LG 52T L1752T 17" Black

The LG L1752T is a used 17-inch 4:3 LCD with a surprisingly good 1,400:1 contrast ratio but an outdated 8ms response time. At $125, it's only worth considering if you specifically need a compact 4:3 panel for legacy software or tight spaces. Display quality and connectivity rank near the bottom of our database. For most buyers, a used 24-inch 1080p monitor is a much better use of the same money.

The 8ms response time is the headline number, and it's not a good one by today's standards. For context, even budget office monitors now ship with 4ms or 5ms panels, and gaming displays are down to 1ms. What this means in practice is that fast-moving content will show some ghosting. Scrolling through documents is fine, but anything with rapid motion, video games, action movies, will look a little smeary. It's not unusable, but it's noticeable if you're coming from anything made in the last decade.

The 1,400:1 contrast ratio is the one spec that holds up surprisingly well. That's better than a lot of cheap modern IPS panels, which often sit around 1,000:1. Combined with 300 nits of brightness, this monitor can produce a reasonably punchy image in a controlled lighting environment. The catch is the color. 16.2 million colors means this is a 6-bit panel using dithering, not true 8-bit. Color accuracy lands in the 43rd percentile, which is solidly middle of the pack. Fine for text and basic tasks, but anyone doing photo or video work should look elsewhere. The 1280 x 1024 resolution gives you a decent amount of vertical space for documents, but it's cramped by modern standards.

Stacked against the MSI MAG 272QPW QD-OLED or the ASUS TUF Gaming VG34VQL1B, this LG looks like it's from another planet. Those are modern gaming displays with high refresh rates, wide color gamuts, and response times measured in fractions of a millisecond. The LG L1752T isn't even playing the same game. It's a basic office monitor from an era when 8ms was considered fast. The comparison isn't really fair, but it does highlight how far monitor tech has come.

The Dell S2725QC and Acer Nitro XV272U are closer in spirit, they're productivity-focused displays, but they still blow the LG away on resolution, connectivity, and ergonomics. The Acer offers a 1440p panel with a high refresh rate for not much more money on the used market. The Dell brings USB-C connectivity and a 4K panel. Where the LG wins is size and aspect ratio. None of those competitors offer a 4:3 panel, and none of them will fit on a tiny desk or a cramped server rack shelf the way this 17-inch unit will.

At $125 used, this is a tough sell unless you specifically need a 4:3 panel. For the same money, you can find used 22-inch or 24-inch 1080p monitors with better response times, better color, and more connectivity. The value proposition here is entirely about the form factor. If you're running legacy software that expects a 4:3 aspect ratio, or you need a small screen for a cramped workspace, this might be worth it. But you're paying a premium for old tech.

The used market for these older LG panels is thin, which is why the price holds up. There just aren't many 17-inch 4:3 monitors floating around anymore. But that scarcity doesn't make it a good deal. It makes it a niche purchase. If you can live with a 16:9 or 16:10 panel, you'll get dramatically more monitor for your money elsewhere.

The LG L1752T is a relic from a time when 4:3 was the standard and 17 inches felt like a big screen. This is a used monitor floating around on Newegg for about $125, and it's aimed at a very specific buyer. Someone who needs a basic display for a point-of-sale system, an old test bench, or maybe a retro gaming setup where a square panel just feels right. It's not trying to compete with modern ultrawides or OLED panels, and that's kind of the point.

What's interesting here is the contrast ratio. LG claims 1,400:1, which was genuinely impressive for an LCD of this era. Most budget panels from the mid-2000s sat around 500:1 to 800:1. The 300 nits of brightness is also respectable for a TN panel from this generation. But the 8ms response time tells you exactly how old this thing is. Modern gaming monitors are down to 1ms or less, so this is firmly in "fine for spreadsheets, not for Counter-Strike" territory.

Our database puts this monitor's compactness in the 86th percentile, which makes sense. A 17-inch 4:3 panel has a tiny footprint compared to today's 27-inch and 34-inch monsters. But that's about where the good news ends. Display quality sits in the 5th percentile, performance in the 6th, and connectivity in the 7th. This is a monitor that does one thing, being small, and does it well. Everything else is a compromise you accept for the form factor.

Anyone doing creative work should skip this without a second thought. The 6-bit panel with dithering, the 43rd percentile color accuracy, and the low resolution make it a poor fit for photo editing, video work, or any color-critical task. You'd be better off with a used IPS panel from the last five years, even a budget one, which will give you better color and resolution for similar money.

Gamers should also look elsewhere. The 8ms response time and 4:3 aspect ratio are both dealbreakers for modern gaming. Even casual gamers will notice the ghosting and the narrow field of view. If you want a small monitor for a secondary display or a retro setup, this could work, but as a primary gaming display it's a non-starter. Look for a used 24-inch 1080p monitor with a 5ms or lower response time instead.

If you need a 4:3 monitor for legacy applications, a retro gaming setup, or a space-constrained workstation, the LG L1752T is one of the few options still available. The 1,400:1 contrast ratio and 300 nits of brightness mean it's not a complete eyesore, and the compact footprint is genuinely useful in the right context. Just know that you're buying a monitor that was mid-range when it launched and is now firmly obsolete for most purposes.

For everyone else, skip it. The 8ms response time, limited color depth, and bare-bones connectivity make this a poor choice for modern productivity, let alone gaming or creative work. You can get a used 24-inch 1080p monitor with better specs for the same price. The only reason to buy this is if the 4:3 aspect ratio is non-negotiable, and that's a pretty narrow slice of buyers.