Gaming: 1680 x 1050 with 7900GT okay???

[johantorn]

Originally posted by: sleepykid
anyone know what is the maximum FPS that you could see on a 8ms screen (vid card notwithstanding)?

i'd think the 2ms monitors sacrifice image quality for speed, coz i read the link by Cygnus X1 and thats what it says basically..."either good at color rendering or are excessively fast."

i suppose they dont use 8bit panels either

Well, 1 millisecond = 1/1000 s -> in one second a 2ms screen theoreticaly should be able to pump out 500 FPS. On a 8ms-panel, FPS would max out on 125. All these values are of course max values, real-world values would be somewhat lower, depending on the "greyness" of the back-to-back states that the screen continously switch between.

 

[kalrith]

Originally posted by: JBT

Originally posted by: kalrith

Originally posted by: Crescent13
My 7800GT @ GTX speeds plays HL2 fine, stumbles through Quake 4 (with 4xAA), and chokes up on fear without any AA or AF @ 1680x1050 (I have a NEC 20WMGX2)

Is widescreen gaming a lot more demanding that 4:3 gaming. I'm asking because I have an x850xt at 560/594 (a little faster than x850xt pe speeds), and I play Quake 4 at 1600x1200 with 16xAA, and it rarely hiccups. I have mine on high quality, so if you have yours on ultra then that could definitely make the difference.

You mean 16AF right???? It is impossible to run 16xAA esspecially with a single card.
4xAA is more stressful on a card than 16xAF.

Maybe that's it. I'm not at home, so I can't look at the settings in the game.

 

[aniruddha23]

Originally posted by: Cygnus X1

Originally posted by: sleepykid
anyone know what is the maximum FPS that you could see on a 8ms screen (vid card notwithstanding)?

i'd think the 2ms monitors sacrifice image quality for speed, coz i read the link by Cygnus X1 and thats what it says basically..."either good at color rendering or are excessively fast."

i suppose they dont use 8bit panels either

That's right basically I'm going to need another LCD to have rich text, but I tell you the colors the VX922 shows on BF2 at all max 12x10 4xAA is just amazing. The VX922 is my gaming monitor and I may in the future buy another for other tasks, but just read the different reviews on the VX922. Hell go to New egg and read all those reviews 99% are positive and I can attest to that. Reminds me to right my glowing review. Good Luck.

Try This for glowing reviews NEC LCD1970GX-BK Black 19"

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: Smartazz

Originally posted by: Shortass
In a year the 7900GT will have problems running at that resolution on high settings, but I would imagine it would run it on medium. The x1900xt might be a better buy and should last longer as a superior card, however.

The prices are so diffrent.

$100?

 

[Markbnj]

I do that resolution in Oblivion on a 2405 with a 6800GT o/c'd to 420/1100. So I'm guessing you'll be very happy.

 

[kalrith]

Originally posted by: Markbnj
I do that resolution in Oblivion on a 2405 with a 6800GT o/c'd to 420/1100. So I'm guessing you'll be very happy.

How does the 2405 look at 1680x1050? I have an x850xt and am planning on getting either a 2405 or 2407 by the end of the year. It will be a while before I upgrade my video card, so I doubt I'll be able to run Oblivion (whenever I get it) at 1920x1200.

Thanks!

 

[sleepykid]

i dont think a single 1900XTX or 7900GTX can drive games at 1920x1200. comfortably with eye candy enabled. thats where SLI might actually turn out to be useful. (never thought i'd say that one) =)

 

[aniruddha23]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: Smartazz

Originally posted by: Shortass
In a year the 7900GT will have problems running at that resolution on high settings, but I would imagine it would run it on medium. The x1900xt might be a better buy and should last longer as a superior card, however.

The prices are so diffrent.

$100?

With the deall deals going on for teh XT I would say $ 50 at most

 

[kalrith]

Originally posted by: sleepykid
i dont think a single 1900XTX or 7900GTX can drive games at 1920x1200. comfortably with eye candy enabled. thats where SLI might actually turn out to be useful. (never thought i'd say that one) =)

Well, I certainly won't be investing in SLI, but I'll probably drop $300 on a single graphics card some time next year. I just upgraded my whole system, so I didn't have much extra cash to spend on a high-end card. So, my question to you guys is which looks better on an LCD, running at the native resolution with eye candy turned off or running at a lower resolution with eye candy turned on?

 

[sleepykid]

depends on what eye candy you talkin about. i'd say if you're running in DX9c with best texture mapping, AA, AF etc., then even at lower res. like 1280x1024 or 1280x800 shoud look very good compared to running 1920x1200 with DX7 or no AA,AF, low textures etc..

 

[kalrith]

I still haven't fully decided on a 2407 over a 2007. The 2007 would obviously be cheaper and have a lower native resolution for gaming (which is good if I can't run games at 1920x1200 anyways). However, it would be much smaller and have less screen real estate. We have a Sceptre 20.1" widescreen at work. I might "borrow" it one weekend to see how I like the size for both normal and gaming use.

 

[sleepykid]

borrowing is a good idea, try it at home and see.
my personal problem is similar but i'm considering between 19" or 20" widescreen. I'm think i'm just gonna buy the 20 inch 1680x1050 viewsonic and a 7900gt and play at max settings & res. as long as i'm able to. then as games get better (and more taxing), reduce the resolution but try to keep eye candy on...

my personal opinion is that if you plan to buy a 24 inch widscreen be prepared to spend a LOT of money for the video card(s) to play games at native res and full details. but i hear you can play at reduced resolutions with black bars at the sides (with dells) that show only that many pixels without stretching the res. full screen. that way you can have your xtra large desktop as well as game in lower res if needed...

btw u gonna be driving the 2407 with the x850xt?

 

[w00t]

I am a true gamer compete in leagues and lan in cs 1.6 when i go to lan I play on a CRT when I get home I play on my 2005FPW looks good either way it did take time getting used to the 2005FPW but within a week I was good. I think all you people who think lower the ms time the better your wrong. a high quality panel at 25ms won't ghost you guys think that they stay at 2ms or 4ms your also wrong again that is the lowest ms time they took during test. CRT's have way faster ms times than lcd's less than 1ms and constant. all you who say true gamers get those samsung panels that have 4ms are wrong those are stupid gamers.

 

[kalrith]

Whether I buy the 2007 or the 2407, it will be driven with the x850xt for the first 5-6 months. I have to space out my big purchases, so I won't be able to buy a new monitor and video card at the same time. I would probably have the money for a 2007 and an x1900xt or 7900gt rather than just a 2407, but I just bought the x850xt a month ago and would like to get more than 6 months out of it.

 

[Markbnj]

Originally posted by: kalrith

Originally posted by: Markbnj
I do that resolution in Oblivion on a 2405 with a 6800GT o/c'd to 420/1100. So I'm guessing you'll be very happy.

How does the 2405 look at 1680x1050? I have an x850xt and am planning on getting either a 2405 or 2407 by the end of the year. It will be a while before I upgrade my video card, so I doubt I'll be able to run Oblivion (whenever I get it) at 1920x1200.

Thanks!

It looks very nice, actually. Of course, 1900 x 1200 looks better, but as someone else said, it's the rare card that can drive a modern game at that res with the candy enabled. I have my settings cranked well back for Oblivion, but it still looks great.

 

[w00t]

1920x1200 is just to high for most gamers you would have to upgrade ALOT and put alot of money into crossfire or SLI basically.

1680x1050 is already pretty demanding be ready to upgrade. I know i am ready to upgrade to a whole new system.

 

[kalrith]

Originally posted by: w00t
1920x1200 is just to high for most gamers you would have to upgrade ALOT and put alot of money into crossfire or SLI basically.

1680x1050 is already pretty demanding be ready to upgrade. I know i am ready to upgrade to a whole new system.

Well, I just upgraded my system a couple of months ago and I have an SLI motherboard, so I think the only thing I would need to upgrade are the video cards. However, I don't think my wife would let me drop $600 into a couple of video cards after spending even more than that on a monitor.

The fact is I don't have as much time to game as I used to. I work full time, go to college almost full time, and have a house (with lots of projects) to take care of. Even if my wife would let me, I don't think I could justify spending so much on graphics cards that are going to be outdated in a year. I can justify spending a lot on a monitor that'll last me 5+ years. I've had my 19" CRT for longer than that, and it's suited me just fine. I'd just like to get a larger screen and preferably widescreen.