|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I would not be surprised if the rep is pushing something you don't need. The
required capacity of the video board is related to the resolution used
(width x height x color depth) and has nothing to do with the size of the
monitor. I run 8 meg Matrox at 1024 x 768 x 32bit true color. I don't need
anything more than 256 color but the card drives the 32 bit true color at
full speed. You could probably run an 8 meg card at 1600 x 1200 x 256 color
with no problem and more than likely run at much higher color depths. If you
know the resolution and color depth you intend to use the video memory
required should be a simple calc (I don't have the formula).
One other thing to consider - the flexibility afforded by two (or more)
smaller monitors can be far and away superior to a single large monitor and
more cost effective. For the price of that 21 incher, you could probably go
with 3 17 inchers.
Earl
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard C. Fredette <sail4@xxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sunday, March 07, 1999 4:20 PM
Subject: 21 inch monitors
>I'm in the process of buying a new Dell computer and am interested to
>know whether the 21" monitor is superior to the 19". I've heard it is
>not as clear as the 19". And then there is the choice of the Trinitron
>over the standard Dell model. Also, it was indicated that the 8 megs on
>the standard video board is not good enough for the 21" monitor and that
>if you upgrade to 16 megs, resolution may be better.
>
>Anyone out there with a 21" monitor that can give some advice based on
>your experience, rather than the hearsay I've been getting? Am I better
>off with the tried and true 19" or is it worth it to go with a 21''.
>What I intend to use it for primarily is to keep several realtime charts
>up and plotting simultaneously using Metastock Pro. Many thanks.
>
>Dick
|