Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!umriscc!mcs213h.cs.umr.edu!mikep
From: mikep@mcs213h.cs.umr.edu (Mike Prather)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Summary (Non/)interlaced monitors - 1231 lines long
Message-ID: <2326@umriscc.isc.umr.edu>
Date: 5 Mar 91 21:54:49 GMT
References: <1991Mar5.122927.45747@vaxb.acs.unt.edu>
Sender: news@umriscc.isc.umr.edu
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla
Lines: 29

I bought a Loop monitor.  It advertises 1024x768 non-interlaced.  The tech 
person at a local computer store said he found that hard to believe, as
the monitor sells for $389.  I don't have a non-interlaced card, so I decided
to bring in my monitor to the store to have him hook it up to a card and
see for himself (and myself).  It synced up and worked fine.  No flicker
whatsoever.  I could tell the difference between non-interlaced and interlaced,
as I'd been using interlaced 1024x768 under Windows.  I was slightly jittery.
With the non-interlaced card he hooked up, a Trident 8900, it looked
great.

The Loop monitor has a vertical frequency of up to 100Hz and a horizontal of
up to 48kHz.  PC Mag (I think) suggested that a vertical rate of 70Hz will
usually result in no noticable flicker.  And the Trident 8900 card says
that it requires that a monitor have a horizontal scan rate of 48-49kHz 
to work in non-interlaced mode, I believe. 

The non-interlaced monitors I've seen advertised seem VERY expensive.  I'm
very happy w/ the monitor that I ended up getting.  The screen is a little too
curvey, it'd be nice if it was a little flatter.  But considering the money
I saved, I'll live with it.  

Mike
 

-- 
===========================================================================
 			Blasphemy is a victimless crime.
mikep@mcs213k.cs.umr.edu				Standard Disclaimer
===========================================================================