Hi everyone.
I am in the process of buying two 17" lcd screens in order to save space and my eyesight. I’ve pretty much narrowed it down to the Samsung SyncMaster 17"
Does anyone know if this is a good choice? Or maybe recommend another? I have considered the Apple displays, but decided that i would rather have 2x17" deskspace than 1xapple display.
I would love to hear from anyone who has any thoughts on this, thanks.
Regards,
Marc
I don’t know too much about this type, but I have since 2 month a Syncmaster 710N and I am very satisfied with it. It has a nicer design and better specifications (response time, brightness…) and was a bit cheaper than the 173.
after a quick wade through all the missleading and confusing specs of these monitors (the 173p and the 710n) i can offer a few contrasting points (though dont take this as advice)
the 710n appears to be a 6 bit panel with 8 bit dithering. the 12ms response does in fact seem to be the rise and fall combined and not one or the other or “gray to gray”, but with a dithering algorithm (which simulates 8 bit colour by switching pixel colours really fast) some of this performace will be negated making it possibly not much faster then the 25ms 173p. the 710n also has a noticably smaller viewing angle and lower contrast ratio.
the 173p has a near 180 degree viewing angle, incredible contrast, and full 8 bit colour.
i think the screen definitely warrants the extra cost vs the 710n
now as far as other brands are concerned, i dont know, we have 4 samsung 171(i forget the exact model) and i was not terribly thrilled. but then, i havent been very thrilled with any lcd’s under $1000us
later
cool, thanks for the info guys. I am probably going to go for the 173p i think. The other one seems a bit too cheap.
Marc
The other one seems a bit too cheap.
If you want a good and not cheap TFT I would go for a Sony TFT. That worth more money.
I’m running 2 Samsung 191T and a 172T and have had no problem other than at first apearing almost to clear 
-dave
I’m running 2 Samsung 191T and a 172T and have had no problem other than at first apearing almost to clear
Great, dave, thats good to hear. I’m gonna go for 2 x 172T’s. Can get em both under £600. Not bad. Thanks for the replies.
Marc
the 172t is 6 bit as well.
and easy way to distinguish between them is that 6 bit lists 16.2 million colours, and 8 bit lists 16.7
there is a noticable difference, especially when viewing high quality images with gradients. (this is in general, not specific to these screen models). the grainyness of images seem worse, even though the image may be fine. i guess it depends what you are using it for though.
later
could be a dumb question…but how does one know if a monitor is 6 or 8 bit or whatever??
sorry if the question is dumb…don’t have much more then a casual knowledge about monitors…
paul.
This may be an even dumber question, but The resolution of those monitors is listed as 1280x1024, but is it actually possible to go higher than that? Is that what they recommend or it that the maximum it will let you go to? Im about to buy 2 19" ones and really need to find out.
Regards,
Marc
Paul, he explained it in the post just above yours :roll: 
Marc, I think setting to any higher resolution than what they recommend would just make the contrast lower. Basically, more power to one area could possibly decrease from another. Something else to consider is that the better companies will underrate a product so it could be that with a good company like Sony or even Samsung they say that there is a limit in an area but you can go up one more step without a noticeable loss. Hope that makes sense. You’ve gotta have a store in the London area where you can go and check them out first-hand?
--Jon
You should know that all LCD screens will only look good at their recommended resolution. If you attempt to use a higher or lower resolution the display will be interpolated, and you get an unsharp image.
I’m currently waiting for the price of 20" LCDs to drop since there are no 19" that can handle 1600x1200 well. 20" LCDs typically cost 2.5 times more than a 19" right now. If I could live with 1280x1024 I would get 17"s instead of 19"s since they will show the exact same picture. And IMHO individual pixels on a 1280x1024 19" are really too big.
Jon, thanks for the reply. Thats what i thought, but i just kept reading “max resolution” on all the specs on the web. I hope that what you said is the case, cuz if it isnt, then instead of paying £800 for 2 19inchers, id have to pay £1300 for 2 20’s. SOB
I’ll head on over to a computer shop this weekend and check it out there and post anything i find out here in case there are other people reading this with their own questions.
Regards,
Marc
Just to illustrate what I mean I threw together a mockup of how LCD screens handle relolutions other than their native one. This is an example of a theoretical 800x600 LCD screen running several different resolutions. Notice that all resolutions except for the native one look fuzzy and unsharp.
This is because they are all scaled to 800x600 before they are displayed.
Torgeir,
I posted a reply to Jon before your message registered on the forum. GAH! I was happier being ignorant! Just kidding but i see what your saying. What a situation! I mean, 1280x1024 is really not ideal so i guess i will either have to compromise or pay up. You say you are waiting for the prices to drop, are you anticipating that they will in the near future? If not, then i guess ill pay what needs to be paid, i am staring at them for about 14 hours a day after all. I think im going to definately go have a chat with the guys in the shops.
I suppose running MAX a little bit blurrier isnt that bad, but for text i can imagine that would give you a headache after a while, one of the things i was hoping to get rid of by switching to tft’s. Thanks for the reply and screenshots.
Marc
Just don’t tell the guys in the shops you’re ordering online cause they may not want to help you in that case 
--Jon
Well,
Torgeir, i went to the shops today (many many) and every single one told me that using a resolution higher than what is stated is impossible. Completely impossible, it wouldnt work. I told them that you had done so and taken screenshots to prove it but they didnt have an answer. So either, you have magic powers, or those people were talking out of their a**. And to be honest, judging by the little knowledge they had, id go with the latter. Did you use any special trickery to do what you did?
What i did find out though is that there is a sony 19 incher that supports up to 1440 res. The SDM-HS94. Except that looking online now (for a better price than the Sony Centre), it says that it only supports 1280. That was a complete waste of time. I’ll give em a call
Regards,
Marc
In a way they are correct too, since the LCD screen is physically unable to display more pixels than it actually has available. However, some LCD screens (and also projectors) are able to accept higher resolution input, but they will rescale this to their native resolution before displaying it. This is what causes the blurring that you can see in my example. Like I said the image I posted is a mockup, not an actual screenshot. A screenshot wouldn’t display the blurring since the scaling happens after the image leaves the computer.
I am using a dual screen setup with 2 dell "20 flatscreens, these are quite cheap comparing with other brands..
I have absolutely nothing to critizise on these screens, so if you have the money I can recommend them..
-Tom
wow nice but spendy… i suppose thats a good price for a 20" flat panel though.