Sat here writing this on a ViewSonic VP171s, I might be a little biased towards ViewSonic, but who cares? XYZ Computing review the 3ms VX924.As a performance or gaming display this product is one of the best on the market, and its 3ms response time means great game play and DVD viewing. The color, brightness, and contrast add to the image quality and should make this a welcome display to any power user's desktop, gamer or otherwise.
PHP Code:$s = new signature();
$s->sarcasm()->intellect()->font('Courier New')->display();
"VX924 WORLD'S FASTEST LCD" - Viewsonic website.
Benq also have a "3ms" LCD.
Thought the review was a bit basic - little more than a page on image quality (surely the most important factor?) and yet again, another tech site going on about the lack of power bricks - who cares?
Nice of them also not to tell the consumer that it uses an 18bit colour panel or not even bother to even mention the issue in the review or even ask Viewsonic. Typical of the 'so so' quality of reviews appearing on too many tech sites these days. Comments like "it looks cool" aren't exactly helpful.
Xbitlabs.com is the only tech site I can take seriously for monitor reviews. Their reviews are superb and deal with all the important factors which someone should be considering when buying a TFT.
Yawn... Probably 3ms when screen's running at 100% brightness + contrast and displaying white, good chance midrange is way higher. Nevermind the 'real' contrast ratio.
Couldn't agree more - classic example of a reviewer not properly understanding the issue of response times.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote