new monitor, want to try hd :o

belial8321

belial8321

belial8321

Associate
Joined
25 Jan 2011
Posts
757
Location
Solihull, Birmingham
Ok my spec is in sig, i play a LOT of games and want to know if hd is actually worth it, like, is there a noticable visual difference? My card supports hdmi cables, should i use that or dvi-d i understand the concepts of it all but not sure what is best in actual gaming? :o
 
If you intend to buy a monitor simply for gaming you should buy a 16:9 monitor.

StarCraftRatios.gif
 
that gif image is deceiving as it doesn't work that way, you lose vertical resolution going 16:9, not gain horizontal res. 16:9 is fine is they offer higher res, but 1920x1080 vs 1920x1200? i know which one i'd choose...
 
oki, also the hd thing, hdmi, dvi-d? is it worth it, is the image crisper? will i lose fps working card harder? does it work card harder? etc XD
 
neologan said:
that gif image is deceiving as it doesn't work that way, you lose vertical resolution going 16:9, not gain horizontal res. 16:9 is fine is they offer higher res, but 1920x1080 vs 1920x1200? i know which one i'd choose...
Click to expand...

I am not talking about resolution. I talk about FOV (Field of view).

And the pic is not deceiving. Thats the difference you see betweeen 16:9 , 16:10 and 4:3 in modern games. How high resolution you have has nothing to do with it. It is the resolution aspect ratio that sets your FOV.

With higher resolution you only get a more detailed picture. Not bigger FOV.
 
Last edited:
hmm HD...
That should never really be used to describe monitor resolutions...
HD is "high definition" i.e crisp image quality. - watching a film on a large screen with a low res is more low definition,
Monitors on the otehr hand have native resolutions for each size which provides a crisp quality image and resolution scales depenign on the size, so either way, you get HD image quality - just more of it ;)
Rather than HD, you shoulod have said high/er resolution, or just 1920x1080 :)

The ports shouldnt put differnt strains on the card

go for dvi/dp over vga/hdmi (hdmi is limited to 1080 and vga cant do 1080, plus the dvi/dp is crisper image quality) HDMI should mainly be used fotr connecting hdtv's to computers and is incorrectly misinterprited to be better tan dvi becasue it has HD in the name.
 
Trana said:
I am not talking about resolution. I talk about FOV (Field of view).

And the pic is not deceiving. Thats the difference you see betweeen 16:9 , 16:10 and 4:3 in modern games. How high resolution you have has nothing to do with it. It is the resolution aspect ratio that sets your FOV.

With higher resolution you only get a more detailed picture. Not bigger FOV.
Click to expand...

By that logic a 2120x800 (2.35:1) screen would be > 1980x1200 (1.6:1).

The simple fact is, aspect ratio (and FOV) is only one factor. Not *the* factor on which a monitor must be judged.

And if games were programmed differently, you'd see MORE on a 16:10 monitor with equal horizontal rez. That would be vert+, btw. Most games use horiz-, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Personally I'd hate to have a 2120x800 screen, even tho it's really, really widescreen (cinema ratio).
 
I hated 16:9 after coming from a 16:10 monitor. So much in fact that I decided to go back to the 16:10 monitor.

The 16:9 monitor seemed too small vertically.
 
Alasdairhurst said:
hmm HD...
That should never really be used to describe monitor resolutions...
HD is "high definition" i.e crisp image quality. - watching a film on a large screen with a low res is more low definition,
Monitors on the otehr hand have native resolutions for each size which provides a crisp quality image and resolution scales depenign on the size, so either way, you get HD image quality - just more of it ;)
Rather than HD, you shoulod have said high/er resolution, or just 1920x1080 :)

The ports shouldnt put differnt strains on the card

go for dvi/dp over vga/hdmi (hdmi is limited to 1080 and vga cant do 1080, plus the dvi/dp is crisper image quality) HDMI should mainly be used fotr connecting hdtv's to computers and is incorrectly misinterprited to be better tan dvi becasue it has HD in the name.
Click to expand...

vga cant do 1080?

Im currently deciding whether to upgrade my 1920x1080 22 inch to a 27 1920x1200 with DVI, is dvi that much different?
 
A VGA cable can support 1920 x 1080 no problem. And it's a common misconception that the signal will always be noticeably worse than digital signals (such as DVI in particular). On some monitors this is the case but on the vast majority of modern monitors you will notice no visible degredation in image quality over a digital signal. There's little reason not to use a digital cable if you have the outputs and cables, though.
 
Last edited:
Ok guys thanks for advice, any ideas of what to replace a 1680x1050 hp 2007w with, crisp image and vivid colours priority please :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom