PenguinJim wrote:
It's surely worth taking a look at a 1920x1200 monitor for gaming? 16:9 is unbeatable for 16:9 movies and TV, but for games/internet/work 16:10 is preferable unless you have very short, very wide eyes?
Just a suggestion, as I've seen a few people skip over the 16:10 option without considering it as 16:9 screens are foisted upon us by cheapest-option manufacturers. 
@PearOfAnguish
I have two Dell U2410's. They were pretty expensive but I've never been happier with a monitor. It's 16:10 (1920 x 1200), but also displays 16:9 resolutions perfectly fine with obviously a black border at the top and bottom of the screen.
One of the features I love is you can choose to scale your input by aspect ratio, fill the whole screen or use the native resolution of the input with no scaling. It means if there is a flaky console game which just doesn't look that good up-scaled I can swap to show it at 1280 x 720 or whatever the console outputs it at and see how it was designed to look. Some people might not like that as you have to put up with the space around the screen not being used, but practically I love the fact I have the option.
Another big bonus of the monitor is it as HDMI, DVI, Display Port, Component and Composite connectors. If you can grab it for under £300 it's a bargain!
Oh, and in terms of quality it's great. Very bright and vibrant, easily configurable and pretty easy to calibrate. Never had any issues gaming on PC, PS3 or 360 on it.
It's built well. The base is very heavy and the monitor sits nice and sturdy on it.
Edited by Cannon_Fodder at 14:22:35 11-02-2013
Might be an HDCP thing. Maybe. 
