I don't think this is the case. Most games scale well on LCDs, you don't HAVE to run at full resolution. I certainly don't on mine. The windows desktop looks like crap at scaled resolutions, but games look great.
I don't think this is the case. Most games scale well on LCDs, you don't HAVE to run at full resolution. I certainly don't on mine. The windows desktop looks like crap at scaled resolutions, but games look great.
Originally posted by: Sonikku
Sony FW900 FTW.
1920x1200 your thing? Go for it.
Video card not up to it? Try 1280x800 instead. Or anything in between if that's your fancy. No scaling.
I'm in the Air Force, so I do have to move occasionally. I'd prefer not having one single item taking up 1/4th of my weight allowance for when I move.
20" here.
One of the main reasons I havent moved to the 24" (that hasnt been stated yet in the thread), is that I rotate the LCD 90degrees often.
When in portrait mode, its almost "too tall". In fact I'd go as far to say it is a bit to tall to read when rotated, I find myself physically looking up and down. Bending my neck or uncomfortably moving my eyes far up and down.
A 24" would be simply too tall in this scenario. At least, they have been when I've test-drove them.
While I like the idea of 24"+ LCDs... for a desk I'll stick with 20" max.
24"+ (in my house) are for televisions.
One of the main reasons I havent moved to the 24" (that hasnt been stated yet in the thread), is that I rotate the LCD 90degrees often.
When in portrait mode, its almost "too tall". In fact I'd go as far to say it is a bit to tall to read when rotated, I find myself physically looking up and down. Bending my neck or uncomfortably moving my eyes far up and down.
A 24" would be simply too tall in this scenario. At least, they have been when I've test-drove them.
While I like the idea of 24"+ LCDs... for a desk I'll stick with 20" max.
24"+ (in my house) are for televisions.
Unless you have an SLI-capable motherboard, in which case, you would know not to buy an ATI card, because you'd be cutting off a possible upgrade path.
And you DO NOT NEED SLI/XFire TO RUN 1920x1200 (this is not directed at you Sunrise). It has been stated by people who ARE running that res without 2 video cards, so stop pretending it's true. It will cost you far less than $300 to get a vid card that can push 1920x1200. In fact, you can get one for $225.
Personally scaling in games on the 24's look fine. I don't use it anymore but I did back when I had a 6800GT. It just looks like free AA IMO lol. well not quite but it doesn't look bad at all IMO.
I just ran a game of FEAR at 1920x1200 and can confirm that even on my modest system it runs perfectly smooth with everything on max except shadow detail (medium) and soft shadows (off) and no AA/AF. I'm not sure what more I can do to convince people that you don't need super-expensive graphics cards to run games at high detail at 1920x1200. It's disappointing to see so many people turned off buying 24" monitors just because they think their mid-range systems won't run their games at native res.
Edit - just tried Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter at 1920x1200 and the framerates were pretty bad and there was huge input lag. I scaled it back to 1280x1024 with black bars on the sides and it ran sweet and looked really good. So there you go, with a modest system you can run most games fine at 1920x1200 but the newer flashier titles will start to bottleneck. Don't let your mid-range graphics card deter you from buying a 24" monitor.
Edit - just tried Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter at 1920x1200 and the framerates were pretty bad and there was huge input lag. I scaled it back to 1280x1024 with black bars on the sides and it ran sweet and looked really good. So there you go, with a modest system you can run most games fine at 1920x1200 but the newer flashier titles will start to bottleneck. Don't let your mid-range graphics card deter you from buying a 24" monitor.
Remember that the scaling is perfect if you're running at a whole factor of the native resolution.
Ex: 1920x1080 LCD would also look perfect at 960x540. FWIW.
Ex: 1920x1080 LCD would also look perfect at 960x540. FWIW.
I undertsnad what you're saying, but I've also seen FEAR performance numbers. Either the numbers I've read are incorrect, you have the game way turned down, or your FPS would not be acceptable to most of us. Why don't you measure your FPS and post your settings?
First of all I don't know how to measure the FPS in FEAR and secondly I have no interest in finding out what my FPS is. If the game runs well, I'm happy. Same reason I have no desire to run a full screen gradient to see if my monitor has banding. If it doesn't show up in general use I'm not fussed. I can tell you that the game runs very smooth with no hitches. Maybe I'm not sensitive to low framerates, or maybe the required specs are overstated. I don't know.
Alright, that's no problem. But since you aren't willing to actually test the FPS, you might want to reconsider stating that others shouldn't be claiming that a 24" display cannot be run without really high-end video. If can be run fine for YOU, but unless you have numbers to back it up, your experience do not meen everyone else should read this and decide they can play FEAR and Oblivion on a new 24" with a 6600GT and be happy with their FPS.
Sonikku
Lifer
- Jun 23, 2005
- 15,882
- 4,882
- 136
Originally posted by: dgevert
Originally posted by: Sonikku
Sony FW900 FTW.
1920x1200 your thing? Go for it.
Video card not up to it? Try 1280x800 instead. Or anything in between if that's your fancy. No scaling.
I'm in the Air Force, so I do have to move occasionally. I'd prefer not having one single item taking up 1/4th of my weight allowance for when I move.
So get a LCD air force boy. For people such as myself who aren't scraping for every inch of space possible, the FW900 more then fits the bill.
- Aug 24, 2005
- 6,783
- 27
- 91
I just got my new 2407, and it is beautiful. I am coming from a dual 17" LCD display, and I was always frustrated with only being able to play a game on one screen. Now, I have a single monitor with more height and nearly as much horizonal width as my two screens toghether! The color reproduction is fine, scaling is no sweat, and I got mine a day early (thanks DHL). All for $703 + NY tax. Pick up the 2407!
Brian
BTW, I ran Oblivion with some eye candy on, and my 7900GT ran it like a champ. Like a 7900GTX, no, but I have no problem with its performance. Go for it!
Brian
BTW, I ran Oblivion with some eye candy on, and my 7900GT ran it like a champ. Like a 7900GTX, no, but I have no problem with its performance. Go for it!
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter