1920 x 1200 or 1920 x 1080

[ithehappy]

1200p only has about 11% more pixels than 1080p, not sure how you got to 30%...

For me, 1200p was a no brainer... I was coming from 1680x1050 and was used to 16:10.

Shite. Extremely sorry for my stupendous statement, that 30% figure I had in mind because I moved to 1200p from a 1050p, darn, should have thought about saying that.

Sorry

 

[Makaveli]

I also prefer 16:10 and 1200p.

Some very good points posted here.

I lol'd at this.

and thirdly this monitor is garbage and the person who says there are no good 1200p gaming monitors available is absolutely right.

"U2412M is also an eIPS panel that is natively 6-bit but uses A-FRC to display 16.7 million colors."

Next time buy a real 8-bit panel.

 

[xthetenth]

For the record I'd prefer 1920x1200 to 1080 all things being equal despite being an avowed member of the church of 21:9. My one true love is pixels, and I feel that 1200 or so is where things really start fitting easily on the screen so two things side by side really works. 1080 still feels short, and 1440 feels tall, like there's plenty of y room for one task but definitely not room for two. Problem is things are rarely equal, and I'd sooner have a nice IPS than a nasty TN, and I'd really sooner have 2560x1440 if they're in the picture.

 

[Makaveli]

For the record I'd prefer 1920x1200 to 1080 all things being equal despite being an avowed member of the church of 21:9. My one true love is pixels, and I feel that 1200 or so is where things really start fitting easily on the screen so two things side by side really works. 1080 still feels short, and 1440 feels tall, like there's plenty of y room for one task but definitely not room for two.

I believe this is because of the 16:9 vs 16:10 aspect ratio that you prefer like myself.

You will see the same thing if you compare your example on 1440p vs 1600p.

 

[lupi]

1200 vastly superior.