Dont Buy a 19 inch LCD monitor

According to The Inquirer The LCD industry has totally lost it, and I agree.

Recently I realised that my 5 year old Mitsubishi CRT computer monitor was about to die, so I began researching possible replacements. I realised that replacing it with another CRT monitor would be cheap as LCD’s are taking over as most people’s default choice for computer monitor’s, but in the end the allure of lower power costs and the much smaller size of LCD monitor’s won me over.


The next consideration was whether to purchase a 17inch or 19inch LCD monitor, and this is where I realised that the LCD industry had totally lost it because there was no logical reason to buy a 19inch LCD (given different sized monitors within the same product range for the same brand ie: Philips 17inch vs Philips 19inch not Philips 17inch vs Noname 19inch) because:

  1. Quality 17inch LCD’s have a maximum resolution of 1280 x 1024, same for the 19 LCD’s. So both display the same amount of information (text in a document, characters in a game, pictures on a website etc)
  2. 17inch LCD’s use at least 20% electricity. Lower power bills for you 🙂
  3. 17 inch LCD’s cost much less eg: 25%. More money in your wallet 🙂
  4. 17 inch LCD’s take up less space in height and width on a desk. After all the whole point of moving to LCD technology was that it took up less space.
  5. 17inch LCD’s are a good match for the 1280 x 1024 resolution whereas a 19inch LCD running at 1280 x 1024 looks pixelated and blurry because the same amount of graphical information is spread across a larger area, similar to the useless digital zoom offered in digital cameras

This article was written in 2005 and is now out of date. However I still recommend that you “Dont Buy a 19 inch LCD monitor” get a 20″ inch LCD monitor instead with a detailed 1600×1200 (normal ratio) or 1400×1050 (widescreen) resolution because the cost will be similar to a 19″ with a crappy resolution of 1280×1024

55 thoughts on “Dont Buy a 19 inch LCD monitor”

  1. Not to mention that a 17″ flat panel, has the same effective real-estate as a 19″ CRT monitor – flat, or otherwise. 🙂

  2. Interesting theory but completely flawed. I’m not sure which 19″ LCD you found blurry or pixellated but I have yet to see any – perhaps some of the cheaper models will be.
    If one follows your ideology I should have just got 1600*1200 resolution on my 14″ CRT, I might not have been able to see anything without a microscope but at least I would have saved on power.

  3. Sorry dude, but I completely disagree. 19″ is better cause it’s bigger. If you wanted to say that 17″ is better cause it takes up less room, use a 15″ – same argument.

  4. well zen, obviously u did not even read the post, it is not better because it is bigger, it is worse seeing as the resolution does not change between a 17 and a 19. a 15 does not even reach that res

    read the page next time

    EDITOR: Finally someone with intelligence actually reads the post 🙂

    PS Anyone else who wants to comment can do so whether they agree with me or not. Note that any comments with personal insults or bad language will go straight to the killfile so don’t bother unless you have something constructive to say

  5. I never bought a 19in LCD for a similar reason – though I’m not sure I agree completely… I didn’t buy a 17in for the same reason – simply that 1280×1024 isn’t a high enough resolution for me 😉 But I don’t agree with a 19in being pixelated and blurry – in their native resolution they look fine – at least the ones I’ve tested looked great in 1280×1024.

    However if you play a game at a resolution lower than the screens native resolution – eg 1024×768 on either a 17 or 19in LCD (if your pc and graphics card can’t get a decent frame rate at 1280), then yes the 17in will probably look better as they’ve been around longer, so manufacturers have spent more time on the technology used for down-scaling graphics to lower then nativ res when compared to 19in (though that might just be that it’s easier to see the ugly scaling problems on a larger screen?? – and might have improved a lot since I last checked??)

    But all this is why I ended up going for a 22in CRT capable of a resolution of up to 2048×1536 (though I use it at 1600×1200 normally) and it still looks sharp (with my quadro) and awesome (with no scaling problems etc) at any resolution (eg 1024×768) if I need to use a lower resolution to improve a games performance etc.

    Obviously lack of desk-space is a major drawback for CRTs, but it isn’t a problem for me, otherwise I wouldn’t have gone for a monitor that takes this much room 😉

    Definitely don’t regret sticking to the CRTs (at least for now)… in fact I’m looking at buying a 2nd one since I’m so happy with this one and they’re so cheap 😉

  6. I was looking at a Samsung 17″ – 34 watts max power consumption – until I noticed the 19″ used only four watts more!! This is important to me as I live with a solar power system for all my electricity needs. Also I figured that (with my eyesight) 1280×1024 was going to be much smaller and harder to read on a 17 than a 19. Pixelation is simply not an issue.

  7. hi, I agree with you in principle and that is if you use 1280 x 1024 on both the 17 and 19 inch then why pay more for the same. However you will find that the spacing between the dots is generally larger on the 19 inch so although the resolution is the same, the picture is “bigger” so for those who like slightly larger icons for the same resolution then you would get the 19 inch. If you are happy to have some see some spaces on your nice white backgrounds. If you want “fine” print and a cleaner background then go for the 17 inch.

    As we all know LCD monitors work best in their native mode and if you have to do any scaling by using a resolution other than their native then you run the risk of pixelation and that will vary depending upon the monitor and the programme.

    A good quality CRT will still give you the best picture, they just don’t look modern, so does that mean the geek world is driven by fashion these days? good heavens could never happen 🙂

    But then again VHS wiped out Beta and it was the better technology 😀



  8. Nothing wrong with my 19″. Not blurry and cant even see the pixels. 17″ just too small for me

  9. That sucks. I have a 3 year old Sony laptop with a 14 or so inch screen that does 1600×1200 and looks great.

    I am looking at replacing my 19 inch CRT with a flat panel to reclaim some desk space but looking at the options it just isn’t worth it

    EDITOR: If you have the money and are willing to consider a “cheap and chearful no name” brand, than there are some interesting large screen LCD options eg: according to a recent review by APC Mag:

    With the arrival in Australia last month of Taiwanese LCD manufacturer Chi Mei, price competition on LCDs has never been fiercer.

    Chi Mei’s 221A 22 inch widescreen monitor, distributed in Australia by Protac, has been advertised for as low as $509 (or $539 with DVI).

    It has an impressive 1680×1050 resolution ¦ higher than many HD TVs, and a claimed 5ms response time and 800:1 contrast ratio.
    – excerpt from

    More details can be found at the review

  10. That is interesting.
    I wonder how my aging nVidia TNT2 would look driving that odd resolution and aspect ratio?

    The price is edging towards some of the bigger Dell LCD monitors:

    The 2007FP one is probably what I want and comes with good connectivity options. It is just a little expensive for what I want it for (ie $719 for two or three square feet of extra desktop space!)

    EDITOR: I don’t think your aging nVidia TNT2 would cut it for 2 reasons:

    1. I don’t think it could handle the increased bandwidth and screen resolution

    2. The image on large LCD monitors looks much better when connected to a DVI video card than an old D-sub (analog VGA) video card.

  11. For me, the choice between CRT and LCD is much simpler. With my experience of working as a tech for almost 19 years and supporting around 450 staff users plus many more public user computers, I have this to say about the CRT. Man, they just seem like they keep getting heavier and heavier as I get older and older in this profession…lol The strength of my back, legs and arms isn’t what it used to be…lol Personally, I’m very excited about the idea switching from CRTs to LCDs, for my back’s sake! lol Until LCDs came along, I was beginning to think that being a tech was young man’s career. Thank you, James Fergason… (inventor of the LCD in 1971)

  12. pixel for pixel value I think standard 19″ is better value than 19″ wide screen….OK standard@1280×1024=1310720
    from memory–>widescreen@1440×900=1296000
    (By the way I’ve seen some real top qual’ 19″ monitors that look awesome such as Samsung’s 19″ 931BF or 931C both rock–>my next monitor!!!)
    So given the vast difference and a 19″ wide is basically a 17″ stretched I’d say your worse off with a 19″wide than a standard 17″…some more food for thought!!!! 19″ for gamers and 19″wide screens for nOObs….lol

  13. I really confused – does no one make a 19″ monitor that will do a decent resolution? I’ve seen a few 19″, and i don’t care how ‘nice’ people think they are – it looks wrong to have such a large monitor at such a low resolution…

    EDITOR: You are correct, if you want a lcd monitor larger than 17″ inch with a resolution higher than 1280×1024* than you pretty much have to jump upto a 21″ inch or 22″ inch LCD monitor

    PS I agree with the previous comment that you’re worse off with a 19″ wide than a standard 17″ because the widescreen 19″ monitors only have a 900px vertical resolution

  14. Agreed that 17″ and 19″ LCD have same resolution, so view should be better on 17″ monitor. But practically there seems to be no such blurring or lowering of quality on moving from 17 to 19 inch sized monitor of a decent brand. That settled, there are definately advantages of larger estate.

    As an analogy, even in HDTVs moving to next larger screen size but similar resolution has more people enticing towards the larger size.

  15. Well so far no one hasn’t given me any good reasons why I shouldn’t buy a 19″lcd wide screen. CRT are good but if you sit in front of them all day and part of the night after a while you get eye burn ie-go outside at night with a moon light close one eye then the next and see the difference maybe this also happens to LCDs’ too. I’m yet to experience this.

    I agree that a 19″ LCD ws is a stretched 17″ or less but more data is shown and the resolution could be slightly better. They do take up less space and lighter. Also better in a well lighted area than a CRT. I have compared from 15″ to 22″ LCDs’ PC monitors and found that 19″ especially the 22″ is sharper and clearer, I still don’t believe it but it’s a fact.

    However if they made a CRT the same as a LCD then the CRT wins my vote. To sum this all up it all becomes down to one thing – A personal choice. If there is anyone out there I would like to know their view on a “Viewsonic” LCD wide screen.

    EDITOR: I don’t think anyones arguing about buying an LCD monitor for your computer because they dont make CRT monitors for computers anymore. In the end it is a personal choice as you say. I would go for 17″ or 20″ because I feel that 17″ widescreen and all 19″ LCD’s offer no benefit and others will do the opposite.

  16. I was told as a child that if i sat too near a tv screen it would affect my vision, so i sat further away lol…. i purchased a 19″ lcd screen knowing it had the same resoloution as a 17″ one, but, as i sit futher away than most not to hurt my eyes, the images are excellent lol :o)

  17. I have just found this/your interesting forum.

    I have just said goodbye to an excellent Mitsubishi CRT and purchased a Dell 19″ Ultra sharp. set it to 1280 x 1024, and must say I am not impressed with depth of colour, no where as deep as the old Mitsub. The fine print may or may not be as clear as on the old CRT.

    I am a complete novice so forgive the question – Can I reduce the size of the overall picture on the screen a touch and improve clarity? I hear the $560 LG are good performers in colour saturation and clarity. Comment would be appreciated.

    EDITOR: Some 19″ monitors can use less of the screen at 1280 x 1024 and display a clearer picture, however this would be a bit pointless because if you did that you may as well have bought a 17inch monitor instead.

    PS Using a DVI cable to connect the video card to the LCD and making sure the Windows Display settings are at 32bit and 60hz refresh rate may help improve image quality.

    I am not familiar with the LG range of LCD’s

  18. Wow found this really interesting as im in the market for a new monitor didn’t even know there was 19inch standard and widescreen
    does anyone have any ideas on using a 51cm television as a monitor or is that a bad idea. to dumb to be blonde have no computer knowledge at all

    EDITOR: You have to use a computer monitor with a computer, you can’t use a TV set 🙂

    If you just use the computer for Internet access, email etc than go for a cheap 17 inch computer screen, there’s no point spending a lot of money if you won’t use it for graphics/video editing or lots of video gaming

  19. On the other hand, you can use a PC monitor as a TV, with the right hardware that is, so sell your TV and buy a big monitor and a TV Tuner.

    EDITOR: I got the impression that the person who asked that question was a newbie so I don’t think that’s good advice.

    Using your computer as a Tv with a TV tuner card is more for people like you and me who have lots of hardware / software skills and can deal with all the bugs in TV tuner software

  20. Want to buy a new LCD monitor. Does widescreen make photos or text look squashed? I was told by salespeople that it is possible to change the resolution to prevent this. I am confused.

    EDITOR: There is little point in most ordinary people buying a widescreen LCD monitor unless you intend to use it mainly for watching 16:9 Digital TV or DVD’s.

    For normal internet/work use a standard square shaped LCD monitor is better and you’ll have a lot more choice of different models and prices

  21. I am seeking advice on what would be the best 19″ lcd monitor to purchase.
    the main use would be viewing reports etc ie Commsec, general items and also for editing photos plus digital movies.

    can you make a suggestion.

    EDITOR: as the title of this article suggests, I recommend 17inch LCD monitors or if you can afford a bigger one than 20″/21″ inch LCD monitors

    Whichever one you do decide to buy make sure you use my list of price comparison search engines for computer parts so that you get the best possible price

  22. Whew……..more threads than a persian silk rug…….but very informative as my Samsung high grade 17″ LCD screen has just gone all pink lines!!! So looks like in the market for a new screen. Was favouring WS models, but it seems as if std 17″ might do the job……and the prices are encouraging, with the Samsung range in the high$200 – $400 range. Thanks for the information

    EDITOR: no worries, glad I could help

    Make sure you use my list of price comparison search engines for computer parts so that you get the best possible price

  23. In response to eltotoX.
    You can actually use some televisiond as computer monitors, we have two tvs and one of them has a port to plug your pc into, so when my monitor stuffed up and was getting repaired (on warranty) I just used that. Mind you the pic quality wasn’t as good.


    EDITOR: yes the picture quality would be terrible as TV’s are much lower resolution than computer monitors. That’s why you should get a Computer monitor for a computer and a TV to watch TV, both do the main job they are designed to do best.

  24. Mate, I don;t know where you’re coming from, but to some people, size matters. Especially when watching movies, and playing games. I naturally prefer CRT monitors because they have faster refresh rate/no ghosting, and they’re cheaper, but please stop giving a bad name to LCD’s

    EDITOR: Please read more carefully. I like LCD’s (I have one myself). What I don’t like is 19inch LCD’s. I have no problems with LCD’s as long as a larger size comes with a larger native resolution eg: most LCD’s 17inch or smaller and 20inch or larger

  25. I’ve been after a 19″ LCD monitor, but all the ones i look at, they are much darker at the top of the screen than the bottom. so see what i mean, open paint and fill your screen with the mid brown, and compare what it looks like at the very top, to what it looks like at the very bottom. on all the ones i looked at, the colour varied from dark brown to pale brown. As a professional illustrator that’s just not acceptable!

    So I’m on the hunt to find a monitor that has EVEN lighting and colour throughout the whole screen I’m desperate! ANYONE who knows of any good suggestions, please help me!!

    EDITOR: that’s a tough problem because by their nature LCD monitors do not reproduce colours as well as CRT monitors can.

    In my opinion any graphics professional used to using CRT’s with dot pitches between 0.22-0.24 will find most LCD’s way too pixellated for serious use and will also have problems with brightness and matching colour profiles

    The best you can do is to check the detailed specifications for each LCD monitor you see at computer stores and make sure:

    * It uses a DVI (digital) connection. You also need a quality video card on your computer with a DVI connection.

    * It has the lowest dot pitch possible

    * It has at least one year no dead and bright pixel warranty (preferably 3 year)

    * That the colour depth is 8bit. According to

    Most manufacturers do not list the color depth of their display. Even fewer will list the actual per-color depth. If the manufacturer lists the color as 16.7 million colors, it should be assumed that the display is 8-bit per-color. If the colors are listed as being 16.2 million or 16 million, consumers should assume that it uses a 6-bit per-color depth. If no color depth is listed, it should be assumed that monitors of 12ms or faster will be 6-bit and the 20ms and slower panels are 8-bit.

    * You don’t get tricked by the salesperson into buying a “fast refresh” monitor because these typically have a lower colour depth.

  26. I purchased two samsung 931c online (big mistake). One is still working the other lasted just two weeks and died. After some to-and- fro with the online shop and samsung (and some weeks wait) we received a class A replacement, this one was dead out of the box !!!

    After more delay and bulk phone calls samsung sent me a Class C (refurb) When we questioned this (as we were promised a new unit) it took some weeks and then samsung said send us your receipt and we will refund your money (put in the too-hard basket??) very poor service and customer relations.

    The monitor that is still working is giving very poor performance and I will be getting a refund on the repack and buying a 17″ in a brand that has service and quality, and it won’t be purchased online !!!! So beware of what you buy and from whom.

  27. Personally, I much prefer the extra 2″ over a slightly higher pixel density.

    “it is not better because it is bigger, it is worse seeing as the resolution does not change between a 17 and a 19.”
    It is entirely a matter of personal preference. As Rob pointed out (post #2), there’s no point in having a higher pixel-density if that makes everything harder to see.

    “a 15 does not even reach that res”
    That is misinformation. The $100 laptop project has a 7.5″ (that’s 7 and a half inches!!) LCD that runs at 1200×900. If 7.5″ can do that res, 15″ at 1600×1200 is surely possible.

    “17inch LCD’s use at least 20% electricity.”
    Err… what? 20% of what? 20% less than 19″ LCDs? According to the manual for my 19″ LCD, the 17″ model is 48W, and the 19″ model is 48W. 48-48=0. 😛

    The price difference between 17″ and 19″ can be as small as $60. The extra 2″ is worth at least that much to me, especially considering an extra 7 inches would cost around $800 (17″ -> 24″).

    True, a 17″ LCD would take up less space on (or *over*) my desk, but what else would go in that space? To say “the whole point of moving to LCD technology was that it took up less space” is far from the truth. There are other (more important for some people) reasons to use LCDs, such as lower power consumption and heat, no flicker, and lower weight. Anyway, in my opinion, the depth (frontback) of CRTs is much more of a problem than the width or height.

    Have you actually used a 19″ LCD? 19″ LCDs are certainly NOT blurrier than 17″ LCDs. I don’t see how either could be blurry in their native resolution. I use a 19″ LCD and 17″ LCDs and CRTs (different PCs), and I must say pixelation is no more a problem for the 19″ than the others.

    Contrary to what someone said earlier, you *can* use a TV set on a computer. While your standard TV image quality is too low for general use, low-quality video often looks better on a TV than a high-resolution computer monitor.

    “If the colors are listed as being 16.2 million or 16 million, consumers should assume that it uses a 6-bit per-color depth.”

    That makes 0c to me. If it were 6-bit per colour, that would be 262,144 colours (2^18). At any rate, my monitor is quoted as having “16.2 million”, and it looks no worse than any other LCD I’ve used.

  28. Arrg … just came over to this site and now I’m even more second guessing my decisions to move over to a 19″ LCD.

    My 17″ CRT works fine, but I’d like more desk room and less eye strain as I’m a Comp Eng student so will be sitting in front of screens a lot.

    I narrowed my 19″ searches down here:

    Any thoughts would be great, and I wouldn’t mind considering a 17″ equivalent or better LCD at that price range ($270 – $350). Suggestions for other LCDs very much welcomed.

    Oh I wish I had that HannsG HW192D model though 🙂

    Cheers and keep up the awesome work.

    EDITOR: With that budget I’d suggest having a look at the prices the 20″ widescreen ChiMei T39D is selling for on StaticIce

    So for a just a little more money than the 19inch or 17inch you get a resolution of 1400 x 1050 instead of 1280×1024. Check out the specs for the ChiMei T39D and see what you think

  29. Thanks for the tip on the T39D. If you compare these two:

    Which one would be best for gaming (CS:S), watching vids and work? The 20″ one seems to be sacrificing a bit everywhere (response, dot pitch, contrast) for a wider screen.

    If the 20″ one is good for all my needs, then I’ll definitely get it; but still undecided between the two.

    I also like the idea of supporting the CMV company for bringing the LCD competition here in Aus, where it was very much needed. Kudos to them, and I’ll probably forget about getting the other brands.

    So it’s a toss up now between the 946D and the T39D; any last words before making the decision for my situation?

    P.S. Still trying to find a decent spec 17/19″ LCD with 16.7M colours somewhere…

  30. Just to let you all know, I decided to go for the Benq FP202W 20″ model for a little over $350. It looks decent enough, and has 16.7M colours 🙂

    EDITOR: Good choice, when i bought my 17″ lcd 2 years ago I made sure it had 16.7M colour capability just like you did

  31. I’m just leaving a reply to agree with everyone who completely tore this article apart.

    1. The 19″ is bigger.
    2. You seriously actually caring about the power consumption of an LCD?
    3. Of course, bigger costs more. This is the closest thing you have to a valid point.
    4. The size issue is usually depth. Anyone who has a reason for/wants the bigger size of 19 vs 17 is not going to mind the 2 inches of lost real estate.

    WAY OFF. By now you probably know this. If not, you are #CENSORED BY EDITOR#

    My reason for replying is that I noticed this was last modified in 2007… Why have you not taken this down!? I just hope that anyone who reads this article has the brains to either read the comments, or just not believe you. It’s simple, you pay more for more size.

    Two great reasons for getting a 19″:

    1. The size does make a difference in games and movies. It makes it a more enjoyable experience, simple as that.
    2. A 19″ is less strain on the eyes, especially for those who have anything less than perfect eyesight.

    This comment has 2 problems:

    1. Foul language is not allowed, you can disagree with me but if you want to argue or start a flame war keep your language clean

    2. The logic (flawed as it is) is typical of a computer/gadget enthusiast because it works like this:

    * Bigger is always better (in this case the physical screen is bigger but the resolution is the same so that argument fails),

    * Faster is always better and the latest product is always better (even if it costs lots more than existing products)

    * The cheapest no name “yum cha” chinese brand is always better even if insiders in the computer industry know that that brand has a high failure rate and poor warranty.

    As always I end my comment saying if 17inch is too small for you than get a 20inch monitor or bigger which actually has an increased resolution to match the increased physical size

  32. I am currently using a 19″ LCD monitor (BenQ FP937s) which cost me $349 compared to the 17″ model which (at the time of purchase) would have cost $330! 349-330 = $19!

    For the time being, I have the monitor plugged into my older computer, whose GeForce2 graphics card can only display up to 1280 x 1024. However, on my other computer, with a ATI Radeon X300SE PCI-express graphics, I can display 1600 x 1200 and beyond (but I am comfortable with 1600 x 1200). The maximum resolution of the monitor cannot be passed, but if the graphics card cannot handle such high resolutions, it is a waste. Did you consider your graphics card when you stated that the maximum resolution of the 17″ and 19″ is the same? Look at the native resolution instead, you should find that it is higher.

    Basically, IMHO, I believe that if you are going to go for the larger screen, only do so if you are willing to go for a graphics card that will utilise the screen’s maximum potential, especially for games. This will probably be more expensive, but it is worth the money. There is no point in a larger screen if you cannot use its maximum/native resolution, or games will not reach a reasonable FPS at that resolution on your graphics card.

  33. I’m on a mac mini. My 17 inch crt keeps losing its red -off and on. I’m thinking of getting a 19 inch LCD but having read this thread i’m confused. I’ve been running my monitor at 832 x 624 and like the appearance. What can i expect from an LCD upgrade? Will everything look weird? Also, what will and won’t plug into my mac mini?

    Help would be appreciated. I’m not stupid, just out of my tech depth.

    EDITOR: Andrew

    Judging by the current low resolution you’re running your 17 inch CRT, a 19 inch running at 1280×1024 would probably be appropriate for you

    As for what would will and won’t plug into your Mac mini I have no idea as I only use PCs. I would call your local Apple shop and I’m sure they’ll be happy to give you advice.

  34. I have tried both CRT’s and LCD’s and widescreen and regular screen and run The MX2 card (old school now). Here’s my story, I find a “run-of-the-mill” CRT gives a sharper picture, esp. text, than all of the LCD’s but the very high end ones. A 19″ WS LCD looks and feels like a stretched 17″. Therefore a regular 17″ will work for most people. The WS also does have distortion, outside CD’s and videos.

    There is so little difference between MS and Contrast Ratios below 5 and 500, it is extremely difficult to see and most of this often can’t be seen. I have an LG 19″ reg. screen with 2ms and 3000 CR..brand new. I defy anyone to show me the difference between 4 ms, 500 CR. I do notice it is just about as sharp as a former Samsung 17″ CRT. Whether it is worth the money or not…mmm?

    There are only a few real manufacturers and almost everything is coming out of China now..same factories, different name sort of thing. Look for something made in Japan, try it out, try it out, try it out. Go to a buddies place or back and forth to the store. Take it back right away if it is not perfect. It is you that will be staring at it and your eyes will suffer if it is too wrong.
    I agree that nobody really needs more than a 17 incher for general computer work. These things seem to even have variations within the same model and place of manufacture. Don’t buy it unless you’ve worked with it. There is good and bad in all of them.

    The 19″ monitor does feel a bit much on the desk in your face..that is a truism.

  35. hi editor,

    good points on lcd 19″ WS issues. obviously there was a mismatch of chipset manufacturers that set the standard and the producers of lcd. WS 1440×900 feature is a big issue in many ways. I like WS but if the chipset does not supports the lcd for clear and good quality of display then what is the point of WS 19″. Clearly, last few years of lcd price war created the problem as always happen during the trasition period in technology versus economy.

    best regard

  36. Jeepers some people get hot under the collar. As an old f**t and seen many changes since before PC existed. I it unfortunate that people become some obsessed with things that cannot kill you. I have found it best to wait for the following generation.

    I do have some problems with LCD resolution and even the best struggle to compete with older CRT screens but these are becoming dinosaurs and will be sad to see the end of my trinitron based screens in the years to come however the newer high res screens are not bad provided you observe the native resolution of the screen.

    If you are not aware there is a setting in Windows display properties named Clear Type and this is intended for use with LCD screens and it certainly improves text where smaller print usually exhibits the dreaded pixelation. Tweak Pro has a more gradual variation that seems to offer a range of setting and you select the one that works best on your screen.

    As a bye the bye if you are after TRUE multimedia performance including TV (Australian 50Hz including digital) then check the specs very carefully many are geared towards the US market and many do not handle below 60hz vertical and therefore useless for some purposes. Check the spec and some do handle the lower vertical rate. Again resolution can beome an issue for multimedia work. You may not be able to check final video for release for public display in countires using 50hz vertical rates.

    I am waiting to see what the SED technology is like hopefully a genuine advance

  37. Right on about the “native resolution”. I learned the “hard way” that this is one of the cardinal rules of configuration and operation of an LCD panel. Check the specs and the box for this number and make sure your graphics card will support that. Then start with the default settings from the monitor’s menu. Use “Clear type” as suggested and then “fine tune” always remembering where you were in case something changes to the detriment.

    When I set this new LG 1933 to work for me, I had to check the settings for the graphics card very carefully and eventually found one that was giving me some problem (memory allocation). This monitor did not run smoothly outside of 1280×1024 either. Once I finally got it right, it really performed with stunning video. I am typing this using that resolution and can see the type very clearly. Comment from John in Nova Scotia. “An old guy that is learning new tricks” Today, technology is advancing so swiftly that you either “drive or get off the road”. so to speak. They honk their horns at me a bit, but I’m in there for the ride…

  38. I’ve used a 19inch LCD monitor for over a year now; I’ve done it all, played high performance games, watch movies, etc, and I have to say.. absolutely nothing wrong with a 19 inch monitor. You should probably update your article now that 19inches have been around for quite awhile now; thus their prices have dropped dramatically. That part of your argument should probably be taken out.

    As for performance, say, in a game.. it’s pretty much the same as a 17inch but bigger, i.e easier to see some things. Movies are also much more enjoyable on the 19inch compared to 17inch.

    While you list all your views on negatives to a 19inch, you list none of the positives to them. I’d never go back to a 17inch LCD after using a 19inch.

  39. Forget all the stupid comments above. Go with the biggest you can afford. You’ll be glad later. Even if you’re as dense as Iridium or Mercury, you’ll see the difference. What the heck are you doing that requires absolute maximum resolution? Trying to compensate for something you lack, is the truth of it all. Couldn’t afford 15 more bucks and so you’d like to complain about it? Hahaha, SIT ON IT!

  40. Ok…So, there you go. If your graphics card will support it, get the biggest monitor you can. If you like a seventeen incher, then get one of those (before they are scarce). Obviously, there is no argument anymore, for or against. Get a big one if you like ’em that way.

    Also, be careful what you say in the public domain..Old guys like me learned a long time ago that when you are buying something, whether it be cars or motherboards, there is nothing to compare with the safety of considering the experience of is golden. Another is that when you make a comment or a movement in the public domain and it strikes a chord, duck! Because, you’re gonna get fired upon…. Like a Moose stepping out on the highway during hunting season OR some world figure that suddenly thinks it all should be “this way or that way”…”buy your pants to fit yer own butt I say!

    P.S. try that Samsung 940BW 19″….one hell of a monitor for the price! P.P.S. I tried a Samsung 931 BF…Some hard to get that bugger focused and showing the right colors..the 940 fn is another good one as are the 931c and b. There is a new 906 I was playing around with the other day…2000 dynamic contrast and 2 ms…wide, new…a helluva piece of gear for a great price..check that one out me hardys.

  41. I don’t know why anyone would complain about a 19 inch widescreen LCD having a resolution of 1440 x 900. Even if a 17 inch monitor has 1024 vertical pixels (or whatever), it’s still not the 1080 pixels required for full HD. I have an LG 19 inch widescreen, and I’ve never thought to myself: “…if only I had a 124 extra pixels, my life would be complete”. Basic HD requires a minimum of 720 pixels; so anything between that and 1080 is irrelevant.

    A widescreen looks damn good, particularly if you’re into video editing (like myself). With it, you can take advantage of the extra width – which saves me from buying two monitors. And when you play back something in widescreen format (16:9), the overall image is much larger (and no less detailed) than what you’d get on a “letterboxed” (4:3) 17 inch.

    I have no regrets regarding my purchase – except the fact that the price of the monitor dropped 100 bucks in just three months!

  42. One consideraion on monitor size is the eyesight of the viewer. I have a problem which means that I need the biggest possible image with little worry about the resolution (within reason). With the usual arrangement of my workstation 19 inch monitors seem to be the best solution, whether LCD or CRT, but I do appreciate the smaller volume of the flat screen.

  43. Hi, newbie here
    I’m about to start work from home and a requirement of the company is that I have a screen resolution of at least 1024 x 768. that’s hopeless on my current 15″ so was looking to buy a 19″.
    Having read through all these comments I’m wondering…would a 17″ suffice?
    Thanks in advance for any advice.

    EDITOR: if you’re working from home the bigger the LCD the better so you can open more docs side by side. Look at 20″/21″/22″ if you can afford it

    Otherwise if going for 17″ saves you a bit of money over a 19″ than go for it.

  44. CRT rules! I also have CRT monitor and you are right that is is much better than LCD monitors. You never have to spend more money for something that you can have for less.

  45. I respect your comments, but I deal with older folk who need screen size not just resolution. The fact that the 19″ monitor has larger pixels (given the same resolution) helps them to see things more easily. So a 19″ monitor is actually a good thing compared to even a 22″ screen with 1680 x 1050 res. Horses for courses.

    EDITOR: that sounds like perfectly reasonable logic, “older” eyes may well appreciate the larger size of text etc on the screen

  46. Considering the Samsung 204B 20.1 incher.
    1600×1200 max res, mmm…..
    price tag at isn’t too harsh either, sitting on around $400 atm.
    Have yourself a look anyone, and any feedback from owners appreciated.
    Also considering the widescreen Samsung 205BW and 206BW, widescreen power with 16.7m colours, and even less price tag than the 204B.

  47. The idea that a 19″ looks worse at the same resolution as a 17″ LCD is ludicrous. I’ve been on a 19″ Samsung Syncmaster 913B for a couple of years now and the thing is crisp, clear and sexy. 1280 x 1024 is its native resolution, so if you’re misleading people by saying the ‘graphical imformation is spread across’. It’s displaying at the exact resolution it’s meant to. If y ou’ve had a blurry 19″ LCD, you’ve either purchased something cheap and or incorrectly configured it.

  48. Just a person who likes to see great colour not over the top like most HDR’s. I make 70% of my photos 1280×1024 and need a second screen for ease of work…I am no tech head but have never been happy with my pictures seen on expensive locally purchased 19″ screens… Dont care about a little power or space as I live on 102,000 acres but do want to be happy with the product….The dollar is up the screens are cheap any hints for me from the brains trust….I was looking at a Philips 170 ???

    Need some advice as no one in this country town to ask…

    EDITOR: I’d suggest Asking for advice at somewhere like Whirlpool Forums – PC hardware section and OCAU Forums – Video cards and monitors section (Note: you have to join OCAU to ask a question)

  49. i have got a plazma tv and connected it to my computer, i love the high def pics i get its awrsome, also the moies i watch over the net are starting to get HD so plazmas are a good choice, they are a bit more expensive if u want a huge one like mine, but they double as a tv so get a wireless keybored and mouse and im set:)

  50. dude u have it all wrong, i have a CMV 19″ LCD, and i have never noticed any pixelation or blurry image, btw most if not all 19″ LCDs now available have a native resoultion of 1440:900, unless u have been looking at some ultracheap generic models, which shouldn’t be touched with a 10 foot pole. BIGGER is better, screw power consumption and the environment. i recently purchased a 28″ Viewsonic LCD with a native resoultion of 1920:1200 and it is amazing, awsome for gaming, movies….. just about anything, once u go bigscreen u never want 2 go back, i feel 4 people who still use 17″ monitors, i know CRT has better image quality, and viewing angles etc.. but until they make a 28″ thats under $1k and 50KG i’ll stick with my current purchase.

  51. Ok, so I’ve only just discovered the same problem. 19″ monitor led me to assume I would get a higher resolution than 17″. Wanted a bit more screen real estate at work so requested a 19″ through the request system. When it arrived I blasted the IT department for getting me one with such a low resolution. Have since had to apologize at it seems that ALL 19″ LCDs have a low resolution.

    I’ve got the 19″ now, and i’ll keep it as its a bit nicer than the 17″ I had. However if i can score a couple of 17″ LCDs I’ll happily get rid of the 19″ and run dual screen. Can’t run dual with two 19″ as it would take up too much space. Get a heck of a lot more screen real estate without unneccessary bulk.

    I see there are a lot of people that like bigger is better, but I like a crisp image in the most efficient space so 19″ has really led me on and let me down.

    EDITOR: Finally someone with common sense makes a comment 🙂

  52. Let’s look at the current market. 17″ lcds are getting harder and harder to find, and in general buyers prefer a larger, easier to read screen. I think it is about time this outdated article is edited or removed.

    1. Quality 17inch LCD’s have a maximum resolution of 1280 x 1024, same for the 19 LCD’s. So both display the same amount of information (text in a document, characters in a game, pictures on a website etc)

    -The further you are away from the screen, the less detail your eyes can make out, but by going to a bigger screen you make it easier for your eyes to see the information in the picture.

    2. 17inch LCD’s use at least 20% electricity. Lower power bills for you

    -Great, but you’re talking about an insignificant difference each power bill. If you worry about this stuff, then you should also buy a slower processor (generally they use less electricity).

    3. 17 inch LCD’s cost much less eg: 25%. More money in your wallet

    -These days the difference in price sits around the 10% mark, if you can find a 17″ LCD. There are many more places only selling 19″ LCDs or bigger, meaning that when you find a 17″ LCD it usually costs more than the 19″ LCDs in most stores.

    4. 17 inch LCD’s take up less space in height and width on a desk. After all the whole point of moving to LCD technology was that it took up less space.

    -Great, but that would imply that we should use even smaller screens, like 15″.

    5.17inch LCD’s are a good match for the 1280 x 1024 resolution whereas a 19inch LCD running at 1280 x 1024 looks pixelated and blurry because the same amount of graphical information is spread across a larger area, similar to the useless digital zoom offered in digital cameras

    -This just elaborates on point 1, but i’m yet to see a blurry or pixelated 19″ LCD running at a native resolution of 1280×1024.

  53. Well i bought some polyview moniters 2 yrs ago and use them for gaming and they are fantastic ,no blurring ,excellent colour /sharpness and no trouble ,everyone comments at how clear it is .

Comments are closed.