Help me replace my 30" monitor and understand a thing o

downwitch · Post by **downwitch** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:10 am

Hi everyone,

So pleased to have an excuse to visit this great site anew.

I have to get a new large monitor, and am looking for a little help from the gaming/video experts out there.

A little background: I purchased a Samsung 305T 30" monitor in late 2007. It's huge and beautiful--when it works. But my second replacement has just died, and Samsung is now telling me they don't have any more. (It's been a true customer service nightmare btw, and the internet is littered with similar tales--caveat emptor.)

I'd like to stay in a similar size range, and am considering this guy: HannsÂ·G HG-281DPB Black 28" 3ms Widescreen LCD HDMI Monitor. The NewEgg reviews are overwhelmingly positive, the warranty is strong, etc. etc.

However it's an HDMI interface, and as this particular box is within a year of replacement, I'd really rather avoid replacing my video card *again* if I can avoid it. (I'm using a Gigabyte GV-NX86S256H I purchased from another thread recommendation.)

I use this machine for (heavy programming) work and watching a lot of movies. No games to speak of. Is HDMI truly backward-compatible to Dual DVI? Will I be sorry if I don't get a new card? And where are all the HDMI cards anyway? Anyone using a good silentish one? (I don't have a TV so I'm pretty much out of that whole technology loop, sorry if these are dumb questions.)

Thanks for any insight you can offer.

nomoon · Post by **nomoon** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:15 am

The resolution on the monitor in your NewEgg link is only 1900x1200. I get this resolution on my 24". The Samsung 305T is 2560 x 1600.

I've been considering upgrading to a 30" for programming as well. I've had my eye on the Samsung 305T, but Samsung seems to have stopped making them a few months back.

Jason

downwitch · Post by **downwitch** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:41 am

nomoon wrote:The resolution on the monitor in your NewEgg link is only 1900x1200. I get this resolution on my 24". The Samsung 305T is 2560 x 1600.

Yeah, I know it's a step down, but I have to say that I find the 30" options out there underwhelming. I don't think the 30" monitor took off for anyone (except maybe Apple), and in my experience Samsung built a great monitor with absolutely zero durability. So no more Samsungs for me, even if they do return to market.

I would go bigger (yep), but again, the available options are underwhelming.

lm · Post by lm » Tue Sep 08, 2009 11:47 am

I'm really happy with my HP LP3065. My usage pattern is programming, movies, games, and it's nice for all of them.

Pros:

- 3 year warranty per default, but upgraded to 5 year warranty with something like 35eur.
- S-IPS panel for best image quality
- almost no input lag, better than most other displays in this matter, so good for gaming (your current monitor has huge input lag)
- 3 DVI inputs
- power button goes off once the screen has been on for some seconds, so it does not ruin the mood when you watch a dark scene of a movie in a dark room.

Cons:
- no scaler, only 2560x1600 res is possible
- only DVI inputs, nothing else
- my unit has some backlight bleed but I guess most do anyway

But I don't understand - your warranty is still valid for Samsung, isn't it, so shouldn't they give you something, no matter if they produce them or not?

Pgh · Post by **Pgh** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 12:32 pm

downwitch wrote:
nomoon wrote:The resolution on the monitor in your NewEgg link is only 1900x1200. I get this resolution on my 24". The Samsung 305T is 2560 x 1600.
Yeah, I know it's a step down, but I have to say that I find the 30" options out there underwhelming. I don't think the 30" monitor took off for anyone (except maybe Apple), and in my experience Samsung built a great monitor with absolutely zero durability. So no more Samsungs for me, even if they do return to market.

I would go bigger (yep), but again, the available options are underwhelming.

Umm, there are at least half a dozen 30 inch monitors on the market now so to say they were a failure is kind of an overstatement.

Dell 3008WFP - has 2 x DVI-DL, HDMI, Display Port plus some analog connections. Plus this has a scaler chip in it so you can run it at non-native resolutions.

Dell 3007WFP-HC - Only has 1 DVI-DL connection. No scaler

Gateway (forget model number) - Has at least 2 DVI-DL, HDMI plus some analog connectors. It has a scaler chip in it too.

HP 3065 - Has 3 x DVI-DL but no scaler. Not sure if HP is still selling it but they're available from multiple outlets.

Apple - One DVI-DL, no scaler. This is long overdue for an update.

NEC - expensive, for graphic pros. Not sure about connectors.

Eizo - same as the NEC.

Samsung - has 2 30 inchers last time I looked. The 305 and one very expensive model targeted at graphics pros.

Plus there's a couple I've forgotten.

The Dell 3008WFP is nice but kind of expensive. I've heard good things about the Gateway too but I don't have one.

downwitch · Post by **downwitch** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 2:58 pm

Thanks lm, I will take another look at that model. I don't need any other resolution, and as long as video quality is solid it should do the trick.

Samsung is refunding the original purchase price. This is I suppose an acceptable solution, though it took them a month to decide to do it. From the horror stories I've read online, the refund can take months more, but I don't really have a choice--this monitor still works, but only intermittently and at random, so it's not usable, and this is my main machine (with no backup monitor of course).

Part of the reason I was considering moving to something a little smaller was to potentially buy 2. Not as ideal for movies of course, but would be a better hedge against failure while working. I can't go through weeks of nonsense once a year like this.

Pgh, thanks for the model rundown. I did perhaps overstate the case a bit, but since there were 3 or 4 models almost 2 years ago when I shopped around, I wouldn't say that companies are really investing in the form factor. As the graphics junkie leaders, Apple's lack of a new entrant is particularly conspicuous.

My understanding is that a lot of people switch to HDTVs as monitors at this size and above. That was part of the reason for the post, was hoping to find out how others had handled a need for screen real estate and video quality both, with the usual (for here, anyway

) acoustic concerns (in the card mainly, although this replacement Samsung has crackled annoyingly since I brought it back from the workshop).

downwitch · Post by **downwitch** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:43 pm

lm wrote:- S-IPS panel for best image quality
- almost no input lag, better than most other displays in this matter, so good for gaming (your current monitor has huge input lag)

One more question about this--I'm looking into both your HP and the LG W3000H, and it appears that both 30" monitors share the same S-IPS panel (the same one in my Samsung), and that LG manufactures it. (Review summary: both monitors get major kudos from newegg respondents, but in the fine print the users may not be graphically demanding enough...)

I wonder if you have further info on input lag for these makes? I know it's not in the stats, and have been unable to find a review that describes these monitors and input lag specifically. I have indeed had trouble with video fluidity on this monitor, and would like to avoid the problem next time around if I return to the same size.

EDIT: Good discussion of these models here, still open to other info.

Pgh · Post by **Pgh** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 4:27 pm

downwitch -

I've had experience with the Dell 3007WFP, Dell 3008WFP, HP LP3065 and Apple Cinema Display. My understanding is that all of these monitors use an LG supplied S-IPS (or some variant) panel.

The Dell 3008WFP is the newest design and has by far the most input options. If you want to watch TV or use more than one computer with your monitor the 3008WFP is probably your best bet. If your certain you one want to use one computer with your monitor then I'd recommend the 3007WFP. I'm not 100% certain - but I think the 3008WFP is the only one of the bunch listed above that has the HDCP DRM stuff inside that will let you watch Blu-Ray discs at 1080p. I don't have a Blu-Ray player yet.

Out of the box the 3007WFP had the best picture. The 3008WFP required adjustment to get best results.

The 3008WFP is more expensive than the 3007WFP but if you keep an eye open for Dell coupon/deals you can get it for around $1000 - $1100.

I know input lag seems to be a frequent complaint with the 30 inch displays but I've never noticed it when doing work or playing DVDs/video. I don't know about games.

downwitch · Post by **downwitch** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 5:14 pm

Thanks Pgh, that's very helpful and matches some of what I have read elsewhere--it seems the 3008WFP does add some internal processing on top of the previous *-IPS template (of which the 3007WFP is also a member).

I am also now looking at the NEC LCD2490WUXi (expansive fanboy review here), as it appears to avoid some of the color problems that can occur with the so-called "wide-gamut" monitors, i.e. anything over 24". Now that I've done a few more hours' reading, I suspect that the lack of new entrants in the category (26"+) has a lot to do with not being able to solve basic color/display/bleed problems. I may be a little paranoid after my double Samsung wipeout, but if dropping a few inches for what is apparently near-perfect color fidelity also means seamless construction, I may just have to take that plunge.

All further thoughts are welcome of course. I am still giving myself 48 hours to research and decide.

Pgh · Post by **Pgh** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:02 pm

downwitch wrote:
... as it appears to avoid some of the color problems that can occur with the so-called "wide-gamut" monitors, i.e. anything over 24". Now that I've done a few more hours' reading, I suspect that the lack of new entrants in the category (26"+) has a lot to do with not being able to solve basic color/display/bleed problems. I may be a little paranoid after my double Samsung wipeout, but if dropping a few inches for what is apparently near-perfect color fidelity also means seamless construction, I may just have to take that plunge.

All further thoughts are welcome of course. I am still giving myself 48 hours to research and decide.

WRT to the ...""wide-gamut" monitors, i.e. anything over 24"" - I think you're confusing two unrelated concepts here. "Wide-gamut" has to do with the number of colors a monitor can display - nothing to do with the size of the screen. A wide color gamut is usually considered desirable.

Also, I've never heard that bleed-through problems were worse for larger monitors than for smaller ones. Bleed-through is primarily a function of the of the screen technology (e.g. S-IPS, PVA, etc), quality of the panel and (at least for LCD TVs) whether it has a "local-dimming" LED backlight.

After having 30 inch, 2560 x 1600 displays for awhile now, I know I'd be reluctant to go back to anything smaller - and to a lesser extent - anything with lower resolution. Once I got the color adjusted on my 3008WFP I've been very happy with it. I use it with two computers and plan to hook up a TV signal to it soon using the HDMI port.

downwitch · Post by **downwitch** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:32 pm

Pgh wrote:WRT to the ...""wide-gamut" monitors, i.e. anything over 24"" - I think you're confusing two unrelated concepts here. "Wide-gamut" has to do with the number of colors a monitor can display - nothing to do with the size of the screen. A wide color gamut is usually considered desirable.

No I'm pretty clear on this actually. I have yet to find a non-WG monitor over 24" on the market (except super-high-end stuff like the Eizos). Yes, it is color technology, and some smaller monitors use it, too (the NEC 24" in question is an sRGB monitor, a pillar of its bragging rights I gather), but there would appear to be limits to other color technologies scaling up in monitor size, so WG ends up being the de facto choice. And while I have been quite satisified with the color and saturation on my Samsung--which was definitely the imaging frontrunner in 30" when I bought it in 2007, and might still be today if a) it worked and b) it was still for sale

--I have long recognized that it's an oversaturated and unnatural color scheme.

I am to some extent mixing up apples and oranges when comparing, say, color fidelity and reliable operation, but I'm just trying to get all the moving parts into one thread.

Pgh · Post by **Pgh** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:55 pm

downwitch wrote:
No I'm pretty clear on this actually. I have yet to find a non-WG monitor over 24" on the market (except super-high-end stuff like the Eizos). Yes, it is color technology, and some smaller monitors use it, too (the NEC 24" in question is an sRGB monitor, a pillar of its bragging rights I gather), but there would appear to be limits to other color technologies scaling up in monitor size, so WG ends up being the de facto choice. And while I have been quite satisified with the color and saturation on my Samsung--which was definitely the imaging frontrunner in 30" when I bought it in 2007, and might still be today if a) it worked and b) it was still for sale --I have long recognized that it's an oversaturated and unnatural color scheme.

I am to some extent mixing up apples and oranges when comparing, say, color fidelity and reliable operation, but I'm just trying to get all the moving parts into one thread.

If you're not confused your answer is confusing. "I have yet to find a non-WG monitor over 24" on the market (except super-high-end stuff like the Eizos)." The Eizo 30 inch monitor IS a wide color gamut monitor - as are the Dell 3007WFP-HC and the Dell 3008WFP. There are wide color gamut LCDs in almost all sizes from 15 inch to 30 inch to an expensive 45 inch LCD TV that JVC makes.

An oversaturated and unnatural color scheme is not the result of a wide color gamut, it's the result of a poorly calibrated and/or badly design monitor. Again, a wide color gamut just describes the range of colors a monitor can display. A well adjusted wide-gamut LCD will have better color fidelity than a well adjusted narrow color gamut LCD of comparable quality.

incorrect · Post by **incorrect** » Tue Sep 08, 2009 7:58 pm

i have to agree here - i've seen many monitors, both cheap & dirty and uber-professional-elite, improve greatly after hardware calibration.

my uncle is a photographer and has many sheets of reference kodak printouts (like the color square sheet you'll see here), and holding it up to a screen before and after calibration is an amazing demonstration of just how wrong you can be when you convince yourself you're right about something (i.e. calibrating by eye then having a computer come along and fix it for you).

if something is oversaturated, undersaturated, washed out bright dark olive burned-out blue grey or tangerine it's almost always because it hasn't been properly calibrated.

downwitch · Post by **downwitch** » Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:55 am

Agreed Pgh, my answer was not very clear. (Slaphappy from too many hours of research, no doubt.) Let me see if I can be clearer, at least for the sake of thread posterity.

- Wide Gamut (WG) is a color space, developed (and then dropped) by Adobe, as an alternative to its own sRGB standard. It offers much more of the visible spectrum than sRGB, but in the process creates imaginary colors and more or less blurs correspondence to IT standard (RGB) or real-world (CMYK) color spaces.

- Any size monitor may use the WG standard. All large monitors do, with the exception of the aforementioned NEC and Eizo models. The NEC 24" *is* an sRGB monitor, and the Eizos offer an "sRGB mode". The fact that no one is building large monitors otherwise may be due to more widespread WG use, or to the expense involved in working with other standards, which simply require better hardware. I don't know.

- Any monitor can be color balanced, of course. Any monitor can have its saturation and colors matched to programs, pucks, the naked eye, prints, or whatever you like. The crucial issue--and it's something that would matter much more to, say, photographers or graphic designers than ordinary users--is what those resulting "balanced" levels correspond to. The WG standard is not used by operating systems, the internet, Photoshop, or (of course) any real-world printing process, while sRGB corresponds to all but the real world, with some OS caveats. The color translation appears to introduce the greatest problems of fidelity.

I'm not an expert on any of this, but I have now read numerous reviews and debates on the subject, and though a few pros are willing to defend WG as unnecessarily maligned, no one can produce an image of, say, pure black and white on a WG monitor that is as good as those from the high-end sRGB monitors. This would imply that no matter how well you balance the colors and saturation against *each other*, you're still only offsetting an incorrectness. Again, the differences are probably too minor to matter much to ordinary users, but WG is not, and will not be adopted as a professional standard, apparently for these reasons. CRT monitors were for many years the pro choice--and what I had before this Samsung--but are vanishing because they're too huge and heavy for the relative color fidelity to matter alongside LCD innovations.

- A separate difference between the NEC monitor and the others, about which I was wrong before, is that it uses an H-ISP panel. The others are all *-PVA (my Samsung) or TFT Active Matrix or S-ISP (the Dells, the HP, etc.). Each panel standard, simply put, renders *whatever* color space with a varying degree of quality. H-ISP would appear to do the best job at the moment. A combination of an H-ISP monitor with an sRGB standard
would appear to give you the closest approximation of CRT goodness.

That's about as clear and thorough as I can be. Whether it's clear and thorough enough or whether any of this is useful, is another matter, and the discussion certainly has wandered away from my original questions. It is frustrating to try to predict how one will feel about using a monitor one cannot test, and this discussion has helped a lot to lay out some of the pros and cons of the available options for me.

Fayd · Post by **Fayd** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:39 am

FWIW, i have that HG, and i'm happy with it.

in my case i had to wallmount it to downtilt it enough to get the entire screen to display right. it's very sensitive to viewing angle, so if you're looking up at any part of the screen, that part is going to be darker than it should be.

but, i wanted to wallmount it anyways, so no harm there.

i've had it for about 2 years now with no complaints. well...1 slight complaint. i wish i had greater forward thinking. i should have gotten the 28" viewsonic that was also on costco's website at the time. it accepted component and S-Video inputs, as well, which would have allowed me to completely ditch my TV in my bedroom and hook my game systems up to my sound system.

lm · Post by lm » Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:27 pm

downwitch wrote:
lm wrote:- S-IPS panel for best image quality
- almost no input lag, better than most other displays in this matter, so good for gaming (your current monitor has huge input lag)
One more question about this--I'm looking into both your HP and the LG W3000H, and it appears that both 30" monitors share the same S-IPS panel (the same one in my Samsung), and that LG manufactures it. (Review summary: both monitors get major kudos from newegg respondents, but in the fine print the users may not be graphically demanding enough...)

I wonder if you have further info on input lag for these makes? I know it's not in the stats, and have been unable to find a review that describes these monitors and input lag specifically. I have indeed had trouble with video fluidity on this monitor, and would like to avoid the problem next time around if I return to the same size.

EDIT: Good discussion of these models here, still open to other info.

When I bought mine, I got the impression that HP LP3065 is basically identical electrically to Dell 3007WFP HC, both of which have S-IPS panels and no scaler. Average input lag as reported by digitalversus.com is 11ms on the Dell. Haven't found any input lag numbers for the HP.

However I am not sure what you mean by video fluidity. Input lag only means how much delay there is between image input and output, and when you are watching movies, even massive input lag should not be even noticeable, because you are not interacting with the computer. Basically input lag adds to the delay between you moving your mouse and actually seeing the mouse cursor move, or typing and actually seeing the letters appear on a text editor. This matters mostly in games where you need to react very fast, and where larger input lag actually makes you less competitive in a multiplayer game, or makes your single player experience less fun. Basically the low input lag was one important deciding factor for me, because I occasionally play stepmania, which is a rhythm game that requires you to press keys with very precise timing, and all else being equal, didn't want to lose the possibility to play it. On a friends LCD monitor, it was completely unplayable because of input lag.

When I got mine, LG didn't yet produce theirs, or at least it was not available around here, so I don't have any info on the LG. I'd guess that since you said it does not have a scaler and you said it has S-IPS, it would be also equal in input lag to the HP? Not sure tho.

boost · Post by **boost** » Sun Sep 13, 2009 5:18 am

HP 3065 - Has 3 x DVI-DL but no scaler. Not sure if HP is still selling it but they're available from multiple outlets.

And it has a dedicated button on the front to switch between these ports.

I've only seen the smaller 23" IPS model from HP and it's gorgeous. I'm using a 26" IPS from Acer. I chose it for it's bigger pixels.
IPS panels usually have the least input lag. Which is only important for games, not movies, see the explanation above. They have very good colors, only some (M/P)VA panels have better colors. And you can always get a Color Xpider to calibrate your monitor. Unless your a professional photographer or designer, your probably ok with any monitor with an 8-bit panel,.
The scaler in the monitor is used when the the source has a different resolution from the panel. Game consoles only support certain resolutions (XBOX 360 720p, PS3 1080p24) these have to be upscaled. When a computer is the source the graphics card can be set to upscale lower resolution with better results. Using a scaler in the monitor can also increae inpput lag.

What do you actually want, big screen, two screens, high resolution?
For 30" HP, Dell and Apple are all good choices. HP for the switchable DVI ports, Dell for the different kinds of ports (the scaler is only relevant if you want to use it with a game console), and Apple for Design.
For the same money you can also buy two smaller screens, but watching movies isn't as much fun.
Another option would be a 32" full HD TV. The resolution is only 1920x1080, but it's big for a computer screen.
If you only want the biggest screen, the TV is the cheapest, but with big pixels. On the other hand only a 30" monitor has 2560x1600 pixels.

lm · Post by lm » Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:20 am

Some LCD TVs don't show all of the image, but instead assume that the image has some pixels of waste in all borders and scale it, making the said TV unusable for a PC display. There was some specific term for this phenomenon, but I can't seem to remember it. But it's definitely something to watch out for, if going for a LCD TV to use as a PC display.

FartingBob · Post by **FartingBob** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:03 am

I have the HannsG 28" beasty and its a very good monitor if you want screen space of more than 24" but dont fancy paying the price of a second hand car for it. I got mine since i was going from a 22" and wanted a decent step up in size.
Picture quality is pretty impressive for a TN, the usual problems of viewing angles is there and the black could be better. But if you have the budget, a nice 30" LCD would be great.

Mr Evil · Post by **Mr Evil** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:43 am

lm wrote:...There was some specific term for this phenomenon...

Overscan.

downwitch · Post by **downwitch** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 2:36 pm

Thanks everybody, great stuff. I was indeed misunderstanding the input lag problem, clear now.

I am very close to pulling the trigger, and am leaning toward the 24" NEC, with a second one to follow when I can afford it. While this 30" is great for movies, and is very workable, the resolution is a little much for my aging eyes.

But I guess the number one concern is that I don't want to replace the monitor for another few years. My future purchase will likely be OLED, and I just don't want a monitor that I regret having purchased between now and whenever that technology becomes reasonable. Plus I'm trying to approximate the very fine experiences I had with my ViewSonic CRTs. I am undoubtedly paranoid after this experience, and realize that quality of image and quality of construction are not necessarily correlated, but the most positive set of reviews from the most geeked-out set of users I can find is for that NEC. (Though there are plenty of thumbs-ups out there for most all the monitors discussed here.)

BTW the price isn't really an issue, as I am using the Samsung refund to pay for it. (The NEC 24" and the various 30" options discussed here are all about the same price.) The HG is much cheaper of course, but as it turns out I don't like its viewing angle problem--I work long hours and get a lot of headaches. Whatever else can be said for the NEC, its color distribution and viewability from any angle are as close to CRT as you get.

lm · Post by lm » Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:20 am

downwitch wrote: I am very close to pulling the trigger, and am leaning toward the 24" NEC, with a second one to follow when I can afford it. While this 30" is great for movies, and is very workable, the resolution is a little much for my aging eyes.

WTF

What I especially like about my 30" is that because of it's size, I can just make everything look bigger and lean back in my chair?

You should be able to have bigger fonts and icons just about everywhere, and all relevant web browsers let you zoom the content at will.

I just totally don't understand the claim about resolution being too high o_O It does not have to mean that things are tiny.

downwitch · Post by **downwitch** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 7:50 pm

lm wrote:
downwitch wrote: I am very close to pulling the trigger, and am leaning toward the 24" NEC, with a second one to follow when I can afford it. While this 30" is great for movies, and is very workable, the resolution is a little much for my aging eyes.
WTF

What I especially like about my 30" is that because of it's size, I can just make everything look bigger and lean back in my chair?

You should be able to have bigger fonts and icons just about everywhere, and all relevant web browsers let you zoom the content at will.

I just totally don't understand the claim about resolution being too high o_O It does not have to mean that things are tiny.

Just meant I don't need this high a resolution, is all. Yes, I can adjust all over the place, and I can scale resolution at the driver level anyway, but as I've weighed the things that matter most, this isn't as high on the list.

The bottom line is that I've found a reason not to buy each of the 30" monitors I've looked at. A different reason in each case, but until *the* 30" I want comes along, I'm going to stick with something smaller that has many other things going for it.

Still haven't bought, busy week, but hope to get one this weekend.

niels007 · Post by **niels007** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 10:04 am

i have the HANNS-G 28''. At 1920x1200 the fonts etc are a little larger but it is pleasant to work with. I got used to the TN screen, coming from a IPS model. It works great for gaming but I actually prefer working on spreadsheets etc on it as well.

It is a small step back in size, one step back in resolution, a few steps back in vertical viewing angle.... but at 1/3rd the price of the cheapest 30'' units, its very good value.

downwitch · Post by **downwitch** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:55 pm

Hey folks,

So the 24" NEC has arrived, and I have to say, it may be the cleanest, easiest-reading, most vivid monitor I have ever looked at. Just WOW.

Do I miss the extra size/resolution screen real estate? Yup. Haven't tried a movie yet, and I'm sure it will be something of a disappointment after the earlier expanse. But there is definitely something in the tradeoff. And though it won't solve the movie problem, I'm thinking seriously about saving up for a second one before they run out of remaining stock...

I intend to post again for archival purposes once I've lived with this sucker for a while--too many reviews stop at initial impressions. Thanks again for all your help.

Sunrise · Post by **Sunrise** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 4:41 am

For most purposes 2-3 1920x1200 monitors give you more screen real estate. Movies and games are an obvious exception.

I have an HP LP3065 and will never trade down, but I've also liked working with multi-monitor setups. I'm a bit torn on what I'd recommend for others. A single 30" screen still costs more than three good 24" ones.

Depending on the room where you use the computer, adding a larger TV might be an option. I have a 40" TV as a secondary monitor and use it for movies, some games and browsing from the couch.