what screen size is best for daytrading?

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by jetq, Jan 20, 2006.

  1. jetq


    thinking about buy two FP LCD, what screen size is best for daytrading, 17 or 19? anyone recommend a brand

  2. marky1


  3. 17 and 19 have the same native resolution, so they will display the same amount of stuff... text on 19" will be bigger but less sharp.

    Any display that suits your eye and has a 3 year warranty will be OK... Samsung, Dell, LG, NEC... 80% of the world's flat panels are made by 3 manufacturers, so there's not really all that much difference.
  4. It's always better to have 17" and Three LCD, instead of having 19" and 2 LCDs

    Even 3 monitor isn't much, you might need to add another 1 or 2 LCDs soon (you don't want to end up having 19" six LCDs, because then you need to have a large table and heavyduty LCD arms) secondly you can't resell 19" LCDs easlily if someday you need to :p

    So i recommand 17"
  5. I'm testing a DELL 2405FPW... So far so good, gonna opt to pick up two more of these puppies at Costco... Dual 2405FPW is about as much as I can handle scan wise... The third one is for another comp. These 2405 run about $800 give or take and have lots of pixel real estate at 1920x1200... If you're near a Costco, I would pop in and give it a looksie... There's also a 30" but it was a bit more than I could handle size wise and price wise, $2K+....
  6. lcw



    I don't understand why the 17" and 19" lcd will display the same amount of stuff.
    I thought the bigger 19" lcd will allow me to see more candles on my charts. Please clarify as I am also thinking of getting the 19" in future. Thanks. :)
  7. Both 17 and 19 have the same number of pixels (1280x1024) it's just that the pixels on the 19 are bigger so while you display the same window area, it's a little larger and easier on the eyes.
  8. Both 17 & 19 have the same native resolution... 1280x1024. Pixels are smaller on the 17".... hence the sharper image.

    If you want to display more per monitor, you need to go to 20" where native is 1600x1200. Pixels are smaller than 17", of course, but there's limited availability of multi-video card solutions.

    The price sweet spot for LCDs these days is the 17" / 19". The cost per square inch of display is about the same, and lots of video cards can accommodate.
  9. lcw


    Aha ... interesting. So in my case because my eye are not so good I like to see bigger fonts or everything bigger a little without seeing more, then the 19" lcd should be better for me instead of the 17" lcd.
    Good to know to avoid the 20" because of less supporting video card. Thanks to all. :)
  10. b1tr0t


    It is unlikely that any dual-DVI video card will have trouble supporting a pair of 20" displays. I picked a video card at random, and it has no trouble supporting both of my 2405FPWs running at 1920x1200.

    Several people have suggested that 20" displays are better than 17" or 19" displays because they offer more resolution. While this is often true, it isn't always true. You need to look at the native resolution of the panel in question.

    The Sony Vaio A690 portable (hardly a notebook) has a built in 17" panel with a native resolution of 1920x1200 that will make your eyes bleed. Fortunately, it also has a DVI docking station that can drive a 2405FPW.

    17" is very acceptable for 1280x1024, 19" is fine for 1600x1200, 23" is fine for 1920x1200.
    #10     Jan 23, 2006