• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is the 6800NU enough to power a 2001FP?

amheck

Golden Member
Hi,

I have pretty much decided on the Dell 2001FP. I now need to choose a video card to go with it. I am still a little uncertain exactly if it matters I have to run everything at 1600x1200 to get the most out of the monitor. I guess I would have to leave off AA and AF in most instances, right?

I guess what I'm asking, are any of you using the 6800NU with a 1600x1200 LCD and if so, how does it do? Or is the 6800GT really the card you need?

Thanks!
Aaron
 
You can "power" any monitor with any video card. The video card doesn't matter when you get into things with resolution, etc.
 
Thanks. Well, maybe I wasn't asking this correctly. Or maybe i'm worrying myself for no reason. I guess what I'm trying to make sure is that I want to be able to play games like D3 and HF2 at the monitor's native resolution, which is 1600x1200. It's my understanding that this will give you the best picture. Is the 6800NU enough of a card to do this adequately?
 
Originally posted by: amheck
Thanks. Well, maybe I wasn't asking this correctly. Or maybe i'm worrying myself for no reason. I guess what I'm trying to make sure is that I want to be able to play games like D3 and HF2 at the monitor's native resolution, which is 1600x1200. It's my understanding that this will give you the best picture. Is the 6800NU enough of a card to do this adequately?

should be... you might not be able to turn up the AA/AF too high, but that's fine.. the games will look sweet without it at that res.
 
why do people get lcd's i dont get it and they play games? i mean WTF lcd:12ms can you say ghosting
refresh rate suxs they are just plain bad and expensive its better to save your money and get somthing better = a crt
 
Originally posted by: w00t
why do people get lcd's i dont get it and they play games? i mean WTF lcd:12ms can you say ghosting
refresh rate suxs they are just plain bad and expensive its better to save your money and get somthing better = a crt

CRTs = UGLY, space-hogger, energy-hogger, radiation cancer maker

LCDs = sexy, space-SAVER, energy-SAVER, put it on a laptop
 
Originally posted by: w00t
why do people get lcd's i dont get it and they play games? i mean WTF lcd:12ms can you say ghosting
refresh rate suxs they are just plain bad and expensive its better to save your money and get somthing better = a crt

refresh rate sux ? have you ever worked in an LCD in your life ? Or do you think 60Hz on lcd = 60Hz on crt ?

What sux is your ignorance....
 
Originally posted by: Amol
Originally posted by: w00t
why do people get lcd's i dont get it and they play games? i mean WTF lcd:12ms can you say ghosting
refresh rate suxs they are just plain bad and expensive its better to save your money and get somthing better = a crt

CRTs = UGLY, space-hogger, energy-hogger, radiation cancer maker

LCDs = sexy, space-SAVER, energy-SAVER, put it on a laptop

oh noes, teh radiation!
oh wait, i'm getting more radiation reflecting off of my wall from sunlight than my dual 21" CRTs.
:roll:

CRTs = HIGH CONTRAST, deep black, vibrant colors, sharp at all resolutions, super fast response

LCDs = washed out, grainy, blurry at all but one resolution, slow response time.

/me hugs his 2001fp
 
radiation cancer maker
LOL

With all these reviews that I read on LCDs, it just makes me hate them more and more.

You're asking for trouble with an LCD for gaming. Unless you're pressed for space, and can spare the money, or if you move around alot with your rig...., or you live in Cali, I wouldn't recommend LCDs for gaming.

They just don't make any sense, more expensive, too many annoyances with picture, it's just not worth it.

http://graphics.tomshardware.c...ay/20041123/index.html

LCDs are like those hot ass b|tches that are totally out of your league. At least for gaming. You'll want one so bad and she'll treat you like poop, but she's so tempting.
 
Alright, VIAN, no need to go overboard on the analogies for LCD's...

If you get a 1600X1200 LCD like the 2001fp then yeah, you're going to have to constantly have a top-of-the-line videocard to game properly on the screen at it's native resolution of 1600X1200. With that said, 17" and 19" screens have a native resolution of a reasonable 1280X1024 - basically a 6800nu and up can game perfectly at this resolution in every game.

I have a 19" Trinitron CRT right next to my 17" LCD (Samsung 710T) and I use the LCD for all games - it's way sharper and much clearer than the CRT, not to mention way brighter. Ghosting is not an issue on a 12ms digital screen.

When I had a 19" 25ms LCD, yeah first person shooters were way to ghosty/blurry on the LCD. On the 12ms FPSes look gorgeous.

Of course LCD technology isn't perfect, and for digital photography editing, CRT's are better. But there's a reason many people are switching to LCD, and it isn't just because it's 'a fad' or because they're smaller/sleeker. High quality LCD screens are crisp, bright and sharp.

As for being "washed out and grainy" ... That's a heavily subjective comment. I don't find good LCD's either of these qualities. And how often are you changing resolutions on your screen? I just leave mine pegged at native 1280 in everything. However newer Samsung screens actually have a good scaling algorithm, so they look fine in games at 1024X768 and 800X600 (check the Tom's Hardware Guide review of the 172X for a more thorough explanation on this).


To the original poster - you would be much better suited with a 6800GT for the 2001fp.
 
I read that the 172x is terrible for full action gaming because of it's PVA type screen.

In the link that I linked above is probably one of the best screens for gaming by samsung.

I wouldn't bother with anything less than 16ms. unless it's that samsung.

Usually the lower you go, the low the color reproduction will get, and of course that's black to white, gray to gray is usually always in the 20ms range or slower in every LCD.
 
Originally posted by: virtualgames0
Originally posted by: Amol
Originally posted by: w00t
why do people get lcd's i dont get it and they play games? i mean WTF lcd:12ms can you say ghosting
refresh rate suxs they are just plain bad and expensive its better to save your money and get somthing better = a crt

CRTs = UGLY, space-hogger, energy-hogger, radiation cancer maker

LCDs = sexy, space-SAVER, energy-SAVER, put it on a laptop

oh noes, teh radiation!
oh wait, i'm getting more radiation reflecting off of my wall from sunlight than my dual 21" CRTs.
:roll:

CRTs = HIGH CONTRAST, deep black, vibrant colors, sharp at all resolutions, super fast response

LCDs = washed out, grainy, blurry at all but one resolution, slow response time.

/me hugs his 2001fp

LOL- no doubt. The "radiation"! :roll:

 
The 2001FP does not need to run at 1600x1200 to look beautiful. I often run it at 1152x864 which uses 75hz instead of 60hz so that I can use vsync and get highier FPS. I even have a GT and ussually never use 1600x1200 unless I'm playing a single player game such as HL2. Doom3 and Far Cry. Multiplayer like CS:Source or Desert Combat, UT2004 where FPS are more important I use a lower resolution with some AA.

So I guess what I am trying to say is a 6800nu and a 2001FP will work together just fine. The 2001FP scales VERY well to other resolutions for games. I can't even see any distortion at all. So unless you have used a 2001FP in games don't talk about how well it does at non native resolution it still looks perfect. Of course run the desktop at 1600x1200 cause the other resolutions do look crappy, games simply do not.
 
Back
Top