sti_boy

I mainly play FPS games. Currently have a 21.3" samsung (213T) which is great for all things expect gaming.

I have two questions:

1) Is there any downside with choosing a WS aspect ratio monitor for gaming? Do the latest FPS games typically support WS resolutions, or are they mainly set-up for 4:3 aspect ratios. For example, Far Cry did not appear to support WS resolutions (I realize this is an older game)

2) Any suggestions for a 20+ inch LCD for gaming? I've been looking at a couple of options:
(a) Expensive - NEC 20WMGX2 20.1" 6ms ($613). Seems like a favourite, but very expensive by today's standards
(b) Affordable - SAMSUNG 205BW Black 20" 6ms

Any other suggestions.

Namrac

Dell E207WFP. Great screen, but without all the bells and whistles that are on its big brother (2007WFP)

__________________
.
.

Mass Effect 2 is the best video gaming experience I've ever had.

.

V-Dub Appreciation Thread | Pictures of Cars/Motorcycles That Make You Smile

Sideburns

all the newer games support widescreen, and it's truly an immersive experience. Go for it.!

Get a Dell 2007WFP, or 2407WFP...those things are nuts.

Or you could probably swing a 20" ACD if you're lookin at that NEC...

Kamakazi

I think all new games support WS, at least I havent seen one that doesnt. As for older games, alot of them I have found don't. Which is why I have my fullscreen monitor.

As for suggestions, I love my BenQ FP202W 20.1" 8ms monitor, not ghosting or anything, and less than $300.

__________________
Video Games Forums Moderator

PSN: Kamakazi010654
XBL: Kamakazi010654
Steam: Kamakazi010654

Stillhouse

Many games(new and old) that don't support WS out of the box can be persuaded to do so with tweaks. http://www.widescreengamingforum.com is a great place to find reviews of games and hardware.

__________________

Friends Don't Let Friends Use PowerDVD

sti_boy

looking at www.widescreengamingforum.com, I see that both the 2007WFP and the 2407WFP have average response times of 16ms (see this link), which "seems" high given that many of the monitors such as the Acer 2423W has an average of 6ms.

Maybe 16ms is ok, I really dont know (I'm speaking in a relative context), but my 25ms Samsung does have ghosting when playing FPS games and I can only imagine that 6 is better than 16 (although I cant speak for the credibility of the spec or where it came from).

sti_boy

actually searching around a bit shows that GtoG the 2407 is 6ms.

BrinNutz

2407 is f'in beautiful!!!! I LOVE IT

__________________
Xbox Live Gamertag : BrinNutz
PS3 Nick: BrinNutz

POW-MIA - Never Forgotten
SSGT Stephen Heitman of Indianapolis, IN. MIA : 13 March 1968
Come home safe my brothers and sisters. When we win.



Admin @ CS:S overclock.nuclearfallout.net

briank

The have the higher response time because they are S-IPS or M-PVA panels with 8-bit color.
WS panels listing 6ms times are most likely TN panels with 6-bit color.
This may be fine if gaming is your primary usage, but just be aware of this tradeoff.

sti_boy

I noticed that in your system specs you quote the version of your 2407. I know that just a couple of months ago there was much talk on forums about issues with the 2407 (and that it was worse than the 2405). I'm assuming that new versions fixed this problem. Is there any way to control getting the "good" version?

Do you game on your monitor?