Hey guys,
Can someone tell me what the best 4:3 LCD PC monitor would be for the above uses?
I want one that has the 4 screws on the back so I can rotate either way. The resolution should be fitting for an XRGB2. Would prefer 5ms update.
Thanks,
Richie.
PC monitor for XRGB2 and MAME
-
neorichieb1971
- Posts: 7885
- Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
- Location: Bedford, UK
- Contact:
PC monitor for XRGB2 and MAME
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
-
PC Engine Fan X!
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 10:32 pm
To be honest, using an LCD monitor with an XRGB-2 looks like shit...it's advisable to use an analog CRT-based PC monitor with it. But if you don't have one and only have an LCD-based one, it's understandable... ^_~
Until the day arrives that such an 29" presented in 4:3 format LCD monitor comes out to replace those aging 29" CRT-based arcade monitors worldwide, it's very likely that situation will not ever happen in our lifetime. But it would be nice, wouldn't it? ^_~
A refresh rate of 2ms or less would be even better, don't you think?
PC Engine Fan X! ^_~
Until the day arrives that such an 29" presented in 4:3 format LCD monitor comes out to replace those aging 29" CRT-based arcade monitors worldwide, it's very likely that situation will not ever happen in our lifetime. But it would be nice, wouldn't it? ^_~
A refresh rate of 2ms or less would be even better, don't you think?
PC Engine Fan X! ^_~
Taking aside the fact that CRTs do indeed look better for a moment:
When buying a LCD today forget about the response time, instead make sure that there's no input lag. You will most definitely always prefer a LCD monitor with a 16ms panel response time and no input lag compared to a 2ms panel with an added 40ms of general input lag.
I'm using two NEC LCD2180 monitors (1600x1200 at 21.3") and have thought about replacing them with two 26" 16:10 monitors, but I really can't find any good ones without massive minimum 2-frames input lag.
In theory my NEC LCDs have a response time of 30ms or so, but I really like the picture. Mame looks stunning (see pic) as do consoles using a upscaler via VGA (HD Box Pro or something better) and they are at least lag free.
When buying a LCD today forget about the response time, instead make sure that there's no input lag. You will most definitely always prefer a LCD monitor with a 16ms panel response time and no input lag compared to a 2ms panel with an added 40ms of general input lag.
I'm using two NEC LCD2180 monitors (1600x1200 at 21.3") and have thought about replacing them with two 26" 16:10 monitors, but I really can't find any good ones without massive minimum 2-frames input lag.
In theory my NEC LCDs have a response time of 30ms or so, but I really like the picture. Mame looks stunning (see pic) as do consoles using a upscaler via VGA (HD Box Pro or something better) and they are at least lag free.
I have a SyncMaster 204B, and I got it with tate in mind.
It's a pretty good monitor with no input lag and a thin border around the frame. On the downside, there is a slight issue with the viewing angle; viewing the monitor from above (or from the right, when you've given it a quarter turn clockwise), even when playing a game like Devastators in MAME.
In theory it works nicely. Shmups and other low-res games perform better than do FPS titles running at the monitor's native resolution, as that input lag Fudoh dismisses disrupts contrast in images just like you'll see when playing Circle of the Moon on a DS Lite (or its predecessors).
To be quite frank, I've given up turning it sideways and I couldn't be happier - I'm close enough to the screen that turning it sideways tends to lose the action when it's that large. A boxed vertical shooter playing in MAME has all the resolution and space it needs for my liking.
I think I've read that going to LCD backlit screens will partially eliminate some of the oddities of the modern LCD screen, including the color reversal when you view the screen outside its viewing angle (I think this is a result of the polarization used to keep the illumination roughly even across the screen). They'll also give off better light, more of it, and increase the lifespan of the display...good stuff, although it's taking its time getting into consumer-range sets. Should be affordable within a year or two for desktop displays, I think. It's already been used in a few laptops.
It's a pretty good monitor with no input lag and a thin border around the frame. On the downside, there is a slight issue with the viewing angle; viewing the monitor from above (or from the right, when you've given it a quarter turn clockwise), even when playing a game like Devastators in MAME.
In theory it works nicely. Shmups and other low-res games perform better than do FPS titles running at the monitor's native resolution, as that input lag Fudoh dismisses disrupts contrast in images just like you'll see when playing Circle of the Moon on a DS Lite (or its predecessors).
To be quite frank, I've given up turning it sideways and I couldn't be happier - I'm close enough to the screen that turning it sideways tends to lose the action when it's that large. A boxed vertical shooter playing in MAME has all the resolution and space it needs for my liking.
I think I've read that going to LCD backlit screens will partially eliminate some of the oddities of the modern LCD screen, including the color reversal when you view the screen outside its viewing angle (I think this is a result of the polarization used to keep the illumination roughly even across the screen). They'll also give off better light, more of it, and increase the lifespan of the display...good stuff, although it's taking its time getting into consumer-range sets. Should be affordable within a year or two for desktop displays, I think. It's already been used in a few laptops.
Says the guy using a three-year-old panelFudoh wrote:Taking aside the fact that CRTs do indeed look better for a moment:
Do both. Input lag is easy enough to find, but response time will kill your picture quick.When buying a LCD today forget about the response time, instead make sure that there's no input lag.
The 40ms panel with lag might be tuned for image calibration professionals and other editing tasks (although even they will be driven up the wall by the lag, and besides, the sort of adjustments that cause input lag will likely not sit well with image pros).You will most definitely always prefer a LCD monitor with a 16ms panel response time and no input lag compared to a 2ms panel with an added 40ms of general input lag.
That's pretty terrible, on paper at least. We'd have to compare units side-by-side to see which is better.In theory my NEC LCDs have a response time of 30ms or so, but I really like the picture.
absolutely right, but it's no issue for me. My 6 months old Sony XBR5 in 52" has definitely bigger problems (lags, trails, motion blur) as those NEC LCDs.That's pretty terrible, on paper at least.
There are probably many aspects which lead to a "good" picture.
As for finding good lag-free monitors: try finding a MVA or PVA 26"+ panel without any lag - nearly impossible. And one definitely can't switch from a PVA panel to a cheap TN panel (which are easily available without input lag).