1600x1200 LCD monitors (other than Dell and Samsung) and eye strain Qs

[btspider]

I'm shopping for a 1600x1200 lcd monitor. I've read numerous topics about Dell and Samsung's models. It sounds like Samsung has a better image, but poorer response time. I'd like to be able to use the monitor I get for games as well.

I'm fairly concerned with my eyes wearing out while playing poker since I work full-time as a software developer.. so I looked around to see if there was something that had the faster response time and a high quality image.

There seem to be a few other models out there such as Viewsonic's and Sceptre's. How do these and some of the other $800-$1000 models compare to the big 2 always discussed here? Is Dell's image noticeably worse than Samsung's? Does Dell's 60-Hz at 1600x1200 cause more eye strain than the models which hit 75-Hz?

I'm not much of a hardware junky and just haven't found too many clear answers after a fair amount of research.

[Rudbaeck]

You really want 75hz over 60hz.

[TylerD]

60 Hz on an LCD screen is fine, on a CRT its a different matter.

[t_perkin]

If you have the space then you can get a sharper image and better refresh from a CRT. Better for your eyes and better for games. It will also cost you about 60% of an LCD equiv.

Alternatively you can do what I am doing now which is typing away on my 8ft projector screen. I don't get 1600x1200 - but you certainly don't have to worry about eye strain [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Tim

[greywolf]

HP2035 20" LCD 1600/1200.

[eric5148]

[ QUOTE ]
Alternatively you can do what I am doing now which is typing away on my 8ft projector screen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude are you serious? That's awesome. What does that cost?

[btspider]

most topics here had said lcd's were better for your eyes than crt's. are crt's better if you get something above 75 hz? i don't have a tremendous amount of desk space available, so if they are just comparable in strain, i'd probably prefer an lcd.

i already have a computer hooked up to my home theater projector (set up at about 110 inches diag right now), but sadly its not good for multi-tabling [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

eric, you can get a decent one for about $1000 - $1200. the high end models are much more though.

[greg nice]

do LCDs even work at 75hz? i thought 60hz was the standard.

for CRTs, you want the highest refresh rate that your monitor can handle.

[Freakin]

I was under the impression that LCDs dont need to refresh. For a CRT, the refresh is the ion gun inside firing away, and it has to refresh the whole screen left to right, top to bottom. A LCD is a different matter, since each pixel is "always on." The only thing that response rate would affect is how quickly a new picture is displayed. AFAIK, the only thing that would cause eyestrain is trying to focus on characters that are too small, and having a display with an insufficient output of light (like cheaper models would have).

Freakin

[BusterStacks]

Not to mention CRTs are shooting radiation into your eyeballs. I have delt with the Samsung up close and personal for extended amounts of time, and honestly the pictures is like 2% better than the Dell. Seriously. I wouldn't take the Samsung even if it were the same price as the Dell, simply because the response time is horrid. Also the replies in this thread are correct, refresh rate is meaningless on an LCD. As far as alternatives to the Dell, you are looking at about twice as much money for an inferior product which doesn't make sense.