|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>
> Yeah, but LCD monitors usually only go up to 1024x768, or maybe
> 1280x1024 if it's expensive.
All decent 24" Wide-LCD's have native resolution of 1920x1200 (which,
with 60Hz refresh rate, has lower pixel clock than 1600x1200@85hz).
Heck, even all decent 22" Wide-LCD's have native resolution of 1680x1050.
Personally, I'd miss 4:3 -monitor if I was forced out of CRT on my
desktop. LCD's, especially wide ones, take an incredible amount of
desk-space with proper resolutions, when 19" CRT can take 1600x1200 easily.
> It looked impressively sharp though. CRT has the advantage that it works
> properly at *every* resolution, but I think LCD has now reached the
> point where it actually looks sharper. I'm thinking about getting myself
> an LCD at some point. However... having just spent a whole heap of
> money, I guess it won't be any time soon...! o_O
Check the panel type and don't get TN ;).
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethis zbxt net invalid
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |