Displays

For our displays, we continue to stick with CRTs due to pricing concerns. However, our favorite 17" CRT continues to go up in price, so we're placed in somewhat of a difficult position. Cheap 17" monitors can be found, but the quality of such options is never that great. Maximum resolution is generally 1280x1024 with refresh rates of 60 Hz. As price is a major concern for the budget sector, we'll still recommend such a display. However, for a minor price jump, the option to purchase a decent 17" LCD is now there.


Click to enlarge.

Display Recommendation: Samsung 793DF/793MB
Price: $145 shipped

In the past, we have recommended the NEC FE771SB as a slightly more expensive alternative to the Samsung display. However, the price of the NEC displays has now shot up about $20 since the last budget Guide, putting it at nearly the same level as a decent 17" LCD. If you can find the FE771SB for less money, by all means go for it. We are unable to do so - at least, not from any place where we feel that there is a reasonable quantity available. As a less expensive alternative, the Samsung 793DF/MB is still good. Some people prefer shadow mask tubes over aperture grilles like the NEC anyway, but we aren't among that group.

The Samsung display is almost perfectly flat on the inside - in reality, the surface is flat externally and slightly curved on the inside. The MB adds the ability to adjust brightness and color temperatures at the press of a button, which can come in handy for certain games - Doom 3 in particular. Movies also benefit at times, assuming that you're watching movies on your 17" display. Overall, picture quality is good, but if you're doing office work primarily, we feel that spending the additional money for an LCD would serve you best.


Click to enlarge.

Display Alternative: Rosewill R710E 17" 16ms LCD
Price: $210 shipped

You could always go for a large CRT like the Samsung 997DF, but for non-gaming use, an LCD is probably a better choice. We've selected a good LCD, although not necessarily a great one. Missing is support for DVI input, and of course, you're locked into a resolution of 1280x1024 for best results. However, a 17" LCD is actually larger than a 17" CRT, as the viewable diagonal is 17" rather than 16". A 19" CRT would have an 18" viewable diagonal, making it slightly larger, but then you're dealing with a heavier unit and all of the other CRT aspects. Other benefits to LCDs include the fact that refresh rates are no longer as important, as flicker isn't generally noticed even when running 60Hz, and they don't use as much power as a CRT.

DVI input would make such a display ideal, but that does add at least another $20 relative to the Rosewill. The only real problem remaining with LCDs is the potential for dead pixels. If possible, buying an LCD at a local store and checking it out before leaving the premises is a good way around this issue. Unfortunately, prices and features are often not as good when shopping locally. The warranty of the Rosewill LCD is the one item that gives us cause for concern, as their RMA process looks rather questionable. Still, $210 for a good 17" LCD is about half as much as what such a display cost a year ago!

Cases and Power Supplies Speakers
Comments Locked

59 Comments

View All Comments

  • JarredWalton - Monday, June 13, 2005 - link

    58 - ??? The Mid-Range to High-End went up a couple weeks ago. Next update in a couple more weeks, I guess. :D

    http://www.anandtech.com/guides/showdoc.aspx?i=242...
  • SAV602 - Thursday, June 9, 2005 - link

    This month?
  • spartacvs - Saturday, May 14, 2005 - link

    Yepeee!
  • JarredWalton - Saturday, May 14, 2005 - link

    It's coming soon! :p
  • spartacvs - Thursday, May 12, 2005 - link

    Hey guys, it's time for a new system guide :)
  • TrogdorJW - Friday, March 25, 2005 - link

    Sorry - ignore that last post, but I guess my comments name and pass don't work in the forums. Just wanted to check. :)
  • TrogdorJW - Friday, March 25, 2005 - link

    Testing....
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 24, 2005 - link

    jwf1776 sent me a reply email which updates the situation. I'll just post the text with links here:
    ------------------
    I don't know why I sent you the link the to enermax site, because the site does make it seem like its atx 2.03 ... but it's all lies...

    The manual I got with the power supply was pretty clear about which models had 24pin rails. They have a 24P on the model number or something.

    Anyways, the maxpoint site (American enermax distributor?) has the correct stats at
    http://www.maxpoint.com/products/pow_supp/spec_pg/...

    Also here is a review of the part
    http://www.cluboverclocker.com/reviews/power/enerm...

    Both sites make clear its atx 1.3
    ------------------

    So, there you have it: the Enermax 375 is *not* a 24-pin EPS 12V compliant motherboard. It *does* have dual rails, which may be sufficient, but that's not the same as supporting the ATX 2.0x standard. It looks like Enermax needs to fix their spec pages....
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - link

    jwf1776: I sent this in an email to him as well, but here's my question to you all: is this a case of false advertising by Enermax or not? Here is an image for the alternative PSU:

    http://www.enermax.com.tw/upload/clgcable0217.jpg

    It doesn't have a 24-pin connector, per se, but it has a 20 pin with a second 4-pin connector that makes it into a 24-pin. Note that there is *also* a second 4-pin +12V adapter for the standard P4 power connector. Unless someone can confirm that the PSU doesn't include the two 4-pin adapters, I believe it still qualifies as a 24-pin PSU. ATX 12V 2.01 vs. ATX 12V 2.03 - is there really a major difference other than the 24-pin adapter bein in one piece?
  • Jep4444 - Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - link

    48 - the adapter doesn't do very much, it'll work without an adapter

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now