Any of you lappy-game @ 1366*768?

[Blue_Max]

I'm used to my lappy's gorgeous 1080P but its ~GT635-640M performance is pretty middling at best.

I have the option to trade it for something smaller, lighter and with a much faster GTX 660M, but it's only got 1366*768 res.

I'm looking forward to Fallout4 and still enjoy Skyrim... are they going to look horrible at that res? Maybe 2xAA will make it bearable?

Your opinions welcomed before I kick myself for a bad trade! (Machines are of equal dollar value. He gains high res and professional style, I gain gaming performance.

 

[fralexandr]

I gamed primarily on my m11x for a few years, the 11.6" 1366x768 display was a meh TN panel with pretty bad contrast though. Not a problem with old games that used fewer colors, but newer games with shadow and lighting effects really don't look as great as on better panels.

Resolution is effectively resolving power, or ability to distinguish 1 object from another. Lower resolutions = more aliasing, fewer pixels. The usefulness of resolution depends primarily on the audiences eyesight, distance to the display, and size of the display. For example, lower resolution might make it harder to distinguish an object from the environment, requiring the player character to move closer in order to see some details, and also result in lines appearing jaggier.

I for the most part don't use anti-aliasing and resolution doesn't seem to be that big a factor for me, but YMMV. I can see the jaggies, it just never bothers me. I don't like screen-tearing, so I usually enable V-sync.
Playing games on a 50" 720p plasma >> 27" 1080p IPS HP 27xi >= 22" 1080p IPS HP ZR22w >= 22" 1080p MVA HP Elite L2201x >> 11.6" 720p TN
note: placement of the 3 desktop monitors is difficult, since I haven't directly compared them against each other, and time probably played tricks on my brain.

I prefer panel quality for better lighting/dynamic range/contrast compared to resolution
Most laptops on 1366x768 use TN panels for what it's worth (kind of annoying, since a lot of cheap 1366x768 tablets use IPS). Your 1080p might be TN or IPS. There are some good TN panels, but there are also some bad ones. Maybe look at notebookcheck for the notebooks in question, since they usually have pretty detailed breakdowns on them, though most reviews are for versions with the high resolution screen...

m11x display review for reference
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3620/alienware-m11x-worlds-smallest-gaming-laptop/7
this laptop came out before cheapo laptop displays started improving, likely due to the smartphone panel craze.

most of my qualms about low resolution have nothing to do with gaming.
It's rather annoying using 1366x768 with general web browsing and office work.

 

[Blue_Max]

Well, I traded a desktop instead so I have both machines for the moment. Firing up a few games now. I'm guessing the sheer performance will outweigh the blockies.

 

[Mushkins]

Well, I traded a desktop instead so I have both machines for the moment. Firing up a few games now. I'm guessing the sheer performance will outweigh the blockies.

I'd be more worried about the lack of screen real estate than any potential aliasing, but that's just me.

You can only fit so much UI on a 720p monitor, and it's now bigger and covering more of what you're actually looking at.

 

[ninaholic37]

I'd be more worried about the lack of screen real estate than any potential aliasing, but that's just me.

You can only fit so much UI on a 720p monitor, and it's now bigger and covering more of what you're actually looking at.

I have a 12.1" with 1024x768 screen and there is way more than enough room for everything. I actually found 800x600 on it much easier to read for common things, especially in Windows. This new widescreen 16:9 trend sucks as well, especially for web browsing, I'd rather have more height than width when reading a webpage.

edit: Both our posts are off-topic though because the OP is talking about gaming.

 

[TeknoBug]

IMO 660M isn't good enough, find a 760M or 860M or even 840M laptop. 1366x768 is a breeze for those GPU's.

 

[Mushkins]

I have a 12.1" with 1024x768 screen and there is way more than enough room for everything. I actually found 800x600 on it much easier to read for common things, especially in Windows. This new widescreen 16:9 trend sucks as well, especially for web browsing, I'd rather have more height than width when reading a webpage.

edit: Both our posts are off-topic though because the OP is talking about gaming.

I'm not sure how my post is off topic, i'm talking about UI elements and limited viewing space specifically in games.

The difference in available screen real estate between 1024x768 and 1920x1080 is *massive*.

 

[monkeydelmagico]

The difference in available screen real estate between 1024x768 and 1920x1080 is *massive*.

Agreed especially for immersive games like skyrim. That being said I have played a fair amount of games on a 15" 1024x768 lappy. I usually try to keep it to old titles and less GPU dependent stuff. I wouldn't say fallout 4 will look horrible but when we know how much better it could look.....

 

[Blue_Max]

Hmmm.... yeah, it's a mixed bag. I found it hard to say no to trading an old basic i7-2600(nonK) rig for this Lenovo lappy.

Heh... if I had the surgical skill, I'd swap the MXM modules! Swap the 660M from the Lenovo with the HP 8760W's Quadro 3000M and enjoy the best of both!

What I'll likely do is upgrade the screen when I have some money to burn down the road - a 1080P matte rather than 1366x768 glossy with a tiny scratch.

But the performance is so much greater regardless of res. I had to run a few games at 768P on the HP anyways due to lack of graphic speed. Heh... I gain twice the cores and threads at half the weight too. I'll stick to the Lenovo and upgrade the screen later. Pity there's not a 900P option for it like some models had - nice balance there.