difference between 800:1 Contrast Ratio and dot pitch?

On my old monitors I was told that the smaller the dot pitch the better. But
now I am looking at the ultra thin monitors and I see things like 800:1
Contrast Ratio. They all have higher dot pitches than I am used to though.
One I am looking at has the best Contrast Ratio but it is .29 dot pitch.

What's the better way to go? If I am buying an ultra thin monitor do I still
have to worry about dot pitch? Should I be more concerned about Contras
Ratio?

By ultra-thin are you really talking about an LCD monitor?

If so, then you cannot compare the specifications of the CRT monitor with an
LCD - they display things on the screen in different fashions. But, what you
may see is a difference when you see fast moving objects - some LCDs will
display a smear because they cannot write to the screen as fast a CRT.

"John Wilson" <NotMe@invalid.aol.com> wrote in message
news:%23CfLlgv9FHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> On my old monitors I was told that the smaller the dot pitch the better.
> But now I am looking at the ultra thin monitors and I see things like
> 800:1 Contrast Ratio. They all have higher dot pitches than I am used to
> though. One I am looking at has the best Contrast Ratio but it is .29 dot
> pitch.
>
> What's the better way to go? If I am buying an ultra thin monitor do I
> still have to worry about dot pitch? Should I be more concerned about
> Contras Ratio?
>

Like Jerry said the LCD monitors are totally different than CRTs in
the way they display.

The more important things in them are the "Contrast Ratio" and
"Response Time"

The higher the contrast ratio and the lower the response time, the
better the monitor.

Response time is especially important if you are going to be using the
monitor on a gaming machine. A slow response time will cause the
"smear" effect that Jerry was talking about.

You should also consider how the monitor connects to the video card.
Does it come with the standard analog connection as well as the newer
DVI connector. If you have a video card that has a DVI output,
connecting the monitor via the DVI connection will provide a better
quality picture also.

Next...Lets say you are used to a CRT running in 1024 X 768 or 800 X
600 mode. You will need to get used to a higher reesolution in most
cases when you buy a new LCD monitor. LCD monitors work best in their
"native" mode. For most 17" monitors that is 1280 X 1024. They will
use other modes but in most cases will not provide their best quality
in anything other than their native mode.

Finally...find out what the manufacturer's "dead pixel" policy is.

A dead pixel is one which is stuck on one color. LCD manufacturers
have different policies on how many and where the dead pixels are
located before they consider the monitor defective. You could pull a
brand new monitor out of a box and have a dead pixel in it when you
power it up. For many manufacturers this may be a totally aceptable
condition and not be considered defective. A dead pixel can be very
annoying especially if it is located somewhere towards the middle of
the viewing area. Dead pixel policies vary from how many as to where
they are located.

On Thu, 1 Dec 2005 20:57:47 -0800, "Jerry" <NoSpamChiefZeke@MSN.com>
wrote:

>By ultra-thin are you really talking about an LCD monitor?
>
>If so, then you cannot compare the specifications of the CRT monitor with an
>LCD - they display things on the screen in different fashions. But, what you
>may see is a difference when you see fast moving objects - some LCDs will
>display a smear because they cannot write to the screen as fast a CRT.
>
>"John Wilson" <NotMe@invalid.aol.com> wrote in message
>news:%23CfLlgv9FHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> On my old monitors I was told that the smaller the dot pitch the better.
>> But now I am looking at the ultra thin monitors and I see things like
>> 800:1 Contrast Ratio. They all have higher dot pitches than I am used to
>> though. One I am looking at has the best Contrast Ratio but it is .29 dot
>> pitch.
>>
>> What's the better way to go? If I am buying an ultra thin monitor do I
>> still have to worry about dot pitch? Should I be more concerned about
>> Contras Ratio?
>>
>

Thank you for such an informative reply.

I was aware of the response time, although I have nothing to compare it to.
I will not find one smaller than 8ms, will I? Would you say 8ms and 700:1
ratio would be adequate for an intensive game?

<Les Herrman> wrote in message
news:u9g0p1t3kle873d3koj225qp3p6sc57c1b@4ax.com...
> Like Jerry said the LCD monitors are totally different than CRTs in
> the way they display.
>
> The more important things in them are the "Contrast Ratio" and
> "Response Time"
>
> The higher the contrast ratio and the lower the response time, the
> better the monitor.
>
> Response time is especially important if you are going to be using the
> monitor on a gaming machine. A slow response time will cause the
> "smear" effect that Jerry was talking about.
>
> You should also consider how the monitor connects to the video card.
> Does it come with the standard analog connection as well as the newer
> DVI connector. If you have a video card that has a DVI output,
> connecting the monitor via the DVI connection will provide a better
> quality picture also.
>
> Next...Lets say you are used to a CRT running in 1024 X 768 or 800 X
> 600 mode. You will need to get used to a higher reesolution in most
> cases when you buy a new LCD monitor. LCD monitors work best in their
> "native" mode. For most 17" monitors that is 1280 X 1024. They will
> use other modes but in most cases will not provide their best quality
> in anything other than their native mode.
>
> Finally...find out what the manufacturer's "dead pixel" policy is.
>
> A dead pixel is one which is stuck on one color. LCD manufacturers
> have different policies on how many and where the dead pixels are
> located before they consider the monitor defective. You could pull a
> brand new monitor out of a box and have a dead pixel in it when you
> power it up. For many manufacturers this may be a totally aceptable
> condition and not be considered defective. A dead pixel can be very
> annoying especially if it is located somewhere towards the middle of
> the viewing area. Dead pixel policies vary from how many as to where
> they are located.
>
> On Thu, 1 Dec 2005 20:57:47 -0800, "Jerry" <NoSpamChiefZeke@MSN.com>
> wrote:
>
>>By ultra-thin are you really talking about an LCD monitor?
>>
>>If so, then you cannot compare the specifications of the CRT monitor with
>>an
>>LCD - they display things on the screen in different fashions. But, what
>>you
>>may see is a difference when you see fast moving objects - some LCDs will
>>display a smear because they cannot write to the screen as fast a CRT.
>>
>>"John Wilson" <NotMe@invalid.aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:%23CfLlgv9FHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl.. .
>>> On my old monitors I was told that the smaller the dot pitch the better.
>>> But now I am looking at the ultra thin monitors and I see things like
>>> 800:1 Contrast Ratio. They all have higher dot pitches than I am used to
>>> though. One I am looking at has the best Contrast Ratio but it is .29
>>> dot
>>> pitch.
>>>
>>> What's the better way to go? If I am buying an ultra thin monitor do I
>>> still have to worry about dot pitch? Should I be more concerned about
>>> Contras Ratio?
>>>
>>

Those settings should do very well for most any game or application.

8ms response time is about the fastest you are going to find. In fact
a lot of flat panel monitors have a much slower response time in the
16ms to 24ms range.

On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 14:11:34 -0600, "John Wilson"
<NotMe@invalid.aol.com> wrote:

>Thank you for such an informative reply.
>
>I was aware of the response time, although I have nothing to compare it to.
>I will not find one smaller than 8ms, will I? Would you say 8ms and 700:1
>ratio would be adequate for an intensive game?
>
><Les Herrman> wrote in message
>news:u9g0p1t3kle873d3koj225qp3p6sc57c1b@4ax.com.. .
>> Like Jerry said the LCD monitors are totally different than CRTs in
>> the way they display.
>>
>> The more important things in them are the "Contrast Ratio" and
>> "Response Time"
>>
>> The higher the contrast ratio and the lower the response time, the
>> better the monitor.
>>
>> Response time is especially important if you are going to be using the
>> monitor on a gaming machine. A slow response time will cause the
>> "smear" effect that Jerry was talking about.
>>
>> You should also consider how the monitor connects to the video card.
>> Does it come with the standard analog connection as well as the newer
>> DVI connector. If you have a video card that has a DVI output,
>> connecting the monitor via the DVI connection will provide a better
>> quality picture also.
>>
>> Next...Lets say you are used to a CRT running in 1024 X 768 or 800 X
>> 600 mode. You will need to get used to a higher reesolution in most
>> cases when you buy a new LCD monitor. LCD monitors work best in their
>> "native" mode. For most 17" monitors that is 1280 X 1024. They will
>> use other modes but in most cases will not provide their best quality
>> in anything other than their native mode.
>>
>> Finally...find out what the manufacturer's "dead pixel" policy is.
>>
>> A dead pixel is one which is stuck on one color. LCD manufacturers
>> have different policies on how many and where the dead pixels are
>> located before they consider the monitor defective. You could pull a
>> brand new monitor out of a box and have a dead pixel in it when you
>> power it up. For many manufacturers this may be a totally aceptable
>> condition and not be considered defective. A dead pixel can be very
>> annoying especially if it is located somewhere towards the middle of
>> the viewing area. Dead pixel policies vary from how many as to where
>> they are located.
>>
>> On Thu, 1 Dec 2005 20:57:47 -0800, "Jerry" <NoSpamChiefZeke@MSN.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>By ultra-thin are you really talking about an LCD monitor?
>>>
>>>If so, then you cannot compare the specifications of the CRT monitor with
>>>an
>>>LCD - they display things on the screen in different fashions. But, what
>>>you
>>>may see is a difference when you see fast moving objects - some LCDs will
>>>display a smear because they cannot write to the screen as fast a CRT.
>>>
>>>"John Wilson" <NotMe@invalid.aol.com> wrote in message
>>>news:%23CfLlgv9FHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>> On my old monitors I was told that the smaller the dot pitch the better.
>>>> But now I am looking at the ultra thin monitors and I see things like
>>>> 800:1 Contrast Ratio. They all have higher dot pitches than I am used to
>>>> though. One I am looking at has the best Contrast Ratio but it is .29
>>>> dot
>>>> pitch.
>>>>
>>>> What's the better way to go? If I am buying an ultra thin monitor do I
>>>> still have to worry about dot pitch? Should I be more concerned about
>>>> Contras Ratio?
>>>>
>>>
>