Quick Survey...

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
C

chazdraves

Golden Member
May 10, 2002
1,122
0
0
1600x1200 @72Hz vs. 1280x1024 @85Hz on a 19"?

Thanks!

- Chaz

Edit: I updated the poll to include my new fave 1024 @ 100Hz (120, if you like for those that support it...)

Oh, and I know the Aspect Ratio is messed with 1280x1024, but a lot of games don't allow 1280x960...
 
M

Matthias99

Diamond Member
Oct 7, 2003
8,808
0
0
1280x1024, but not for the refresh rate. I just find 1600x1200 too small for prolonged desktop use on a 19" monitor.
 
L

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,938
6
81
1600x1200 @ 85
I wouldn't get a 19" with anything less. 1280x1024 is too big for me now after years of 1600x1200 on a 19", and <85 is painful.

It depends on what you find most comfortable. Probably 1280x1024 @ 85 though, because refresh rate is more important, IMO.
 
Elcs

Elcs

Diamond Member
Apr 27, 2002
6,278
6
81
You need a 3rd option.

LCD :p

On second thoughts, 1280x1024. 85hz is perfect for me.
 
C

chazdraves

Golden Member
May 10, 2002
1,122
0
0
First of all... LCD for gaming? Icky poo.. Sorry...

As far as 120Hz goes... can you even tell the difference past like 85? 72 isn't very noticeable, let alone 120Hz... Maybe it just doesn't bother me to the extent of some...

Oh yeah, and I don't think I could play Doom3 at 1024... it's almost like a disgrace to the game... (and the OC'ed 6800GT...).

Keep it coming, if yah would. I obviously have much to learn yet.

- Chaz
 
J

jim1976

Platinum Member
Aug 7, 2003
2,704
6
81
Depends on the monitor. As Mathias99 said if you have a 19'' you should use the 12x10.
But if you have a 21'' monitor then 16x12 would be your best bet I guess.
 
DannyLove

DannyLove

Lifer
Oct 17, 2000
12,876
4
76
1280 by 1024, and yea like the second poster said, anything beyond that is too small for me.

danny~!
 
C

chazdraves

Golden Member
May 10, 2002
1,122
0
0
Perhaps I should change it up a bit by saying "for gaming"...

Any difference in opinions there? Which is to say, would you honestly play Doom3 at 1024 instead of 1600 even if your video card could handle 1600x1200? And, if so, why?

Thanks again! Keep 'em coming!

- Chaz
 
P

PCHPlayer

Golden Member
Oct 9, 2001
1,053
0
0
I get headaches and vertigo with any refresh rate less than 75 Hz, and even that is sometimes iffy. Usually I try to keep the refresh rate at 85 or higher. Everyone at work calls me the refresh rate snob.
 
P

Pete

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
4,953
0
0
My eyes would demand 85Hz or above, but I'd probably choo-choo-choose 12x9 or maybe 14x10 on a 19". 16x12 would be pushing it with normal font sizes, IMO.
 
I

imported_Sasha

Senior member
Aug 29, 2004
286
0
0
I'm using 1600x1200x32-bit at 72-Hz. I wants a larger monitor so I can go with more resolution. Keep in mind my digital camera is like 3000x2000.
 
apoppin

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: chazdraves
1600x1200 @72Hz vs. 1280x1024 @85Hz on a 19"?

Thanks!

- Chaz
Click to expand...
i really do have a similar choice . . . for my 19" Samsung 955DF i can set 16x12 at ~70hz (which totally sux on that monitor) or 12x9 at 80hz (i guess it is OK since Samsung says 12x10 at 79 is "safe") OR 11x8 at 85hz.

For ME (and my 19 incher), 11x8 is best for desktop AND gaming. Desktop, because i am a bit near-sighted and gaming because my 9800xt runs most newer games very well at 10x7 or 11x8.


So, for your choices, i'd pick 1280x960
(and keep that aspect ratio over 12x10) . . . 72 hz is too low of a refresh (for your eyes) and probably at the limits of your monitor (anyway) . . . .;)
 
J

JBT

Lifer
Nov 28, 2001
12,094
1
81
Depends on the game. DIII is a slower single player so I would probably go with the max res. If it was a online game that was fast paced I would go with the lower res and highier refresh rate.
 
V

VIAN

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2003
6,575
1
0
First of all... LCD for gaming? Icky poo.. Sorry...

As far as 120Hz goes... can you even tell the difference past like 85? 72 isn't very noticeable, let alone 120Hz... Maybe it just doesn't bother me to the extent of some...

Oh yeah, and I don't think I could play Doom3 at 1024... it's almost like a disgrace to the game... (and the OC'ed 6800GT...).
Click to expand...

LCD for gaming isn't all that horrible. On the plus side, without vsync, you notice less tearing since the picture is shown at once. Which will help by disabling vsync and getting the more performance out of your card.

I can tell the difference between 85Hz and 100Hz. I would keep it at 100Hz, but I keep it at 120Hz because of vsync. Nice arbitrary frame rates - 60fps, 40fps, 30fps.

As far as the resolution goes, 1024 is the only one that supports 120Hz and vsync is definitely a must for me. This way I get more performance out of my card. At 1024x768 isn't a bad resolution. It is still considered High Definition. It's also the minimum resolution I care to play at. You only notice the bad resolutions once you move down from higher resolutions.

1600 is a terrible resolution, everything looks so small on the desktop. However, the game looks really nice, but alas, a performance hit unlike any other.

 
C

chazdraves

Golden Member
May 10, 2002
1,122
0
0
I was going to list 1280x960 in the choices, but some games (*cough* Doom3 *cough*) don't support 960 by default, though I'm sure you could tweak a .cfg file or something to make it work...

In response to apoppin's post - I actually have the Samsung 997DF. I like it most of the time, but I find it occassionally lets out a very obnoxious, very high-pitched squeal... (am I the only one that hears it?). That and the fact that the upper left corner seems just a sheer hint "yellow-er" than the rest of the screen... I can't notice in games, but it really shows up on a white document...

As we continue this, would someone care to explain the whole refresh rate vs. frame rate thing? I've never had anyone elaborate that to me, and it sounds interesting... something to do with multiples? Anyhow, thanks for responding! Please keep 'em coming!

- Chaz
 
S

screw3d

Diamond Member
Nov 6, 2001
6,906
1
76
I'm surprised no one mentioned this yet.. but 1280x1024's aspect ratio is 5:4, whereas your CRT's ratio is 4:3.. at 1280x1024, you are going to get some weird geometry
 
C

chazdraves

Golden Member
May 10, 2002
1,122
0
0
Yeah, I tried to quick touch on that above... Some games (why???) don't support 960... But, you're right, the aspect is a bit distorted.

- Chaz
 
L

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,938
6
81
12x10 @ 85 for gaming, partly because it's better performance at that level, and because otherwise refresh rate would be painful.
 
C

chazdraves

Golden Member
May 10, 2002
1,122
0
0
Now, for as little as I obviously know about refresh rates, even I can say that 60Hz is rather irritating...

I'll be honest, I think you guys have swayed me on the subject... I've just turned down (and tried out) all of my games at 1024 with EVERYTHING on, and I must say... it does actually look a little better... Doom3 with 4x/8x?!?! Very nice... My monitor doesn't support 120Hz at 1024 though... gotta stick with 100Hz... but I can definitely tell the difference...

Thanks as always! Please keep the opinions rolling in!

- Chaz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom