3007WFP-HC native res oddity

Hades

Hades

Hades

Man of Honour
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
29,846
Location
Surrey
The 3007 apparently has two native resolutions: 2560x1600 but also 1280x800. The latter res is the default when running a single link DVI cable.

I'm using a dual link DVI but when I run games in 1280x800 it looks less sharp than when in 1600x900 which looks superb (e.g. Far Cry). I don't really care much because even my older gfx card can run things in 1600x900 but I just find it odd that the 1280x800 doesn't perform as well as a non native res?
 
1280x800 isn't native, but it is a nice integer fit (2x2 pixels -> 1 effective pixel). 1600x900 is 16:9, so is a bit of a stretch for a 16:10 screen...perhaps the extra pixels and a bit of blurring (associated with the less simple fit) is sufficient to make it look better than 1280x800 (which should be quite gritty and crisp).
 
Hades said:
The 3007 apparently has two native resolutions: 2560x1600 but also 1280x800. The latter res is the default when running a single link DVI cable.

I'm using a dual link DVI but when I run games in 1280x800 it looks less sharp than when in 1600x900 which looks superb (e.g. Far Cry). I don't really care much because even my older gfx card can run things in 1600x900 but I just find it odd that the 1280x800 doesn't perform as well as a non native res?
Click to expand...


hi there mate

I would not worry about it. I just put farcry and got the exact same thing as you described, 1280x800 is really pixelated and blocky like looking. I tried 1600x900 and it was better, much better but to be honest still no way near 25600x1600. Oh my monitor is 3007wfp not the HC.
 
Thanks. Not bothered about it but just intrigued as 1280x800 should be a 1:1 map.

Amazing monitors though :)
 
I guess that 1600x900 is a bit like getting free antialiasing. Sharpness isn't everything while gaming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom