Why did dell make the 2005fpw 1680x1050?

[Mears]

AFAIK, no current consumer cards, minus the Kyro, can display this resolution since 1050 isn't divisible by 8.

 

[jvarszegi]

What does that have to do with it? I don't doubt you, I'm just curious. SXGA+, which is running on my laptop right now, is 1400 X 1050!

 

[halfadder]

There must be some new video card BIOSes and drivers to support that resolution, otherwise Dell wouldn't be selling it.

As for that strange resolution, it's the fault of their LCD supplier, I suppose. New Apple LCDs have funky resolutions as well.

 

[jvarszegi]

Originally posted by: halfadder
There must be some new video card BIOSes and drivers to support that resolution, otherwise Dell wouldn't be selling it.

As for that strange resolution, it's the fault of their LCD supplier, I suppose. New Apple LCDs have funky resolutions as well.

Is it strange? It's a straight extension of SXGA+, and it's an industry standard. That's why the resolution is called WSXGA+. What am I missing?

 

[jpeyton]

ATI cards support this resolution without a problem.

 

[Luthorcrow]

Originally posted by: Mears
AFAIK, no current consumer cards, minus the Kyro, can display this resolution since 1050 isn't divisible by 8.

That is an interesting none fact. Were did you get it? The better question is will wide screen become a standard on all new games are not? I mean besides just the big titles.

 

[SocrPlyr]

Originally posted by: Mears
AFAIK, no current consumer cards, minus the Kyro, can display this resolution since 1050 isn't divisible by 8.

actually any current card can display it...
Just have to have the windows settings for it...
which i'm sure once it is plugged in happen to be there...
divide by 8??? wtf??? smoking crack i think

Josh

 

[FishTankX]

It's widescreen aspect, man. Widescreen.

 

[klah]

Originally posted by: halfadder
There must be some new video card BIOSes and drivers to support that resolution, otherwise Dell wouldn't be selling it.

As for that strange resolution, it's the fault of their LCD supplier, I suppose. New Apple LCDs have funky resolutions as well.

The manufacturers are probably trying to utilize the maximum amount of each glass substrate as possible. For example a common sheet size for 7g plants is 1.9m x 2.2m, which is later cut into individual panels such as eight(8) 100cm panels. I saw one of the manufactrers sites before which showed how they divided each sheet into the different panel sizes, but I no longer have the link.

 

[Mears]

The divisible by 8 limitation looks like it might only apply to horizontal times, which would work in this case.

http://entechtaiwan.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20

No, I don't smoke crack.

And WTF does,

It's widescreen aspect, man. Widescreen.

have to do with anything. For one thing, when you say widescreen I'm guessing you're referring to 16x9, which it isn't and there are several 16x9 lcds that have native resolutions that fit the above paradigm (1366x768 for example).

 

[Rhin0]

Don't know since I see no reason to game in anything above 1024x768. Just can't understand people wanting to game in 1600x1200

and gaming is all that matters! 🙂

 

[Luthorcrow]

Are you serious? The difference in pure graphically eye candy between 1024x768 and 1600x1200 is huge. I am always disappointed when I have to scale back the res when maxed. But I haven't gamed at 1024x768 since my ATI 9700 PRO.

 

[ponyo]

Any modern consumer card can support this resolution without any problem. That means ATI, Nvidia, Matrox, etc.

 

[batmanuel]

The Dell driver disk has an .inf file on it that adds the resolution support in windows for older cards the like FireGl 8800 in my PC. The X300 I put into my wife's new PC actuallly autodected the monitor's resolution and set it to 1680x1050 the first time it booted into Windows, though.

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: Rhin0
Don't know since I see no reason to game in anything above 1024x768. Just can't understand people wanting to game in 1600x1200

and gaming is all that matters! 🙂

The higher the resolution, the better it looks. Of course I had a game on this PC that the highest resolution supported was 640x480... but just imagine the lowest resolution 🙂

 

[imported_driver]

Originally posted by: Rhin0
Don't know since I see no reason to game in anything above 1024x768. Just can't understand people wanting to game in 1600x1200

and gaming is all that matters! 🙂

You sound like Bill Gates: "Nobody will ever need more than 640K of RAM!"

 

[Anubis]

they should have made it 1920x1200
they make 15.4 in laptop LCDs that do that resolution why cant they make a 17-20 in LCD that will do it and not cost over 1500$

 

[saltedeggman]

Originally posted by: Anubis
they should have made it 1920x1200
they make 15.4 in laptop LCDs that do that resolution why cant they make a 17-20 in LCD that will do it and not cost over 1500$

i concur...... WUXGA is so nice....although a little small for my 15.4 laptop

 

[NarcoticHobo]

My fx5200 displays its native resolution, if that puny thing can do it i'm sure almost any card can.

 

[w00t]

widescreen is tight