good size for the average person.

but like they have said, modern lcd's dont suffer from the problems that you have mentioned.

mafropetee wrote:

this seems like an awesome deal. not sure about the brand, but the specs look even better than dell's offerings. 300cd/m2 brightness, 1000:1 contrast ratio... and 20.1" which i think is a good size for the average person.

but like they have said, modern lcd's dont suffer from the problems that you have mentioned.

The dell also gives composite/s-video inputs as well as a built-in 4-port USB hub, FWIW.

mafropetee wrote:

this seems like an awesome deal. not sure about the brand, but the specs look even better than dell's offerings. 300cd/m2 brightness, 1000:1 contrast ratio... and 20.1" which i think is a good size for the average person.

but like they have said, modern lcd's dont suffer from the problems that you have mentioned.

I'm about to order a Dell UltraSharp 2007FP widescreen monitor. I'm getting a deal on one through work. The UltraSharps are pretty sweet deals. Especially since you can get the detachable speakers that get their power from the monitor itself. The built-in USB hub is a definite plus as well.

I'd be kind of leary of that 1000:1 contrast ratio. Scepter is kind of a low end brand so their specs are probably not entirely accurate.

I don't live in USA and prices here in my are expensive

Anyway, I want good monitor for gaming and for watching videos

I Just found those LCD's which are available in place that I want to get the LCD from
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824116375
http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/index.p ... 36;pt;2#cb
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/17/ ... d_monitor/
http://ap.viewsonic.com/in/products/pro ... php?id=287
http://www.samsung.com/ca/products/moni ... ifications


Which one of those are the best ?

Are those LCDs better than CRT ?

Those all look fairly good. They all have DVI ports. I wouldn't buy an LCD now that doesn't have one.

The one thing that makes LCD's better than a CRT is that as long as you run one at it's optimum resolution it is much sharper than a CRT. CRT's just kind of paint the image on the screen and it doesn't line up any specific way. You can really see it on lower dot pitch Trinitron screens where there are pixels that end up smaller than others due to this. Shadow mask displays like the ones you were looking at just have triangular color triads on the screen. They just get painted however and the pixels aren't really very square. More blobbish.

Personally, even if you have to play games at a lower than optimum resolution on an LCD, I still believe it looks better than a CRT. Overall LCD's are brighter. Much brighter now than they used to be. Sometimes even insanely bright.

What I would recommend is going to a store near you and compare. Decide which one you think looks better. I like the sharpness of LCD's better myself.

maroon1 wrote:

Are those LCDs better than CRT ?

Yes. Almost any LCD is going to be better, there is no such thing as a quality CRT anymore. They are only made to sell with the cheapest computers, so are made to low specs and often poor quality control. I was a die-hard CRT fan, but I would not buy one today under any circumstances.

You should only buy a CRT if you can't afford a LCD or the prices are really bad in your country. But don't think you will be getting better quality.

maroon1 wrote:

Which one of those are the best ?

Depends on you. The samsung is an inch bigger and the brightest of the lot, but is probably more expensive. Samsungs are an excellent brand for LCD, but generally have a price premium.

The viewsonic VP930 has the best contrast ratio, which is good if you want a more CRT-like monitor. The viewsonic VX922 has the fastest response time, good if you play computer games.

But they have all different prices, so it's very hard to say one will be best. View them in person and see for yourself.

Is there a spcecific reason you're wanting a CRT rather than LCD?

Because colors on even best LCDs look like crap compared to a good CRT.

he problem may be finding a good CRT these days. Mitsubishi / NEC is selling their old $500 CRT model for $5000 these days. It's ridiculous.

Klyith wrote:

The viewsonic VP930 has the best contrast ratio, which is good if you want a more CRT-like monitor. The viewsonic VX922 has the fastest response time, good if you play computer games.

I have the VP930b and it was an excellent replacement for my 19" Sony CRT.

CR and black levels are very good on this LCD. Response times are excellent as the stay consistent (see Tom's Hardware or BeHarware reviews) compared to a lot of other LCDs that spike as high as 30ms. It's perfect for games, photo editing and video. Viewing angles are also really good.

Some negatives: There is some slight backlight bleeding, but only seen on a black screen in a dark room. Out of the box color temp is a bit off, but getting to 6500k isn't too much trouble.

Klyith wrote:

Yes. Almost any LCD is going to be better, there is no such thing as a quality CRT anymore. They are only made to sell with the cheapest computers, so are made to low specs and often poor quality control. I was a die-hard CRT fan, but I would not buy one today under any circumstances.

So you'll find CRT's being used as the primary displays on systems used by professional graphic and video artists? And if so, which ones?