Entry Level Buyer’s Guide, July 2005
by Jarred Walton on July 20, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
Display and Speaker Recommendations
The display market - at least for budget displays - is really stagnating. New CRTs are basically non-existent and budget LCDs are hard to come by unless you want two-year-old technology (which is a long time in LCD terms). The 14 and 15 inch LCDs start at around $175 new, and with their fixed resolution of 1024x768, we'd prefer a 17" model. Here then are our recommendations.
Click to enlarge.
Price: $153 shipped (Retail)
With supplies of competing monitors now becoming scarce, the 793DF remains one of the few viable options for budget displays. The ivory model is available for $143, but we prefer the looks of the two-tone model shown above. If you like the plain white more, you can save that $10. The features are good overall, but we're sad to see the disappearance of quality aperture grille CRTs like the NEC FE771SB. Many people won't notice, but the tubes in the 793DF are still slightly curved. The ideal resolution for 17" CRTs is either 1024x768 at 85Hz refresh rate or 1152x864 with a 75Hz refresh rate. We prefer the slightly increased screen size of the latter, but some prefer a higher refresh rate. While it supports 1280x1024, the 60Hz refresh rate bothers many people, and we would stay away from it.
Click to enlarge.
Price: $210 shipped (Retail)
We're doing our best to incorporate a decent LCD into the budget recommendations, and the Polyview V17E manages to qualify, though we do have some reservations. The good aspects are that the response times are sufficient for most people (though we're not sure who makes the 14ms panel) and the display has a DVI input (as well as VGA should you go with a setup that lacks a DVI output). The manufacturer's replacement policy for dead pixels isn't the greatest, but at least it's clearly defined: 4 or more dark/bright pixels, 6 or more pixel defects, 2 or more sets of defective adjacent pixels, or 3 or more defective adjacent pixels, with "adjacent" meaning within a 1cm area. We've used quite a few LCDs, and pixel defects are becoming relatively uncommon, so hopefully you never need to worry about the warranty. A single bright pixel in the center of your display can be quite annoying, however, so be forewarned that there's a risk. The overall quality of the display in terms of contrast and colors is decent, though not the best, but that's to be expected of one of the cheapest 17" LCDs around.
If you want some other alternatives for an upgraded display, our top pick would be to spend around $300 on a 19" display. The Acer 1914SMD 8ms model performed very well when I used a couple in the past month, and both displays were free of pixel defects. Several other 19" LCDs are available in the $250 to $350 range, but we'd look for 16ms or lower response times and DVI input. Rebates on two models at Newegg even drop the price to under $250 for a 19" LCD, but we don't particularly care for mail-in rebates. The Dell FP1905FP is another good model that can often be found on sale, sometimes for under $300.
On the CRT side of things, you can still find the Samsung 997DF and it's a decent but not great CRT - it has similar issues to the 793DF, but at higher resolutions. We'd prefer the NEC FE991SB, but with availability declining and the price near that of 19" LCDs, you're better off with an LCD. Refurbished CRTs may be something else to consider, and with luck and perseverance, you can even find 21/22" models for under $200, some of which offer better specs than the current batch of large CRTs.
Click to enlarge.
Price: $71 shipped (Retail)
You'll see on the next page why we skipped the budget speaker selection. For our upgraded speakers, we're going with a higher quality 2.1 setup instead of the 5.1 configuration that we've recommended in the past. It's really a matter of preference to which you want. Gamers might want 5.1 audio while those who listen to MP3s or watch movies on their PC will generally prefer better quality 2.1 audio over cheap 5.1 setups. The X-530 is still a reasonable choice, and the speakers are actually cheaper than the Z-3 speakers that we list here.
Besides offering better tonality and response curves, the Z-3 is more convenient to set up than a 5.1 configuration - finding space for 5 speakers around your PC can be difficult for many people. The included volume control allows you to place the speakers further away from your monitor while keeping the controls close at hand, and a headphone port also allows you to tune out the rest of the world - or allow the rest of the house to sleep as the case may be. If you want to go with a less expensive setup yet still want decent sound, the Logitech X-230 can be had for around $37 - half as much as the Z-3e. We're not entirely clear on what the differences between the various Z-3 models are, so if you can find the Z-3 or Z-3i for less money than the Z-3e, we see no reason to get one over another. (Feel free to enlighten me if there's a good reason other than looks to buy one model over another.)
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
57 Comments
View All Comments
bob661 - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
Thanks Jarred.JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
#15 - Bob,OCZ has quite a few overlapping RAM offerings these days, all of which have a place. I recommended the BH5 based Gold that runs 2-2-2-5 1T at 2.8V as opposed to the VX offering that requires 3.2V for 2-2-2-5 1T. Here's the link:
http://www.ocztechnology.com/products/memory/ocz_e...
You can also find the RAM at Newegg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82...
The VX is about the same price, but it doesn't have "Gold" in the name.
----------
WRT the displays, I would much rather have a larger display. Getting people to go from $600 for the basic setup to $750 for a 19" LCD is a tough sell, unfortunately. I really like 19" LCDs (and I like my 2405FPW even more), but few people are willing to shell out over $300 for "just the display". As Hacp mentions, a lot of people just don't realize what they're missing. I know plenty of people with 17" to 19" displays that still run them at 1024x768 - even on LCDs. They just don't realize that resolution is something most people should adjust.
SDA - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
#31, I'm not sure where to start with you.First: Anyone can see the difference between 17" and 19".
Second: You won't notice any difference between a fast system and a (reasonably) slow system when watching movies, writing letters, or surf the web. otoh, you WILL notice a difference between a good monitor and a bad monitor when playing games and editing photos. You're using your monitor every time you're at your computer, but most of the time you don't need a fast CPU at all.
Third: Image quality is important. If image quality wasn't important, people wouldn't buy high-end video cards for games.
IME, people who place I/O equipment (monitor, mouse, sound setup, etc.) at the bottom of the list do so because they have never used genuinely good I/O equipment for any reasonable length of time. I don't mean any offense here, this is just what I've seen.
Zebo - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
sprockkets - just the opposite.. prescott uses about 30% more power than a northwood at same hurtz.. and really starts leaking like crazy after 3.4 which a northwood never saw.Zebo - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
Bob - http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid...Hacp - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
I doubt that a budgetminded person would recognize the difference between 19 and 17 inches much. Heck, I would even go for a 15 inch LCD if it gave room to get a better video card/cpu or more ram. Screen size is the last thing I think about when I budget for a comptuer.Wellsoul2 - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
The Polywell LCD is a good one but I would go witha 19 inch monitor for around 40 to 50 bucks more.
The bigger LCD makes such a huge difference IMHO
compared to the bang for the buck you get putting
50 bucks anywhere else.
Hacp - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
Btw nice guide. Didn't mention this before.sprockkets - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
Yeah, but consider first that having a prescott core as opposed to a northwood core would save power, but also save more energy also since you don't have to spend money on the HVAC removing the excessive heat it makes too, and that system takes a lot of energy!At work, we have 2.8ghz stupid dell optiplex systems that have no ventilation slots whatsoever, and it is so funny to see all the dust collect on the back and the floppy drive because that is all it can intake from. But they don't put out much heat. However, the newer prescott based ones (same 2.8ghz) are much hotter; in fact, I managed to get prime95 on it, and the stupid computer had to turn on the processor fan to full blast, making it sound like a vacuum cleaner! It even speeds up when loading simple websites (gets louder while loading, then quiets down once the page loaded up)!
Btw, someone at newegg made this comment about not having cool and quiet on semprons: They don't need it! The 2600 and 2800+ (well, at least the 90nm Palermo cores) put out so little heat, I don't even think the fan is necessary! It runs 2-3 degrees over ambient, and around 5 when prime95 is running!
Other note about power supplies and Dell: Dell used to use Delta, then of course the fiance department cut that out and now they use crappy HIPoint. Again, where I work, with new 3.06 ghz systems, out of 30 some systems, nearly all have had the power supply replaced, and a good amount even twice. For exaple, do a search for Dell 4600 and see what I mean. It doesn't pay in the long run to use crappy power supplies for all the issues it causes.
siliconthoughts - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
While I like to build systems as much as the next guy, for a $600 system the new HP A1130n systems (at bestbuy/circuitcity/etc) are really hard to beat (3500+ athlon64 socket 939, 250GB SATA, PCIe, DVD, DVD-RW, integrated ATI X300, 1GB RAM) for ~$650 (w/ monitor and throwaway printer after rebate) Dell has nothing competitive with it.You generally don't build a system like this for yourself anyway - vendors have a purpose: keeping me from being the free-support guy.