[psychogentoo]

I was unable to find the specs for the 345m on the ATi website...I found something about the 340 so I assume that the 345 also has the Radeon core. Assuming that I don't think it'll have much issues driving an external monitor. You should consult your manual for your laptop to verify the spec and limitations of the chipset.

What happened when you hooked up your laptop to your friends samsung? Were you happy with the image quality and the response time? Did it give the resolution you wanted using your integrated graphics proc?

If you want to know the specifics about certain monitors, you should start reading some comprehensive reviews. anandtech.com and tomshardware.com is a good place to start. Based on everyones posts, I think you have a good idea on what to do about adding the TV functionality to the LCD/CRT monitors.

 

[Judge Crandall]

Quote:

Originally Posted by psychogentoo What happened when you hooked up your laptop to your friends samsung? Were you happy with the image quality and the response time? Did it give the resolution you wanted using your integrated graphics proc?

I just thought of doing that earlier today. It looked great and I was able to set it to maximum resolution with no troubles. I think I'll probably end up getting this, along with an external TV tuner like the ones you suggested. Either that or I'll just get a separate tv, which would probably be cheaper and less of a hassle. Thanks to everyone for all the great advice.

 

[dSquared]

I just went through the same process, and ended up cycling through four tvs to finally end up with the (i hope) final one, a 26" LCD HDTV. (For the size you specificed, basically all you are going to find are going to be 26", 30", 32", and on up from there. The price does follows an exponential curve as you go up the scale.)

The main two factors I have dealt with is resolution, and the DVI with HDCP.

1. Resolution (and screen)
a. Make sure you get something at least 1280x768 (e.g. the 22" Samsung, which is a really nice tv, is 1280x720, meaning as a computer monitor, it only can be run at 800x600 max).
b. Pretty much all the lcd tvs that are primarily designed as a tv, have, for a lack of a better term, bezel overhang. What I mean is the edge of your desktop will extend "into" the bezel of the tv (with three tvs I've tried, it's about the width of the taskbar at the top of your window). This is not the case of a primarily computer monitor that happens to have a tv tuner: e.g. the Dell LCD tvs.

2. Check to see if the DVI connection is HDCP (copy protected) enabled. If it is, theorectically, it's incompatible with a standard computer DVI. However, my tv (JVC) does have the HDCP DVI, but it runs off of my Powerbook (The only thing I have to do is wait a couple of seconds for it to adjust: it does this wierd 1950s-ish scroll/flicker thing for a minute, and then it works).

My suggestion is consider what you are going to be using it more for: computer use or tv/movie watching.

If you're mostly going to be using it as a computer monitor:
1. Less expensive: Dell 26" LCD TV (I tried the 19", and it was fine, but too small for me). If going this route, look for coupons, etc from techbargains.com, and check the dell site often. I've seen the 26" list for ~$1200, but currently it's going for ~$1400.
2. A little more expensive, but much better as a computer monitor: hp 2304 (it's significantly less than the practically identical consumer version) and a HDTV receiver of some sort. This, however, is a 23" monitor.

If you're mostly going to do tv watching with some light duty computer monitor (this was the case for me), you have an advantage in that you can go to your local big box retailer and actually see the sizes. However, don't count on actually being able to judge picture quality on any of them because the feeds are usually craptastic, and the tvs aren't properly calibrated.

For me, I ended up going through best buy. However, I would suggest checking prices at bhphotovideo.com before buying a a B&M store. I noticed B&H usually has quite competitive prices, even when you count shipping--though not as competitive as having a buddy working at Best Buy.

For a 26" LCD HDTV, you're looking at approximately $1900-ish street.

HOWEVER, if you have a costco membership, I saw a 30" Sharp AQUOS for $1999 at Christmas, when I was home visiting my parents. The costco versions are usually decontented a bit (i.e. fewer connections: usu. something like 1 Digital, 1 component, and a few RCA), but that's a great deal (e.g. at the time, Best Buy was selling the 32" AQUOS for $3100). Moral of the story: shop around.

There's also another issue, if you wait until July 1st, all tvs will have some sort of HDTV (ATSC) receiver. The downside with that is it will also have some sort of copy protection built in, which the current boxes generally don't have. Another issue is that if you watch a lot of cable, you're going to want to be using the cable company's hardware anyway, which may range from a DVR-receiver combo to a cablecard.

(If you're wondering, my TV is a JVC 26WX84, which has now been replaced by the 26X575. The picture is nicely detailed, though the tv tends push the reds and greens, but I fixed that with some color calibration tests.)

 

[Judge Crandall]

Just wondering what you guys thought about this. I was originally going to get the Samsung 213T 21.3" Syncmaster LCD monitor from Newegg for $855 including shippung, but then I found it at Dell for around $750. Original price was $940, but after 10% off offer from Dell and a $100 manufacturer's rebate from Samsung, plus free shipping, it ends up at about $750. Is this a good deal? It seems like it, but I know Dell has a lot of rebates and what not all the time, so maybe if I wait a bit longer, I can get a better deal?

 

[Elec]

If you poke around Dell's website, you'll be able to find their own 2001fp right now for $600. It's a 20.1" as opposed to the 21" Samsung, so you'd be giving up almost an inch but the resolution is the same (1600x1200). Both are rated at 250cd/m^2 although the Dell's contrast ratio is listed at 400:1 while the Samsung is 500:1. I've heard good things about both monitors but haven't used either. Were it my decision, I'd probably grab the Dell to save some cash and rebate hassle and give up the slight extra size of the Samsung. A 20" LCD is pretty ginormous already for computer display duty. Of course, I've already got Dell's 2005fpw so I'm not in the market

EDIT: Dell Small Business actually has both the 2001fp and 2005fpw listed for $549 right now, which is an excellent price. The 2005fpw is newer and has better specs as compared to the 2001fp. The 2005fpw is also widescreen and uses the 1680x1050 resolution as compared to 1600x1200, so you do lose some screen area. The 2001fp is about 2 inches taller but an inch narrower than the 2005fpw. Anyway, if you qualify for Dell Small Business, this may be a good way to go, though I'm also told that by calling Dell to place your order, you can mention the prices from small business and they'll often give them to you just for having asked.

 

[Judge Crandall]

I was thinking about getting the 2001FPW, but I read a review that compared it to the Samsung. It said the Samsung would be better for watching movies and general comp work, while the Dell is better for gaming, which isn't a concern of mine. Of course, I'm not sure how big of a difference this would be though. How's the 2005FPW? I just started looking at that, and it looks pretty good.

 

[Elec]

I like it quite a bit. In fact it's amazing compared to the 17" CRT I upgraded from. Very big, very bright, vivid colors. Haven't noticed any "ghosting" issues which LCDs sometimes suffer from (because the pixels change too slowly and so you get blur or ghosting on fast movement/action in games and movies). The actual dimensions of the screen are about 17.25" wide by 10.75" high and the diagonal is just over 20 inches. The monitor itself is somewhat larger because of the bezel and the stand is tall. For general desktop work, the 2001fp is probably better because the higher resolution and slightly larger screen give you more work space. I would argue that the 2005fpw is better if you're also going to watch movies because it is natively 16:10 widescreen. Keep in mind that you'll still get black bars on top and bottom, however, since most movies are a wider aspect than that (16:10 is 1.6:1 - 16:9 used in HDTV is 1.78:1, and many movies are 1.85:1 or 2.35:1). So while you'll get a wide presentation and smaller black bars than on a normal "square" 4:3 display, they'll still be around when watching movies unless you do some stretching to eliminate them.

EDIT: Ran out of time, but I can post more impressions/info or even a few pics later if you'd like.

 

[Judge Crandall]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elec EDIT: Ran out of time, but I can post more impressions/info or even a few pics later if you'd like.

Yeah, that'd be great.

 

[Elec]

Ok, got a bit of time to finish up now. The monitor is also excellent for games, and was a good choice for me since the two games I mainly play now both support widescreen. But if you aren't gaming, you don't really have to worry about the widescreen issue for that or having a powerful enough video card to run games at the proper resolution.

One thing you should be aware though is that you DO need a video card or chipset which will support the 1680x1050 native resolution for 2D (desktop display). Most made within the last few years will, although older cards/chips may have trouble, especially if you plan on using the DVI connection. The only issue I've had with mine is that the backlighting is somewhat uneven on a full-black screen. LCDs are not capable of producing a true black, because the backlight is always on and the best an LCD can do is block most of the light. So really you get a deep gray rather than black. Anyway, the top right corner of my monitor is a little lighter gray than the rest - it's only noticeable when watching a dark movie or one with black bars at top and bottom. For me, it's about a 3 or 4 out of 10 on the annoying scale and the monitor is otherwise fabulous for the price I paid. But I figured I should mention it in the interest of full disclosure in case you buy one and it has a similar issue. Ok, some pics! There may be a couple large white spots on these, it's actually dead pixels in my digicam, not the monitor

The stand, next to my old 17" CRT

The assembled monitor next to the CRT. You can see how much bigger it is, also that it stands a lot taller. You'll see why.

A dark movie. You may or may not be able to see the backlighting issue I mentioned, but it gives you an idea of how wide a movie will be and how big/small the black bars will be. The floating green text to the top left is in the black bar. I believe Matrix is 2.35:1, which is about the widest you'll run across regularly, so the bars will be the same or smaller on most films.

This is a picture showing what a large screen/wide screen/high resolution is good for. For example, you can have all this junk open at once: web browser, IM window, clock & calendar, Winamp, and two messaging clients. You'll have to excuse the blur, it's courtesy of my digicam with the flash off.

Another larger one of my screensaver, just to show off the colors. Again sorry for the blur.

And then one last one just for fun. This feature is especially great for things like forum browsing or using something like Word to create documents. This is the reason the monitor sits so high on the stand - it needs clearance to rotate to portrait mode.

Otherwise, lemme know if you have any specific questions. Keep in mind that the 2001fp is quite similar, although a bit taller and less wide.

 

[Judge Crandall]

Thanks for taking the time to do all this. I really appreciate it. If my laptop can support the resolution, I'm going to try and get this, especially if I can get it for $550 through the small business section. If not, I'm probably going to get either the 2001FPW or the Samsung 213T. I'm leaning toward the 213T because a friend of mine has it and it works great for him. I haven't had any first hand looks at the 2001.

 

[Elec]

The monitor comes with a .inf file which installs and makes the 1680x1050 resolution available, assuming your video card supports it. Because of this, the resolution probably won't just show up when you go into your laptop's display properties now. It's worth doing some research specifically into what resolutions your video chipset will do. It's likely that if it can handle 1600x1200, it'll also do 1680x1050, which is less pixels.

 

[Judge Crandall]

I've looked a lot online, and asked dell and ati about it. They refuse to give me a straight answer. I think I'll just take the risk and order the 2005. I can always return it or sell it if it ends up not working. Thanks for all the help.