difference in new and old monitors, how much is too much?

I agree, between the two, theres probably not going to be much difference.


However, if you move up to a LED monitor thats something along the line of:
1920x1080, 50,000:1 or better CR, and 2ms response, you should see a significant improvement.

The price diffreence may not be that much more either.

What models are the screens?

bassfisher6522 said:

From what specs you've listed I don't see that much of a difference...same resolution, same response time and very little on the contrast and brightness.
The only advantage would be the signal input on the new monitors if they have a display port for combining more than 2 monitors to one GPU.

Wouldn't you need a Display Port on the video card as well?

Well if you want 3 way monitors you want the new 2 to be as close to the current one. So the ones mentioned will be fine. Personally I'd save a little more and get 3 new ones then you can get 3 1080p LED screens! Ben Q monitors are getting a good name for themselves. Apart from them I'd only ever touch samsung screens

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

Different resolutions aren't that bad with triple screens. I had 1440x900, 1920x1080, and 1680x1050 on my setup for quite awhile (sig pic shows this setup). If you game across all 3, then you will need to run all screens at the same resolution, which in my case was 1440x900 across each screen. It was fine for games to have the higher res screens running at 1440x900 but for Windows Desktop use, running lower than Native makes the image fuzzy.

I now have 3 1920x1080 screens, all 3 are different since I upgraded one at a time when there were deals on the screens. Samsung 23", HP 23" (with Display Port), Viewsonic 21.5".

this is the new setup,

Personally I would hold out and opt for a nice IPS display. They are more expensive, but it's because they perform quite a bit better.