Final Thoughts

When we first started this analysis, we felt a little confident that the budget monitors in this comparison did not stand much chance against some of the other units among the group. On the contrary, we were very impressed to see the ~$400 units performing better than the more expensive units in our roundup. The low response time of the BenQ P931 played less of a role in our comparisons than we had anticipated, and sacrificing an 8-bit LCD panel for a 6-bit one probably hurt the monitor more than it should have in our comparative report card.

Our Samsung 193P won our hearts in almost every benchmark - colors were great, the design is awesome and we noticed no motion blur. Unfortunately, that amazing performance comes with a $700 price tag - you could almost get two NuTech L921Gs for that price! In fact, the ViewSonic Q190MB and identical twin NuTech L921G performed splendid in today's roundup. The price point is certainly there, and our analysis on the last few pages proved performance just at or slightly below that of the Samsung 193P in applications. For a low cost, no frills 19" solution, NuTech and ViewSonic monitors are hard to beat.

However, don't go away from this article with just the knowledge that the ViewSonic Q190MB and the NuTech L921G are good buys. Recall the steps that we laid out at the beginning of this article on how to buy a good LCD. To sum things up, remember the basics about monitor shopping - don't blindly trust all the specifications on the box and see the unit before you buy it.

Subjective Analysis (continued)
Comments Locked

97 Comments

View All Comments

  • MAME - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    thank god the dell 2001fp is the (2nd) best one here. I got it for $650 a few days ago on a whim. The reviews are kinda mixed but there's a 21 day return policy. Problem is, it's 21 days from the invoice and the expected shipping date would put the LCD in my hands AFTER that time. Thus, I couldn't return it even .1 seconds after receiving it :-/

    Alas, it seems the monitor is a good choice nonetheless and I should have decent product on my hands soon. My eyes can't wait!
  • Peter - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Because that's a barenaked LCD Panel, not a finished product?
  • Azsen - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Hi, why does no-one have any information on this monitor:

    http://www.samsung.com/Products/TFTLCD/Monitors_n_...

    19" 8ms response, 600:1 ratio
  • Peter - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Regarding the aspect ratio: If someone had taken the time to actually MEASURE, they would have found that all those LCD panels that sport a 1280x1024 resolution actually do measure 5:4, thus having correct aspect ratio at that resolution. Moot point, actually.

    (Running a CRT at 1280x1024 is wrongwrongwrong, though.)

    Peter
  • ceefka - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    #4 Jeff7181: LCD's use less power, take up less space (especially from 19" on) and produce less interference and heat. That times 2 if you are working with 2 screens. If a CRT works for you, then fine. It's not so much ignorance as it is choice.
  • KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    D0rkIRL: Thanks for the catch. Fixed.

    bookem dano: We know of the problem and we should have it fixed soon.

    klah: I was only aware of Xbitlabs doing so. We feel that the methods for measuring reponse time thus far are OK, but not represent gray to gray response time measurements well. Its something we are working on and we will probably have a better methodology before the next roundup.

    Kristopher
  • bookem dano - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    For some reason while looking at this article, my cpu was pegged at 100%.

    I tried IE, Net, FIre, all same thing. Quite annoying.
  • carlivar - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    OK so the tips at the beginning say to get a monitor with the correct aspect ratio such as 1280x960 resolution. I agree. Then all of the monitors reviewed (other than the Dell) have 1280x1024, which they specifically warn against.

    I know that most 19" LCDs are 1280x1024 but couldn't they at least have explained why this is?

    And actually, why is this?! I don't understand the popularity of 1280x1024 instead of 1280x960! IT DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE.
  • Googer - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    You will have to pry MY CRT from my cold dead hands before I let an LCD connect to my Graphics Card.
  • klah - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    "The TrTf response time is normally a pretty useless measurement - but it makes for an easy specification in which to market LCDs. "

    Why not provide us with a graphs of response times across the entire spectrum? There are at least 2 sites that do so now: X-bit and Tom's.



Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now