Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!killer!chasm
From: chasm@killer.UUCP (Charles Marslett)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: NEC Multisync vs. NEC Multisync Plus
Message-ID: <3658@killer.UUCP>
Date: 11 Mar 88 14:56:32 GMT
References: <7597@cisunx.UUCP> <1686@bgsuvax.UUCP> <8056@condor.UUCP>
Distribution: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Organization: The Unix(R) Connection, Dallas, Texas
Lines: 24
Summary: difference between the NEC Plus and the NEC Multisync II

In article <8056@condor.UUCP>, charlie@condor.UUCP (Charlie D. Havener) writes:
> I own a NEC multisync II. I have had it about 6 weeks. It cost $630.
> ... Byte
> did not test the NEC Multisync II which is most unfortunate. They
> tested the Plus which costs a lot more. It is not at all clear to
> me what you get for the extra money.

The Multisync II is the successor to the old Multisync and has pretty
much the same specs, except that it pays attention to the sync lines
polarity.  So it maintains the position and shape of a VGA screen much
better (I think it does a better job on EGA screens, too, but that is
getting pretty picky!).  The Multisync Plus is a whole different animal --
it does NOT handle low frequency images (200-line CGA for example) so it
cannot be used with boards that do no double scan the CGA compatible modes
and it will properly display screens up to about 900x600 non-interlaces and
with a bit of fiddling the 8514A 1024x768 can be made to work.

Bottom line: for most people, most of the time the II is a better monitor
even at the same price (and they are not nearly the same price!) -- but if
you need higher resolutions than the 800x600 or 704x519 most current "good"
boards provide, you will have to pay more and lose something else. Sorry.

==========================================================================
==========================================================================