Resolutions above monitors native?

[pekingman]

So, I'm just getting into this gaming thing and so far so good as I'm having loads of fun. Is there though, any benefit to running games as higher resolutions than your monitor? My current Dell runs at 1680x1050 native and it seems to me that running at the native would yield a better picture than if I turned up the resolution. Is there something to this? Should I limit the resolution to the monitors native? What do you guys do?

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

The monitor can't display beyond its native resolution. Games usually only show resolutions that your monitor is capable of.

 

[Throckmorton]

If you somehow use a higher resolution, the quality will be worse because the monitor will have to downsample, interpolating all the pixels in the process.

 

[JustaGeek]

I play NHL 08 at 1600 x 1200, with no visible difference in quality between the games played at ACER's native 1680 x 1050.

Perhaps it has something to do with the HDCP designation/rating...?

 

[themisfit610]

No. it has nothing to do with HDCP.

If your monitor's native resolution is 1680x1050, that's how many pixels it has, and running any other resolution means at least one of the following:

1) Scaling (interpolation)
2) Black bars

If you run 1600x1200 on a 1680x1050 panel, what happens (ideally) is the resolution gets downsampled to 1400x1050 (to match the vertical resolution of your monitor), and displayed with black bars on the sides to fill in the missing 280 pixels. This maintains the correct aspect ratio, and maximizes vertical resolution, while at the same time not losing any content (cropping off edges for example). It is slightly less sharp / detailed than just running 1680x1050 or 1400x1050 natively.

Alternatively, you can stretch out 1600 to 1680, and stretch down 1200 to 1050, which is really terrible, because then your aspect ratio is incorrect.

At least maintain a correct aspect ratio!!

If there's no visible difference, you're just not seeing it!
If you can't see it, and don't care, then consider yourself lucky!

~MiSfit

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: themisfit610
No. it has nothing to do with HDCP.

If your monitor's native resolution is 1680x1050, that's how many pixels it has, and running any other resolution means at least one of the following:

1) Scaling (interpolation)
2) Black bars

If you run 1600x1200 on a 1680x1050 panel, what happens (ideally) is the resolution gets downsampled to 1400x1050 (to match the vertical resolution of your monitor), and displayed with black bars on the sides to fill in the missing 280 pixels. This maintains the correct aspect ratio, and maximizes vertical resolution, while at the same time not losing any content (cropping off edges for example). It is slightly less sharp / detailed than just running 1680x1050 or 1400x1050 natively.

Alternatively, you can stretch out 1600 to 1680, and stretch down 1200 to 1050, which is really terrible, because then your aspect ratio is incorrect.

At least maintain a correct aspect ratio!!

If there's no visible difference, you're just not seeing it!
If you can't see it, and don't care, then consider yourself lucky!

~MiSfit

If you would like to contact EA Sports - be my guest!

I has nothing to do with the aspect ratio - I don't have a choice! I can play at 1280 x 1024, or 1600 x 1200 - period. Yes, the image is stretched/shrunk a bit, but it is still more than acceptable.

Are you lucky enough that all your games have 1920x1200 resolution to choose from...?

Why don't you pick up a copy of NHL 08 and see it for yourself...?

And get the ACER X221W while you're at it, so you can experience it, too.

Frankly, I don't care about the interpolation - as long as the image is as good as possible. Definitely better than black bars or playing in "Windowed" mode.

 

[speckedhoncho]

What could happen if the rasterizer and/or pixel shaders knew the pixel pitch? Could higher-than-native resolution enhance the dithering or depth from native resolution?

 

[TheStu]

check out WidescreenGamingForums.com to see if NHL08 can be run in Widescreen mode, and what it ends up looking like.

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek
I play NHL 08 at 1600 x 1200, with no visible difference in quality between the games played at ACER's native 1680 x 1050.

Perhaps it has something to do with the HDCP designation/rating...?

EA has had pretty crappy/non-existent support for 16:10 resolutions. You aren't actually displaying 1600x1200 resolution as your monitor physically doesn't have that many pixels on the screen. It's probably cropping the extra vertical resolution.

 

[JustaGeek]

Thanks guys.

I've looked into the issue, and some people on the EA Sports forums found a workaround.

Unfortunately, it leaves either vertical or horizontal bars.

It REALLY looks good playing at 1600x1200 on a 1680x1050 LCD.

Took a bit of getting used to, since the whole image is deformed, but but the gameplay is smoother than last year's edition, so I am generally satisfied.

 

[PingSpike]

I can understand why EA didn't include the other resolutions as an option. That may have taken a whole half hour to program in.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: PingSpike
I can understand why EA didn't include the other resolutions as an option. That may have taken a whole half hour to program in.

No widescreen support is basically EA's policy. Recently a few games have supported widescreen. Battlefield games can be set to widescreen with a command line mod, but for some insane reason it's not official.

 

[nullpointerus]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: PingSpike
I can understand why EA didn't include the other resolutions as an option. That may have taken a whole half hour to program in.

No widescreen support is basically EA's policy. Recently a few games have supported widescreen. Battlefield games can be set to widescreen with a command line mod, but for some insane reason it's not official.

Hey, at least the games have sound these days!

 

[taltamir]

thats EA's way of saying "we hate you, now bend over" to their customers... kinda reminds me of sony... which is why their aquisition of so many good software companies are such black days for gaming... (i sadly have to use a plural here as they keep on doing it... westwood, bullfroog, bioware... etc)

Anyways you are loosing lots of quality, and it would have taken them literally half an hour to do right... you SHOULD go with the black bars option, it will look MUCH better.

And if you had a case where you really were running something at above its correct resolution at the right ratio (ex 1680x1050 monitor running at 1920x1200)... then you WILL be loosing quality for that. Not to mention you are gonna have alot more lag because your video card will have to render things at a higher resolution... and harddrive and ram will have to handle larger texture files... and so on...

I have seen several displays and TVs where they have problems forcing you to give them a higher res their their native... which they then shirk and mess up... its horrible... (two sony grand wega HDTVs my parents bought... and a sceptre widescreen 22inch "gaming" monitor which I bought and immediately returned for a refund as the worse moniter I have ever seen in my entire life).

 

[themisfit610]

Yes, the image is stretched/shrunk a bit, but it is still more than acceptable.

Go into your video card configure card, and turn off scaling, and use black bars. It will look a LOT better. No scaling artifacts, and no horizontal stretch. Love it.

~MiSfit