Your ideal do-it-all video solution

[brikis98]

I use my computer for a wide variety of purposes:

* Gaming (shooters, RTS, sports games, etc)
* Watching movies
* Photo editing
* Tasks involving reading (programming, word processing, browsing)

Currently, I have the Sony FW900 24" CRT, which is pretty damn good: can change resolutions (great for gaming), is widescreen (solid for movies), has terrific colors/contrast/sharpness (good for photo editing) and I run it at 1920x1200 (plenty of screen space for programming & browsing).

I've been casually browsing for an upgrade and have considered the following:

* 24" LCD: same 1920x1200 resolution, but a slightly bigger screen, which would be nice for movies & reading. however, no ability to change resolutions means it's not as good for gaming, as I'd constantly need a powerful video card. and, more importantly, it wouldn't be that noticeable of an upgrade, IMO.

* 30" LCD: much bigger screen, so even better for movies. 2560x1600 would be awesome to have tons of space for everything. but gaming would become near-impossible unless I invest heavily into SLI or CF.

* 37" 1080P TV: an even bigger screen, so terrific for movies. Resolution is a bit more reasonable for gaming. However, I'd lose some vertical space, so reading tasks aren't as great.

* Projector: the biggest screen and the best choice for movies. Depending on resolution, could be great for gaming too. However, resolution is unlikely to be high enough to be practical for reading tasks. Also, I have two windows in my room that would make it somewhat unusable (especially for photo editing) in the day time.

What would be your ideal video solution to tackle all the above tasks? Note, my budget is, at most, $1200 or so.

Cliffs:

* Use my computer for movies, games, photos and reading
* Want a bigger, better display that can do all the above well
* Max budget: $1200
* Need recommendations

 

[brikis98]

bump

 

[Modular]

You can always use 1:1 pixel mapping on your GPU to change resolutions for games. Some people have reported that the newest nVidia drivers have fixed mapping for G80, others have had mixed results. Bottom line is that you shouldn't worry about gaming on an LCD, because you don't have to run it at its native res.

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: brikis98
* 30" LCD: much bigger screen, so even better for movies. 2560x1600 would be awesome to have tons of space for everything. but gaming would become near-impossible unless I invest heavily into SLI or CF.

Not really true.

If you can live w/o gobs of AA & AF on the more intensive newer games, an 8800 GTX will suit you just fine. Heck, before i got the 8800, i was using my X1900 XT, just running it w/ "centering timings", so games were just a nice lower resolution window w/ black bars around the sides.
I can do the same w/ the 8800 GTX, though nV calls it "no scaling".
That allows you to play newer games out there, albeit at a bit lower resolution (as if you had a say, 2048x1536 display, or perhaps 1920x1200).

When i get more time this week[end i hope], i will add results of Oblivion & Stalker to my 8800 GTX thread (i have the 3007 WFP).


So yeah, you can likely figure out my recommendation already.

I'm telling you, 1920x1200 looks amateur compared to 2560x1600, & the games issue?
It's not one.

 

[brikis98]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: brikis98
* 30" LCD: much bigger screen, so even better for movies. 2560x1600 would be awesome to have tons of space for everything. but gaming would become near-impossible unless I invest heavily into SLI or CF.

Not really true.

If you can live w/o gobs of AA & AF on the more intensive newer games, an 8800 GTX will suit you just fine. Heck, before i got the 8800, i was using my X1900 XT, just running it w/ "centering timings", so games were just a nice lower resolution window w/ black bars around the sides.
I can do the same w/ the 8800 GTX, though nV calls it "no scaling".
That allows you to play newer games out there, albeit at a bit lower resolution (as if you had a say, 2048x1536 display, or perhaps 1920x1200).

When i get more time this week[end i hope], i will add results of Oblivion & Stalker to my 8800 GTX thread (i have the 3007 WFP).


So yeah, you can likely figure out my recommendation already.

I'm telling you, 1920x1200 looks amateur compared to 2560x1600, & the games issue?
It's not one.

yes, the 8800GTX - the top of the line video card - can handle games at 2560x1600. but that won't last. and i can't afford to get a top of the line video card every year.

running at a lower resolution and scaling means worse image quality... i can't imagine scaling, say, 1680x1050 (a reasonably high resolution if you can't afford top of the line video cards) to 2560x1600 can look all that good. but, i've never seen scaling on the 30" LCD's, so i don't know for sure.

as for 1:1 pixel mapping... i suppose that's an option... but then, of course, you lose that extra screen space and are basically playing on a smaller monitor... seems like a waste...

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: brikis98
running at a lower resolution and scaling means worse image quality... i can't imagine scaling, say, 1680x1050 (a reasonably high resolution if you can't afford top of the line video cards) to 2560x1600 can look all that good. but, i've never seen scaling on the 30" LCD's, so i don't know for sure.

as for 1:1 pixel mapping... i suppose that's an option... but then, of course, you lose that extra screen space and are basically playing on a smaller monitor... seems like a waste...

I personally cannot tolerate seeing anything than native resolutions for pixels, so i run 1:1 pixel mapping, as i don't really mind using a smaller picture.
I find the extra space for normal use very enjoyable, so when i am playing games @ 2560x1600, i consider that a bonus.

That being said, of all the LCDs i've seen, the 3007WFP does scale very well.

 

[brikis98]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: brikis98
running at a lower resolution and scaling means worse image quality... i can't imagine scaling, say, 1680x1050 (a reasonably high resolution if you can't afford top of the line video cards) to 2560x1600 can look all that good. but, i've never seen scaling on the 30" LCD's, so i don't know for sure.

as for 1:1 pixel mapping... i suppose that's an option... but then, of course, you lose that extra screen space and are basically playing on a smaller monitor... seems like a waste...

I personally cannot tolerate seeing anything than native resolutions for pixels, so i run 1:1 pixel mapping, as i don't really mind using a smaller picture.
I find the extra space for normal use very enjoyable, so when i am playing games @ 2560x1600, i consider that a bonus.

That being said, of all the LCDs i've seen, the 3007WFP does scale very well.

Of all the stuff I do on my computer, I would hazard a guess that gaming is about 50% of the time and everything else combined is another 50%. And, since I can't afford top of the line video cards all the time to play at 2560x1600, that means that I'd often be doing 1:1 pixel mapping. i wonder if that makes it worth dumping $1k on a 30" LCD...

this makes me lean towards the ~37" 1080P LCD... i should be able to run most games at that resolution and 1:1 mapping on a screen of that size will still look pretty big... i wonder if i'd miss the 120 pixels of vertical screen space... is there anywhere i can see one of these big 1080P LCD's hooked up to a computer and play around with it (try b4 i buy)?

damn it... LCD's have caught & passed CRT's in virtually every area, but their inability to handle different resolutions well is a serious drawback for me...