I've finally allowed myself the money to purchase a new "default racing monitor", so that I can put my current Dell 19" LCD (not widescreen) as a secondary monitor to take over for telemetry/second monitor use.

But really, before pushing that "purchase" button, I decided to think things over again. Here's the monitor I'm looking at:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009094

The reviews look good, and CNET seems to like it. The price keeps going on and off sale, so I'd like to catch it now to save myself the extra money.

But I still question my priorities... Will I really see a big difference in terms of the cockpit view in race sims?
I'd like a bigger monitor overall, and thats why I've gone with the 22"... But I question wether the 1680x1050 will really make a difference in viewing area?

Any input on this?

Thanks

i would say do a 24" if you going to do it. I went from a 19 inch, and i find the 24" to look small sometimes. i guess i get used to it.

Well I think one of the main reasons I decided upon the 22" monitor was because of the price. I really don't have a lot of extra cash to throw around right now, so I think I'd like to stick to 22" right now. Thanks for the idea though Shane.

oo ok. well then get the 22. it will of course be better.

well, widscreen is going to be an advantage for sure, and although I went with a 24, I would say for the price of a 22, it's a darn good deal. plus 1680x1050 is that much easier on the GFX card:) with that said, I'm not sure a 22 is much bigger than a 19 aside from the added width. but it's alot cheaper to buy two more of them down the road one day, right;)

Way to think Darren.

I wonder if there is a way to take a cockpit picture in 1280x1024, vs a cockpit picture in 1680x1050?

That'd surely convince me of the difference.

By the way, you wouldn't think that the change in resolution would tax the graphics card too much would you?

Thanks for all the help guys. I appreciate the quick responses.

That's a good deal on a widescreen LCD monitor. I have an Acer 21" version for a few years now. Plugged it in and it worked great from day one. They make some good monitors.

I'm not so sure about getting it from Newegg, though. This is probably my only gripe with them and they are great in everything else but, they have a lousy dead pixel policy. Dead pixels are just that...non working pixels on the LCD screen which can and will become an annoyance and would usually require a RMA. However, they require a minimum of 8 dead pixels before even considering taking it back.

Tiger Direct will take it back within 30 days of purchase no matter what and they have exactly the same sale on the same monitor going on. Clicky

Not saying you'll get a dead pixel but it's just one of those little things that will bite ya if you don't look into it.

well all I know for fact is 1680x1050= 1.76 million pixels, 1920x1200= 2.3 m/p where as your 1280x1024 asks for only 1.3 m/p. I'm no tech guy, but I'm going through the same kind of thing myself, and I figure pixel count is the clearest way to spot the change. I'm sure someone here could pipe up with other factors that affect performance, but I would say if your pushing you graphics card now, a 22 would be the way to go, plus its cheaper. keep in mind though that monitors tend to shrink with time, I think my 24 only mesures out to around 17" these days, so I had to buy two more just to bring it back up to spec:)

The sad truth isn't it?
When I first bought my 19" dell LCD, I spent several glorious minutes marveling in its hugeeeeeness.

After a month it pretty normal however :-)

Fantastic point Conor, I shall order from tigerdirect. I had no idea that any online store would take it back, even with dead pixels, I figured that was up to manufacturer.

Thanks guys! that definitely seals the deal. I'll order in the morning!

Its a big differance between 19 and 22. I did the same 19->22ws and wow it was :o.

Also in games, now u will be using widescreen mode and you will see more to left-right of the wheel.