If it's not an actual cut, then the film is still there, it's just sort of scuffed. You want to use a light abrasive to, basically, sand down the surface until the scratch is not really visible (a.k.a. polish). ... In theory.

You can use the edge of a piece of cardboard (the wavy variety) for like five or so minutes. Vaseline is not a good idea. And alcohol will just remove dirt ... it doesn't actually dissolve anything.

Once you're done you can wipe it clean with something like water or alcohol to clean up the debris.

This guy is talking about it here: http://youtu.be/GtytAXQTGdA

Technically speaking the scratch will always be visible unless you re-lacquer the surface of the screen ... but whatever. And if you have an actual gouge it's not going to work.

Also, from now on when you open a computer do it on a table away from anything you can break

Yeah, the best a repair can do is just make it bearable. There's really nothing you can do to fix it entirely. If you want to replace it, that's a perfectly reasonable option. Though, I'd suggest this monitor:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824236117

Similar price range, same length warranty, MUCH higher contrast ratio, and a MUCH lower response time. (2ms, that Acer is 5ms)

Not that it matters much now but you can't really base a monitor purchase on specs. There's no real standard for testing displays. So one display with a lower contrast on paper could have higher contrast IRL. It's the same with ms. Not that response time even matters when we're talking sub 8ms.

Professional and customer reviews is pretty much the only way to go when buying displays online.

People I know who've bought it give glowing reviews. And lower response time is always better, even if you don't explicitly notice it. It'll lead to smoother appearance. The contrast ratio is the primary difference, It's pretty substantial.

Obviously, though, almost any monitor is going to be fairly nice now in this sort of spec-range.

Unless Asus full of lies D: (But I don't think so) I think they have some guarantees that others don't in terms of pixels not working and things like that. Most manufacturers say "if it's not over 20%" or some other figure they won't do anything. But I'd have to check again to be sure.

I know the Sceptre monitor I have flat out lied in the details on the box. It says it's 16:9 "full 1080p HD", but it's a 16:10 screen that has a native resolution of 1680x1050.

Frankly, I just suggested the one I'd buy

I'm sorry the paper thing didn't work out so well. It was something I found in passing. I've never had to personally deal with a damaged LCD in that manner. Most of the time if I had to repair one I'd change the LCD panel in the device/monitor instead of trying to fix it.

But, if you can spiff it up, you still have the old one too.

Asus, like all display manufacturers are more or less filled with lies whether they like it or not. Without a testing standard for response time and contrast ratio they pretty much make it up themselves, meaning some choose to run tests in optimal conditions while others do it in real world lighting. Some run contrasts between colors side by side, others do dynamic contrast tests comparing one totally black display to a completely white one.

It's all pretty much a specs war where everyone cheats. In my real world experience the only ones I've known to show somewhat realistic and modest numbers are those that cater to graphical professionals. Probably because they know their customers won't just go online looking at numbers.

As for response time, it's true that  lower ms means a smoother experience. But at 2-5ms we're way above human capacity so it's impossible to make a discernible difference (assuming they're truthful with their specs). Also, most LCD displays are capped at 120hz or lower by the manufacturer making a response time under 8ms irrelevant anyway.

I'd take the recommendations from the people you know IRL any day before the specs. They'll also be able to tell you about issues like possible bleeding and uneven lighting.

I'm sure this display in particular is good. I'm jus saying its worth noting that he manufacturers lie... a lot.

Hey everyone,

Not sure if this is the appropriate forum, but I want to get some opinions on this computer I am trying to build. Be aware that even this build is stretching it on how much I want to spend on a PC, but I want a reliable one that I am able to play WoW and other current games with.

So basically, how well do you guys think this PC with run WoW?
How well do you think it would run current games such as Battlefield 3 or Skyrim?

Also, my last concern is, is everything I selected compatible? Wasn't sure if the motherboard and case would work together etc.

Thanks for any and all help!

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/Tempo ... hList.aspx <<Wishlist Link

Case: APEVIA X-Gear ATXB5KLW-BK Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case 420W Power Supply

Motherboard: ECS IC780M-A2 (V1.0A) AM3 AMD 770 ATX AMD Motherboard

Processor: AMD Athlon II X4 631 Llano 2.6GHz Socket FM1 100W Quad-Core Desktop Processor AD631XWNGXBOX

Memory: CORSAIR Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Low Profile Desktop Memory Model CML8GX3M2A1600C9

Video: EVGA 01G-P3-1556-KR GeForce GTX 550 Ti (Fermi) FPB 1GB 192-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card

Hard Drive: HITACHI HDS721050CLA362 (0F10381) 500GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive

With the equipment you have listed you should be able to run most of the current games on their highest settings and get a framerate of 30fps or higher.

However, I would suggest you look into a more powerful Power Supply. I recommend at least a 650 watt, but it might not be necessary.
Your motherboard choice is compatable with both the case and the processor. I'd make a slight recommendation at looking into a more solid case. Also one with better air movement within, to keep the processor and video card cool. Plus, when building your own, it's always nice to have a big case to give yourself plenty of room to work, and Move cables around. Not a necessity, but yet another recommendation.
Your current build should be able to run most anything you'd like to load up on at least HIGH settings, if not the highest.

The 8800GTS is made for games, the GT520 isn't. In other words the 8800 old as it is will still run circles around the 520.

As for the processors. The Quad is the better choice. Both will do the job just fine for most games though. You don't really need a lot of cpu power for games.

Some graphics cards support HDMI even though they don't have the specific port. Normally you'll get an adapter (DVI to HDMI) with the card. If that's not the case you can still get an adapter, but audio won't go through the cable. So if you want to send audio to your monitor/TV you'll have to run that through a speparate cable. Still works though.

I've seen the 520 in other "gaming machine" as well. Strikes me as really weird (and shitty) how they choose to build these machines. Guess they want their lifespanns to be as short as possible so people'll come back sooner rather than later to buy another one.

Obviously the 8800, even though it's GTS. Though, not BFG, since that company doesn't exist anymore

If you want to play games and it's an nvidia card, don't go below x6xx. Seriously.

By the way, some of those cards had a S-Video like port ... but it's actually not. It's suppose to have a dongle that goes with it with a bunch of addition connections. If you notice, it's probably not actually S-Video, there's likely too many pin connections.

Anyway, they didn't really support HDMI anyway, because a lot of those cards didn't support HDCP (Though if they have DVI, they might).

Just get a DVI to HDMI cable ... it works well. But no HDCP support when using it.

You can get a signal through an hdmi cable without hdcp support though. What sometimes happens is the image gets boxed in by black borders. This issue can be circumvented with the right software that lets you manually adjust refresh rates and the number of lines sent to your monitor. It's pretty difficult stuff though.

On a personal note. I fucking hate HDCP and drm crap like it.