VOGONS


First post, by jheronimus

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Lately I've been thinking about the mid to late-90s LCD screens that would look appropriately on top of a Slot 1 or Pentium MMX machine. What were the most popular models?

As far as I understand, desktop LCD screens existed way before that. For example, in 1992 you could get a 10 inch dark gray Eizo screen on a swivel arm to get that "high tech villain's office from a cyberpunk movie" feel. However, such a screen wouldn't be compatible with your VGA card and you'd need a separate controller to drive it.

Then, in mid-90s you could get something like a 12-inch NEC MultiSync LCD200. It's already VESA-compatible, but still very small.

Then, around 1997 companies started to mass produce 15 inch screens. Boot magazine listed a 15 inch Compaq as one of their "gadgets of the year" in december'96. In 1998 Eizo introduced an 18 inch model called L66.

So far, L66 looks like an optimal choice to me.
bg1.png

It has a good screen size, it's bulky enough for the look I'm after but still 2-3 times lighter than a CRT of a comparable size. Also, nice feature set (like integrated speakers, USB hub and 2 VGA ports). However, I don't see any on my local market — even though they were definitely sold here in early 00s.

What would be a good alternative?

MR BIOS catalog
Unicore catalog

Reply 1 of 16, by kenrouholo

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Do you game? If so, throw this idea in the garbage because those screens are completely useless for that purpose. Otherwise, sorry, not sure (sorry if that's not helpful but the first part of my response is meant to be helpful if you do game).

Yes, I always ramble this much.

Reply 2 of 16, by jheronimus

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
kenrouholo wrote:

Do you game? If so, throw this idea in the garbage because those screens are completely useless for that purpose. Otherwise, sorry, not sure.

Why? Is it blur or what?

MR BIOS catalog
Unicore catalog

Reply 3 of 16, by kenrouholo

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
jheronimus wrote:
kenrouholo wrote:

Do you game? If so, throw this idea in the garbage because those screens are completely useless for that purpose. Otherwise, sorry, not sure.

Why? Is it blur or what?

Significant motion blur, input lag on some models (though some modern screens still have a bit too much input lag for some types of games), probably not good scaling if you don't run native res, bad contrast (I mean you can find high-end screens of the time that had better contrast than low-end screens of the time, but compared to modern displays they still sucked).

Those monitors are 100% intended for professional use and 0% for gaming.

I mean, if you find one cheap as heck, it could be interesting to check it out, but don't expect too much. NEC is the brand that I would go for if I were buying one but I can't tell you if the Eizo stuff is any better or not. I can't guarantee the NEC will be the best. It's just the one I'd personally go with.

Yes, I always ramble this much.

Reply 4 of 16, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I'm using a NEC MultiSync LCD 1550ME. It's about 15 inches and has 4:3 ratio, I believe.
Motion blur and scaling are no problem, as far as I can tell (flight sims do work fine).
Before that, I used to have a grey Belinea LCD screen (sorry, can't remember model number).

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 5 of 16, by kenrouholo

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Jo22 wrote:

I'm using a NEC MultiSync LCD 1550ME. It's about 15 inches and has 4:3 ratio, I believe.
Motion blur and scaling are no problem, as far as I can tell (flight sims do work fine).
Before that, I used to have a grey Belinea LCD screen (sorry, can't remember model number).

I think if you set it up next to a CRT and take some photos, you'll see that it's got much more motion blur than the CRT. But it's not obvious to everyone and if you are happy with it then that's what matters and that's fine.

Some games are a bit tougher as far as input lag and motion blur, like particularly fast FPS games, or even worse, rhythm games like Dance Dance Revolution or Guitar Hero type games. But it's a valid point to say that not all genres of games are highly affected by motion blur.

Yes, I always ramble this much.

Reply 7 of 16, by kanecvr

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I wouldn't bother with period correct LCD screens. They look the part, but are horrible to use. Blurry, ghosting, poor color reproduction and mediocre reliability. The image quality between old LCD monitors and modern 4:3 displays is like night and day.

Reply 8 of 16, by kenrouholo

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
swaaye wrote:

What about the age of the CCFL backlight? That must be an issue. Color change etc.

They do dim with time and can start to flicker or burn out. I'm not sure about color temperature change, but it sounds highly plausible. Good thinking on that idea. I think you're right.

Yes, I always ramble this much.

Reply 9 of 16, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
kenrouholo wrote:

I think if you set it up next to a CRT and take some photos, you'll see that it's got much more motion blur than the CRT. But it's not obvious to everyone and if you are happy with it then that's what matters and that's fine.

True. I was thinking of it in comparison to 90s era notebook LCDs (colour).
They had noticeable motion blur, I remember. But even that wasn't a bad thing for me most of the time.
In fact, I liked it in case of monochrome LCD screens. It gave them some kind of gracefulness and made them look more professional
(like their monochrome CRT counterparts).

kenrouholo wrote:

Some games are a bit tougher as far as input lag and motion blur, like particularly fast FPS games, or even worse, rhythm games like Dance Dance Revolution or Guitar Hero type games. But it's a valid point to say that not all genres of games are highly affected by motion blur.

Agreed. I remember playing jump&run games for DOS on an old laptop. The colour screen was waaay to slow to keep up.. 😵

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 10 of 16, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I was using a 15in LCD screen for a couple years and even though it had its limits, it was good enough for gaming (I'm talking FPS games here (and yes my K/D ratios were well above 1:1 🤣)) and it's THE smallest display adapter you can get! CRT is WAY bigger and larger LCD screens obviously are bigger as well and that's sure worth something!

Whats missing in your collections?
My retro rigs (old topic)
Interesting Vogons threads (links to Vogonswiki)
Report spammers here!

Reply 11 of 16, by jheronimus

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Wow, thanks for all the feedback! I kind of thought that blurriness wouldn't be an issue with TFTs like it was with passive screen found in laptops. I like FPS a lot, so that would definitely be an issue for me.

I actually got my first LCD screen in 2002 — it was a 17 inch model by NEC that cost 2-3 times more than the CRT screen everyone seemed to praise at the time (Iiyama Vision Master Pro 454, 19 inch). I don't remember blurriness to be an issue, though. Guess either I was to little to tell the difference or the screens advanced a lot in those five years.

MR BIOS catalog
Unicore catalog

Reply 12 of 16, by nforce4max

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

The only complaint that I have about this period correct LCDs was that some are PICKY when it comes to resolutions but early to mid 2000s LCDs are pretty nice for this use.

On a far away planet reading your posts in the year 10,191.

Reply 14 of 16, by yawetaG

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Tetrium wrote:

I was using a 15in LCD screen for a couple years and even though it had its limits, it was good enough for gaming (I'm talking FPS games here (and yes my K/D ratios were well above 1:1 🤣)) and it's THE smallest display adapter you can get! CRT is WAY bigger and larger LCD screens obviously are bigger as well and that's sure worth something!

Go back a few years (early-mid 1990s and earlier) and 10-12 inch and smaller LCD screens were available. Some early portable computers have even smaller screens, with no more than 3 or 4 lines of text visible at any given time. Some screens were limited to text mode, too. If you don't need color, there's a crapton of monochrome screens (black on green, green on black, orange on black, etc.), but you better choose one with an easily replaceable backlight...

Reply 15 of 16, by sf78

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Colors are also way off on every single TFT I've seen, up until around 2008-2010. I had Benq G2222 HDL from 2010 that was praised for it's quality, but even that was struggling with accurate colors and black levels when compared to a same era TV's. I believe the first somewhat usable gaming screens started to come out in 2002-2003 when the ghosting was more manageable. Still, all the TFT's I had looked pretty crappy up until 2014 when I upgraded to a better screen.

Reply 16 of 16, by candle_86

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Do florcent lights bother you, if so you will hate using an old LCD, I got my first one back in 2007, it was an older 2001 Dell LCD, it actually hurt me to look at it, I didn't try again until about 2013 at which point the CCFL was no longer a part of the LCD