Build Your Own Arcade Controls Forum

Main => Monitor/Video Forum => Topic started by: iAtoria on April 10, 2009, 09:40:57 am

Title: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: iAtoria on April 10, 2009, 09:40:57 am

So I am in the market for a nice LCD monitor for my arcade cabinet and was wondering which of the two below I should go with.  The details are listed so you can see.  The viewing plane was calculated by using the Pythagorean Theorem (a^2+b^2=c^2).  As you can see the 24" monitor is both taller and wider than the 20".  Both will fit in my cabinet, so that is not an issue, but I was wondering what the general forum population thought would be good to do.  So below I have listed some questions.

Monitor	Aspect Ratio	View Plane (WxH)	Cost	Link
20" Dell UltraSharp 2007FP	4:3	16"x12"	$379	Here (http://"http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Displays/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687")
24" Dell G2410	16:9	20.8"x11.7"	$259	Here (http://"http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Monitors/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-7956")

Question #1: Can you use MAME with a 4:3 aspect ratio (not-stretched) on a 16:9 (wide screen) monitor (perhaps with edges cut off)?
Question #2: Which would you buy and why?

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: Blanka on April 10, 2009, 09:52:08 am

There is an error in your Pythagoras calculation! The 20 inch 4:3 has more vertical estate then the 24 inch 16:9:
(http://www.martijnkoch.com/lcds.gif) (http://www.martijnkoch.com/lcds.gif)
Your pane-sizes are not correct. The 20 inch is 408x306mm (fck inches) and the 24 inch is 521x297mm
The Ultrasharp is an Ultrasharp, and not to be confused with the no-name line. Ultrasharp means SIPS or SPVA panels, and the 2007 has SIPS.
So go for the 2007.
If you mount it vertical (you can because of good viewing angles of the 2007), Pac-Man is even bigger than on a 32 inch full-HD TV! Compare the yellow vertical 20 inch with the white horizontal 32 inch TV!

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: XeviouS on April 10, 2009, 10:47:19 am

Yep, mame will run 4:3 ratio on a 16:9 screen.

If I was going to build another cabinet i would go with the 16:9 screen and build a bezel that covered up the bits of unused screen. I reckon 4:3 screens are not always going to be around, and a 16:9 screen will  "future proof" the cabinet for when your monitor eventually goes bung.

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: iAtoria on April 10, 2009, 11:19:31 am

Blanka:

Aye, good catch on the 3,4,5 triangle error there.  I can see pac-man being bigger when the screen is mounted vertically, but what about other games such as x-men or simpsons?  I agree that the Ultrasharps produce a much better quality image than the no name lines, but is S-IP/S-VA technology needed for old school games and a couple newer ones?  Also, how big is the difference?  Thx for the info.

Xevious:

That was more along the lines of my thinking (future-proofing), and it could also enable the possibility of movies, other consoles, etc.  I play Stepmania a lot and it's awfully hard to see the arrows on a 19" (what I currently have) from ~5 feet away.

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: Blanka on April 10, 2009, 12:42:44 pm

No reason to go with the 24 inch. It is cheap, and will die sooner, and big chance in 2013 you won't find a 23.5 inch 16:9 either. It's probably 24.3 inch by then, which means you have to recut the bezel anyway.
I would go for the much better viewing angles and built quality of backlight electronics. Tiny kids, tall basketballers, and 6 X-men side by side, all can see equally well on the 20 inch, whether it is vertical or horizontal mount.
I would also prefer it for desktop use. 1200 pixels vertical is much better for internet, word, etc than 1080 pixels.
Did I say the picture is bigger on the 20 inch? If you keep 4:3 aspect, it will look bigger, definitely!

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: Stobe on April 10, 2009, 03:03:07 pm

My vote would be the 20" 4:3.  I have one of the dell's, and it is very nice.  I've rotated it to vertical (I know, its not what you have intended, but I'll throw this in for the record), and the vertical games looked awesome!

-Stobe

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: Endaar on April 10, 2009, 03:03:22 pm

One thing to consider is that as more and more artwork is added to MAME, the 16x9 gives you the option of seeing part of the original bezel on the sides of the screen that would otherwise be blank.

I'd personally stay away from the cheap Dell lineup as the Ultrasharp panels are much nicer. Bear in mind though that for nearly $400, there are other options for larger 16x9 screens with more 4:3 real estate than the 20"

Endaar

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: Blanka on April 11, 2009, 01:55:58 am

Quote from: Endaar on April 10, 2009, 03:03:22 pm

Bear in mind though that for nearly $400, there are other options for larger 16x9 screens with more 4:3 real estate than the 20"

Not if you want a SIPS or SPVA panel. In that case, the 2007 is a good deal with a good 4:3 size for the money. For equal 4:3 estate, you need either a 25 inch 16:9 or a  23 inch 16:10 screen.
And the argument for the bezels: I never understood the option to show bezels in mame. You either make a real sticker on your bezel for 1 specific game, or you just display the game in a generic (black) bezel. Bezel art was never designed to be "back-lit".

Another argument: if you want to use 16:9 or 16:10, backlight-bleeding or bad-contrast is more visible in the black bars left and right, than when the screen is perfect 4:3.So if you go widescreen, you will need the better SPVA or SIPS displays anyway to have better quality blacks, which makes the deal definitely more expensive then the Dell 2007. And quality is not only the darkness of the blacks, but also the colour. SIPS/SPVA panels have mostly grey blacks, and not blue blacks. I think that Dell has a good price. I did not know it, but I will definitely consider it for my future projects.

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: SavannahLion on April 11, 2009, 03:13:24 am

Quote from: Blanka on April 10, 2009, 12:42:44 pm

No reason to go with the 24 inch. It is cheap, and will die sooner, and big chance in 2013 you won't find a 23.5 inch 16:9 either. It's probably 24.3 inch by then, which means you have to recut the bezel anyway.

Not to chase off topic, but where do you get that from? I know they've effectively killed CRTs with asinine laws limiting sizes, they're applying the same to LCD's as well?

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: Blanka on April 11, 2009, 09:59:29 am

Quote from: SavannahLion on April 11, 2009, 03:13:24 am

Not to chase off topic, but where do you get that from?

You quote two of my statements. Which one do you question, the first or the second?
The first is a guess based on the price. If I see what giant LCD's they offer for 150 euro today, I don't trust these panels. You mainly read about noisy inverters, and that component is one of the most sensitive parts in an LCD screen.
The second is based on the big variation in panelsizes. They never sell 1 size/resolution combination for a very long time. There are always some tweaks over time. In CRT time, most 19 inchers were exchangable, in the worst case you had to tweak the image size with potmeters or software. Today with LCD's, every panel is slightly different. See my scheme and see how many panels there are available or have been available. I won't be sure that in 5 years you can get the exact same resolution/dimension combination.

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: Endaar on April 11, 2009, 11:39:58 am

Quote

Not if you want a SIPS or SPVA panel.

Just trying to give the OP some other options to consider. I doubt I've seen a SIPS or SPVA panel so I can't compare, but any LCD is a compromise for MAME to begin with. If we were discussing a display for home theater use, I'd place a higher premium on image quality than I do in this context. In any event, the SIPS/SPVA information is good to know.

Quote

And the argument for the bezels:

Again, personal preference. I think this actually comes down to the fact that in bigger cabinets, if you want the most 4:3 real-estate possible on an LCD screen, you likely have no choice but to go with a widescreen display. The bezels at least give you an option to fill-in the otherwise dead space.

It's really too bad there aren't any 25" 4:3 LCDs...

Endaar

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: erictrumpet on April 11, 2009, 12:20:20 pm

A very timely topic for me. I found a fantastic deal on a widescreen true 1080p 25" LCD monitor and I was considering replacing my 21" Apple CRT (4:3 of course), but when I pulled out the ol' tape measure, it became obvious that a vertically-oriented game presented on both monitors (non-rotated) would be equal, or if not, the CRT would have a slight edge on the image size. And for horizontal-oriented games in MAME, which still use a 4:3 aspect ratio, the size would be the same - again, no advantage to the LCD. In other words, a 25" widescreen only added side width to my image - which would not result in any larger image in any MAME games at all. The only benefit would in Windows, and watching movies - two things I do sometimes but not often on my cab. So I am sticking with the 21" 4:3 CRT for now.

Eric.

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: Todd H on April 14, 2009, 01:33:26 pm

I went with a 16:10 25.5" monitor. The widescreen form factor comes in handy for PC games as well as the upcoming Street Fighter IV for the PC.

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: Blanka on April 18, 2009, 05:23:23 am

Quote from: Endaar on April 11, 2009, 11:39:58 am

It's really too bad there aren't any 25" 4:3 LCDs...

I started a petition for that, but those FCKN American government bureaucrats decided to come up with a law that demands big screens to be widescreen 16:9. Thought the EU has some stupid idiot  business limiting rules, but this rule makes the rule-craziness award to travel back across the Atlantic. Guess it's the reason that 16:10 aspect screens are getting rarer and rarer too.
So just like Apple hates Europe for making their Apples greener (ROHS is based on EU rules), we hate the USA for limiting big screens to be 16:9. Wonder if you guys ever get the chance of buying that 21:9 Philips screen. That's not 16:9 too.

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: SavannahLion on April 18, 2009, 12:27:57 pm

Quote from: Blanka on April 18, 2009, 05:23:23 am

Quote from: Endaar on April 11, 2009, 11:39:58 am

It's really too bad there aren't any 25" 4:3 LCDs...

I started a petition for that, but those FCKN American government bureaucrats decided to come up with a law that demands big screens to be widescreen 16:9. Thought the EU has some stupid idiot  business limiting rules, but this rule makes the rule-craziness award to travel back across the Atlantic. Guess it's the reason that 16:10 aspect screens are getting rarer and rarer too.
So just like Apple hates Europe for making their Apples greener (ROHS is based on EU rules), we hate the USA for limiting big screens to be 16:9. Wonder if you guys ever get the chance of buying that 21:9 Philips screen. That's not 16:9 too.

I was under the impression that those ---punks--- passed that lame ass law to apply to CRT, not to LCD's.

In any case, I spent the last twenty minutes trying to find the law restricting the size of CRTs to <25". I know it exists, but I just can't seem to find it. ???

Related to that, I can't find nor have I ever heard of a law forcing big screen TV's to not be 4:3. I understood it to be more economics and marketing than law. A 24" 16:9 is often sold by stores as being comparable to (or better than) a 24" 4:3 screen. None of those ---smurfs--- will ever tell you that simple math will reveal just how much screen real estate there really is. A proper 4:3 big screen (One I would actually like to have) would probably result in higher manufacturing costs.

Kind of like the abuse the digital camera market experiences.

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: Blanka on April 19, 2009, 05:51:10 am

Spread the word:
http://www.petitiononline.com/43lcdtv/petition.html

Title: Re: Monitor for a Cabinet: 24"=16:9 or 20"=4:3
Post by: BORIStheBLADE on April 25, 2009, 11:36:51 am

Quote from: Blanka on April 19, 2009, 05:51:10 am

Spread the word:
http://www.petitiononline.com/43lcdtv/petition.html

I signed it.