Next best thing to a U2410?
- Thread starter Freeman
- Start date
I can just about understand your argument that 16:9 is better for entertainment purposes. But this statement is a step too far.
Productivity apps do not enforce a screen ratio (or FOV). Therefore the difference is purely in screen area.
A 1920x1200 monitor has more screen area than a 1920x1080 monitor. More area = better. Simples.
A 16:9 ratio is not automatically better than a 16:10 ratio when you consider the reality that currently gen 16:9 screens are smaller, cheaper versions of a 16:10 monitor.
If the height was the same, the 16:9 screen would be bigger and arguably better. But since it is the width that is the same, the 16:10 is bigger and better.
From a media consumer's perspective (that includes gamers o'course) I believe 16:9 is better. Slightly better field of view in games at native settings, ideal for films and the price of these panels is better as you say, so the amount saved can be spent elsewhere.
From a professional perspective then the need for additional real estate is there and 16:10 is a no brainer.
If you're something in between, then it's just personal preference or what you need more most, which is why I'm going to stop right here
I myself chose 16:9 recently (moving from a 16:10 panel). My PC is only used solely for gaming now and I prefer the physical difference in width and height that it provides for fps games over my 16:10. As I said though, it's just personal preference.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 5 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 4,123
Trana is the monitor forum troll.
