Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums

Monitor for TDM/Theif: recomendations.


Recommended Posts

We dont have a general tech supp. section, so this seemed like as good as place as any.

 

My Nec 20WGX2 pro's are getting the end of thier life and need replacing, back in the day these cost £250 but Im not spending that amount again.I know whats makes a gooed monitor for playing TDM & Thief but I havent looked into this for a long while so thought i would get some opionions beforehand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dell U2413.

Too expensive @ £350+ per monitor and the black levels on this montor are worse than my Nec's. But there is a Dell U2413M out there that is £150 cheaper, but can find any comparisions so I can see what Dell have removed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that looks pretty good to me:

 

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2413.htm

 

I wish OLED were here and affordable already...

Please visit TDM's IndieDB site and help promote the mod:

 

http://www.indiedb.com/mods/the-dark-mod

 

(Yeah, shameless promotion... but traffic is traffic folks...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the link Nob posted, near the bottom they compare the U2413 to the U2413M.

 

Hmmm, not sure what this means but:

 

luminance (cd/m2): 266

 

Black Point (cd/m2): 0.32

 

Contrast Ratio: 839:1

 

that seems really dark black point. This is an LCD backlight and I find this monitor excellent for TDM.

I always assumed I'd taste like boot leather.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd highly recommend holding out a few months with buying any monitor. There's a lot happening in the development end of both 140hz 2560x1440 27" monitors and the 4K monitors.

 

Right now a lot of the manufacturers claim to have them ready but a lot also get their panels from Samsung, who are more known for quality and durability.

 

ASUS tried getting ahead of the curve, by early announcing their 2560x1440 monitor for gaming, but they keep delaying it as it's most likely just them trying to get attention in the market.

 

So I'd recommend waiting a few months until the first versions have been out for common users and properly reviewed and until Samsung or BenQ come out with their own quality assured monitors.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • luminance (cd/m2): 266
  • Black Point (cd/m2): 0.32 - (that seems really dark black point. This is an LCD backlight and I find this monitor excellent for TDM.)
  • Contrast Ratio: 839:1

 

The luminance refer's to how bright the monitor is, if a monitor has a cd/M2 of 300 and a black point of 0.3 the contract ratio would be very good. But that would be a false advertising, because they manufacturer would using a insanely high brightness level to cover up the fact of a crap black level. And this is compounded by the fact that most users would only have the Luminance set to half that.

 

0.32 isnt that good, my Nec's have a Bp level of 0.3 and if you google me, ttlg and monitors you'll see why -

 

- http://www.ttlg.com/...ad.php?t=122056

- http://www.ttlg.com/...ad.php?t=124407

 

What I/we should be aiming for is a max of 0.18-0.2 for mainstream monitors at the £100-150 mark. There are AMVA/APVA monitors out there with Black levels of 0.04-0.05 that match those of a CRT monitor, and I was about to say "but so far they have noticable ghosting issue according to reviewers" but the BenQ GW2450HM seems to buck that trend - TfTCentral review.

 

The BenQ is amazingly cheap for a 24" monitor and the spec @ £123, but then you see why... no adjustable stand, no usb ports and only a 2yr warranty. But on the plus side it has a matt AG coating, non-gloss bezel and doesn't look to bad either. So I could can two of these for the price I paid for the first one of my Nec's many moons ago at £246 for the pair.

 

I'd highly recommend holding out a few months with buying any monitor. There's a lot happening in the development end of both 140hz 2560x1440 27" monitors and the 4K monitors.

There are few problems as I see it,

 

1. my rig currently has a GTX670 and a core i5 2500k and is what most people would consider high'ish spec, but most games would struggle at 2560*1440 on even this set-up. That said I guess AA higher than 2x wont be required at such resolutions?

2. the prices of those monitors will be silly in the extreme, anything more than £250 will be taking the piss.

3. more importantly will the release of said monitors drop the price of the current crop of 1920*1080 monitors..?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, AA is the currently best way of simulating a sharp, clear picture on lower resolutions by getting rid of the jagged pixel staircases. With higher resolutions you could do completely without AA, as it will be very difficult to see pixels at 2560x1440. Obviously the size of the monitor should be regarded.

 

MSAA and especially SSAA is almost always been a more expensive way of clearing a picture, than going up in resolution. Seeing as most modern monitors have a native resolution they need to be in, to have an optimal picture, you usually go for the highest resolution(native) first and apply AA methods after to enhance the quality, depending on left over performance. With that in mind, I'd imagine the new high-res monitors will somewhat obsolete AA, giving you room to put your extra performance elsewhere.

 

But you're right, some of these monitors are extremely overpriced and that's because right now they are all fighting for cornering the market for the new tech, while promising everything and happiness. Over the past 3-4 months a lot has happened on this topic and I imagine it's gonna continue to storm with announcements for a few more months, before prices will land in a steady range.

 

It's only ever worth waiting for hardware when it's a leap forward from the previous standards and the new monitors are definitely a big leap. Personally I think hardware wise, a smart purchase is one that doesn't bottleneck the next upgrade. If it's a matter of budget then patience can be a challenge, though it gives more motivation to research the market further.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that pixel density is more important than overall resolution. My brother had a 15" laptop that ran at 1920x1200, and you didn't need AA on that one at all.

I always assumed I'd taste like boot leather.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally I think hardware wise, a smart purchase is one that doesn't bottleneck the next upgrade. If it's a matter of budget then patience can be a challenge, though it gives more motivation to research the market further.

Thats the thing I have been using 1680*1050 for years and am more than happy with that res, partly because thats what most 20" monitors supported and secondly because that was and still is the sweet spot for gaming perf on £200-250 gfx cards. If I upgrade to the BenQ's I will be making a leap to full HD and I know my GTX670 wont be able to run everything on v-high/ultra like I have been used too. But this will mean the next gfx card will have to be carefully chossen to I can get tthe latest games to run butter smooth at full HD, like I can do now at 1680*1050.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a Samsung SyncMaster 2233 in 1680x1050 too, and though it's a nice monitor I've also been very happy with since I got it, the aspect is a bit bothersome 16:10, it's got 3 MS delay and poor viewing angles. However to me upgrading to 1920x1080 isn't significant enough an upgrade to go for, even though BenQ got some excellent monitors for that range at some fantastic prices.

 

GTX670 is also a very nice card though, but you're right that it will be tested on higher resolutions. A 4K monitor in native would for instance require 2 780GTX to run most modern games in native with good performance.

 

In my opinion 4K monitors sounds awesome, but they are a massive overkill for common users. I think the 2560 monitors are where it's at and as for pixel density I think 2560 on 27" is a good very ratio increase compared to my 1680 on 22".

 

Again for me, upgrading would be with resolution, size, update rate, color depth and delay in mind. All of which can be achieved with a current BenQ monitor, but it's all just step forward, where in a few months the 2560 monitors will be miles ahead on all and more.

Edited by Kvorning
Link to post
Share on other sites
All of which can be achieved with a current BenQ monitor, but it's all just step forward, where in a few months the 2560 monitors will be miles ahead on all and more.

You say that but you have contradicted yourself, the price of the monitors and the GPU power required to play games at native res will mean it will be a few years, not months before 4k monitors are cheap enough to be considered ethusiast(and by that I mean people who dont spend more than £250 on a GFX card, that being the single most expensive item in the pc) let alone mainstream.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you want good blacks you want a VA panel and a lesser option would be IPS but I don't know what's available lately for that price range ~$450 US.

 

Personally for me, having come from a flat panel crt, I'm not a fan of, and simply won't buy monitors that are 16:9. I can't stand not having the vertical space particularly when using programs like DR or Photoshop. Vertical screenspace is so valuable and yet there's not much choice out there because most companies decided without OUR (the freaking customers) input to go with 16:9 std which I despise them for.

 

I sincerely hope that 10bit OLED panels come out sooner rather than later because the color reproduction on ANY 8bit VA/IPS/TN panel is seriously lacking and is just something we have to live with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • I think if you want good blacks you want a VA panel and a lesser option would be IPS but I don't know what's available lately for that price range ~$450 US.
  • Personally for me, having come from a flat panel crt, I'm not a fan of, and simply won't buy monitors that are 16:9. I can't stand not having the vertical space particularly when using programs like DR or Photoshop.
  • I sincerely hope that 10bit OLED panels come out sooner rather than later because the color reproduction on ANY 8bit VA/IPS/TN panel is seriously lacking and is just something we have to live with.

  • the BenQ mentioned above is a "A-MVA" but I have an issue with the glossy bezel and the menu button placement on the side of the monitor.
  • Then go for a 1920*1200, so you get the best of both worlds.
  • yer, but they will be pricey I imagine and they need to fix the short lifespan of this tech before putting into monitors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You say that but you have contradicted yourself, the price of the monitors and the GPU power required to play games at native res will mean it will be a few years, not months before 4k monitors are cheap enough to be considered ethusiast(and by that I mean people who dont spend more than £250 on a GFX card, that being the single most expensive item in the pc) let alone mainstream.

 

Nah man, I agree that the 4K monitors are massive overkill and will be too expensive, whereas the 2560 monitors are already affordable and will drop in a few months and you can run games in native with your current card. However that will be without AA enabled, which on the upside won't be as essential as it is with current monitors.

 

Btw my friend actually ordered this one yesterday, I'll let you know how it performs. I advised him against getting it now, but he's likely to get it refunded anyway.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/111258830737?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

Edited by Kvorning
Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that the circuit boards have the cheapest garbage on them. Sure the monitor looks nice now but probaby not in a year or two when you have blown capacitors and are paying another $100 bucks to get it repaired or worse, just think it died and its out of warranty.

 

The nice thing about reputable companies is they have a reputation to uphold so they're going to use at least decent quality components on their circuit boards. Qnix and similar companies don't give a shit. They get a deal on nice panels and pair them with the cheapest possible stuff to keep the bottom line low. Bad idea.

 

My uncle who was a comp sci major at IU told me about 20 years ago that electronics is one of the things in life where you actually get what you pay for and in most cases, its true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • the BenQ mentioned above is a "A-MVA" but I have an issue with the glossy bezel and the menu button placement on the side of the monitor.
  • Then go for a 1920*1200, so you get the best of both worlds.
  • yer, but they will be pricey I imagine and they need to fix the short lifespan of this tech before putting into monitors.

 

That BenQ is the one that turned up in searches I did also researching your topic.

 

I don't like glossy bezels either however my current stable of monitors have glossy bezels because that was the only option and suprisingly they're not distracting and particularly in the dark appear pitch black and melt away in to the scene. I can't say I'm fond of them but they are much less issue that I'd previously thought. They do require frequent weekly dusting though.

 

All of my monitors are 1920x1200 so yes I agree completely with you.

 

There are 10bit lcd panels out now but they're used mainly in medical and specialized industries and aren't cheap what-so-ever.

 

$5,279

 

$1,400

Edited by Lux
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're getting a little ahead of ourselves here. Unless you're running a 10 bit workflow, having a 10 bit display is pointless. Unless you have firegl Pro or quadro card, you're stuck with 24 bit colour support.

 

And my Dell is 10 bit, well 8 bit +frc. Which is what that LaCie monitor does.

And so does that 5000$ monitor.

I always assumed I'd taste like boot leather.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently nvidia can do 30 bit colour for a while now in direct3d apps since the geforce 200 series cards. But for OpenGL apps like photoshop and any medical program you still need a quadro card.

I always assumed I'd taste like boot leather.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...