PDA

View Full Version : TFT screens 17", 19" or 20" .. or 2x 17?



purpleturtle
January 30th, 2006, 09:42 PM
Hi all,

I wonder if anyone has much experience with working with different TFT screen sizes and/or has any strong feelings as which size to go for.

I sit in front of a 17" Dell all day at work, which is fine, but think I want something a bit more special for at home. The 20.1" ones at 1600x1200 appeal, but they are considerately more expensive than the 17"s (in the UK we're talking 450 vs 200 ...) And for that money, I wondered if 2x 17s would be better than a 20.1 ... I've never used a dual headed system before though.. How well does it work?

ember
January 30th, 2006, 09:59 PM
I would go again for 19" - they are not really different from 17" in price and I find them to be more comfortable to the eyes. If you have the money, 2x19" are very cool.

prizrak
January 30th, 2006, 11:01 PM
I'd stay away from 19" since the ones I seen have the same max resolution as a 17" (1280x1024), which I don't find suitable on such a large screen. I'd say get 2x17" but getting dual head with Xorg is VERY difficult (but possible) so you might opt for a 20 or something.

garba
January 30th, 2006, 11:17 PM
go for a 20" and never look back, 1600x1200 is a great resolution for desktop use... just stay away from those 19" displays which come with a native resolution of 1280x1024 pixels leading to a messed up aspect ratio

purpleturtle
February 2nd, 2006, 12:27 AM
Thanks for your inputs. I'd never noticed/realized that 1280x1024 was a aspect ratio of 5/4 rather the usual 4/3. I suppose it doesn't really matter.

poofyhairguy
February 2nd, 2006, 12:34 AM
I'd say get 2x17" but getting dual head with Xorg is VERY difficult (but possible) so you might opt for a 20 or something.

Its not that hard. The Gentoo wiki says how. Plus once you get it to work, dual head is great. Its hard to go back to life without it.

dolson
February 2nd, 2006, 12:46 AM
Meh. I used dual-head until I got rid of CRTs and got LCDs. It's not that hard to give up. :)

Now I have two PCs, one has a 17" and the other a 19". Honestly, there isn't much of a difference due to the resolution being identical, as stated already. If you need to save cash, get a pair of 17". Otherwise, get a pair of something with a higher resolution.

If you can live with one screen, get one with the highest res that you can afford. The size doesn't matter, really. If you could get a 17" with 1600x1200, then it would be much better than a 20" with 1280x1024 res. Know what I mean?

That's my advice anyhow.

Jedeye
February 2nd, 2006, 01:03 AM
dont know how good this is for the eyes, but get the 17 and just slide it a little closer to ya ;)

mips
February 2nd, 2006, 01:22 AM
I would love a 30" Wide display but they are pricey :(

Kvark
February 2nd, 2006, 06:45 PM
just stay away from those 19" displays which come with a native resolution of 1280x1024 pixels leading to a messed up aspect ratio
The screen area on a 19" has the ratio 5/4 just like the resolution 1280x1024. So the aspect ratio of the image is perfectly accurate since the screen area has exactly the same shape as the resolution.

What to get depends on what you primarily use the computer for. A wide display is the only choice for movies cause a normal high display would just be wasted on big black stripes over and under the movie. For games get a normal one that is as big as possible. For work get dual display, two small ones are way better then one big when multitasking.

PS. Remember to look not only at the size but also at the other specs like contrast, brightness, response time and angle.

garba
February 2nd, 2006, 07:03 PM
The screen area on a 19" has the ratio 5/4 just like the resolution 1280x1024. So the aspect ratio of the image is perfectly accurate since the screen area has exactly the same shape as the resolution.


100% sure? anyway, should this be true, think of it the other way round: you'd get a messed up aspect ration when using any resolution other than the dread 1280x1024, most "orthodox" vesa modes sport a 4/3 aspect ratio. Lame.
;)

Kvark
February 2nd, 2006, 09:00 PM
100% sure? anyway, should this be true, think of it the other way round: you'd get a messed up aspect ration when using any resolution other than the dread 1280x1024, most "orthodox" vesa modes sport a 4/3 aspect ratio. Lame.
;)
I'm 100% sure that my 19"er is 5/4 and 90% sure that other 19"ers have the same shape as mine.

Yeah you do have a point there, a 4/3 resolution won't fit well on 19" or a wide display or anything else that isn't 4/3. But the only situation I can think of when there would be nothing else then 4/3 resolutions available is when playing really old games.

Personally I like 5/4 better then 4/3 because height is more important then width when working with text documents, surfing or chatting. And if you have dual display then you have plenty more width then height anyway.

purpleturtle
February 4th, 2006, 07:17 PM
Well I've gone and done it.. I've bought two "cheap" 19"ers..

The UK office supplies chain Staples had an offer on them for 159 for a 19" TFT, made by Gateway, dual analog/dvi input, 16ms response time.. So I bought two :)

I almost went for going for a topclass Viewsonic 17", but they were the best part of 300 .. And I only need it for desktop use anyway, so I thought two cheap 19"es would be better. (The kid in the shop was quite impressed)

I'm pretty pleased so far anyway :) Now I need to work out how to get the dual head thing going... And I need to work out what to do with my old 19" CRT beast...

purpleturtle
February 10th, 2006, 11:23 PM
For the record, wrt regarding setting up the dual head thing.. I spent one evening unsuccessfully hacking my xorg.conf following the GenToo wiki instructions to try and get it working without a great deal of success (I may well have missed something as I was rushing it a bit).. The next evening I read about using the ATI configuration tool fglrxconfig, so a tried that, and it worked a treat :D And I've just backfitted my mouse modifications from my original xorg.conf into the ATI generated xorg.conf.

I'm experimenting between the "dual head" and "big desktop" modes.. It would be nice if I could send a windows from one head to the other.. I'm going to try and find that out now, but if anyone knows off hand if it's possible ...:-k

Mr_J_
February 11th, 2006, 01:09 AM
Are you trying out twinview?
There was a howto on the ubuntu customizations&tweaks forum about that.
I've used it and it works.



Anyone know models of monitors I should look at?
I work with Flash ocasionally, and image editing.
Most is just normal office work with nearly static imagery.
I play the usual mmorpg and the like...

I only started understanding LCDs and TFTs about last month or so...
Are there any specific models I should look at?
Is it worth getting a DVI conection on the LCD?
Is there such a diference between CRTs and LCDs in terms of image editing or flash?
Is it worth purchasing a monitor like SDM-HX95B ? or SDM-HS95DB ?

Sorry to be such a nuisance. The first monitor costs 608 so I'm not buying it until I'm totally sure I'm not spending a stupid amount of money on something I don't really need.

Any recomendations I should go out of my way to find info about? On stores that is...

Since now thanks to all.
Sorry to try to hijack your thread.
Good luck with your new monitors. Are they any good? Specwise...:D

macewan
February 11th, 2006, 01:44 AM
mine is a Benq 19" flatpanel - works fine - worth the money

vayu
February 11th, 2006, 09:29 AM
The single most dramatic computer upgrade I've ever made was a widescreen monitor (Dell 2005 FPW ). It has 1680x1050 resolution. I feel crippled when I use my 17" 1280x1024 now.

Mr_J_
February 11th, 2006, 07:26 PM
I've looked at the few models spoken of... They look vague in the relation to the BenQ, since no model was sent.

The last one mentioned looks great if hard to find where i live.

Thanks for all the help, and please continue.