New monitor. 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 ?

seriously someone needs to write a sticky regarding opinions on 1920x1200 or x1080

its a question thats coming up every week!
 
Fothsn said:
One of the shop guys in another thread said OcUK won’t stock this monitor which is a shame :(
Click to expand...

That is a shame really, because im sure the viewsonic would sell a lot more than the Hanns-G, with the extra connections, and the 1:1 pixel mapping, its much more appealing to people who want to connect a game console aswell as the PC
 
Nate Silvers said:
Only person being ignorant is you because my whole point is 24inch 16:9 is bigger than 24inch 16:10 ratio. First of all a 16:9 screen is bigger than a 16:10 screen pixel mapped and then after you add the black bars it's even smaller.

Don't listen to this muppet.
Click to expand...

well.... 20.35" x 12.72" for a 16:10 and 20.92" x 11.76" for a 16:9. by my calculations the 16:9 is 0.57" wider and 0.96" shorter. In other words, its SMALLER - 258.85 sq. in. for the 16:10 and 246.02 sq. in for the 16:9 = 12.83 sq.in smaller in fact.

when both are displaying a 16:9 image yes, the 16:9 will display it an entire half an inch wider and taller but really, there's sod all in it.

people arguing over an whole 120 pixels in height really need to get out more lol. whats that, 7 lines of text?
 
Last edited:
james.miller said:
well.... 20.35" x 12.72" for a 16:10 and 20.92" x 11.76" for a 16:9. by my calculations the 16:9 is 0.57" wider and 0.96" shorter. In other words, its SMALLER - 258.85 sq. in. for the 16:10 and 246.02 sq. in for the 16:9 = 12.83 sq.in smaller in fact.

when both are displaying a 16:9 image yes, the 16:9 will display it an entire half an inch wider and taller but really, there's sod all in it.

people arguing over an whole 120 pixels in height really need to get out more lol. whats that, 7 lines of text?
Click to expand...

Looking at the Dell Website, the 2409 has a SMALLER pixel pitch (0.27 vs 0.276) than the 2408, meaning it's not as big hence his whole argument is also moot.

As for 7 lines of text, that's quite a lot actually, especially if you are doing more than just media and gaming on your PC (in programming, 7 lines can help increase your productivity - having to scroll a long function is a nightmare).
 
im not a programmer, but i'll still be getting a 16:10 just because 16:9 resolutions will work exactly the same on a 16:10, so to me, it seems pointless getting a 16:9
 
16:10 is the best choice, imo. The extra vertical resolution is very handy for applications and those games where you have lots of windows open (EVE being one that springs to mind). But the kicker is the lack of 16:9s monitors with *VA or IPS panels. That, to me, makes them a complete no go except as a very bottom of the pile budget product.

But I guess it'll soon be a moot point as 16:10 is going away rapidly, as are non-TN panels. Hell, I've started seeing large numbers of new LCD TVs with monitor-type 16:9 TN panels in them. If manufacturers will do that they've given up any pretense of producing anything but cheap tat.
 
1920x1080 = Slightly wider FOV (Field of Vision) in decent game engines (Source/CryEngine 2.0)

1920x1200 = More pixels on screen (230,400 more to be precise).

I have both. I have my gaming rig hooked up to a 1080p HDTV (as well as a Triple-Screen setup), and my laptop has a 1920x1200 display.

For movies, it actually DOES NOT really matter! Do you know why?
Because not all that many movies are 1.78:1 (16:9) aspect ratio! Hellboy is, Band of Brothers is, as well as quite a few others.
BUT
Loads of movies (perhaps most of them) are between 2.35:1 and 2.40:1 (2.39:1 is common now).

So you will still get black bars on a 1080p HDTV!

 
Yes, they are the same HDTV. I posted that to show that 16:9 is not the most common aspect ratio for movies. Most movies use a wider aspect ratio, and so even on a HDTV you will get black bars.
 
I am looking to get a new monitor and only the cheaper ones at the moment seem to be 1920x1080, with all the more expensive models being *1200 vertical.

I would be all for spending less but the cheaper ones don't have enough connections for me so I'm still looking at the 2709 for the moment!
 
Meh most, most of my japanese movies are 16:9 and everyone knows asian cinema kicks hollywoods ****. IPS and PVA are horrible monitors for a hardcore gamer. Great colours though such a shame.
 
IPS and VA are fine for games. Their response times are good enough now that I doubt even a twitch gamer could tell the difference between one of them and a TN.
 
Seems peeps don't know why you have 16:10.

Hint if you type Word doc's all day long and want to see 2 side by side A4 Doc's at 100% on screen at same time then get a 16:10.

If your PC is mainly about multimedia get a 16:9, finally Manu's are now turning this this proper widely used/old Ratio (its not a RES its a Ratio).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom