4:3 & 16:10 multi monitor questions

gdpayne · 14 Feb 2009 at 14:16

Well it looks like one of my 4:3 19" monitors has joined the choir indivisible. First it was making a noise, then switching on and off, now nothing at all.

So I'm going to have to replace it in my multi-monitor setup. I could go for another 4:3 19" 1280x1024 monitor, but for not much more I could get a cheap 1680x1050 widescreen.

Questions:

1) Can you get Vista to play nice with a widescreen<>normal multi monitor setup?

2) What's the best size/resolution to have a semi-seamless side by side setup?

3) Anyone else done it?

Cheers.

wilsky · 14 Feb 2009 at 17:20

I believe the have to be same resolution on each monitor. So unless the widescreen has the same resolution as the 4:3 then one or the other is going to look awful.

whiskycycle · 14 Feb 2009 at 18:31

wilsky said:
I believe the have to be same resolution on each monitor. So unless the widescreen has the same resolution as the 4:3 then one or the other is going to look awful.

Not true.

Am running a 1680x1050 20" with a 1280x1024 17" to the right. Aspect ratios on both screens are perfect and there's no "looking awful" at all, on either monitor.

Phil2008 · 14 Feb 2009 at 20:36

undergroove said:
Not true.

Am running a 1680x1050 20" with a 1280x1024 17" to the right. Aspect ratios on both screens are perfect and there's no "looking awful" at all, on either monitor.

Yeah I had that same setup not so long ago, and both screen will go to there native res just fine.

gdpayne · 15 Feb 2009 at 12:57

OK, I suppose I'd better report back for anyone else in a similar situation.

It appears that getting Windows to play is not an issue. However in order to have as seamless a join as possible, the key criteria is the 'pixel pitch'. This is the gap between physical pixels onscreen and the closer you can get the vertical pixel pitch to be, the less of a 'jump' you get moving from one monitor to the other. Now for 5:4 aspect ratio 19" monitors the pitch is 0.294mm. Going through a range of weird and wonderful monitor types, you get the following table of sizes/pitches:

Code:

[B]Monitor         Resolution     Pitch    Diff[/B]
Benq 21.5       1920x1080      0.248   -15.6%
Samsung 23"     2048x1152      0.249   -15.3%
Viewsonic 20"   1680x1050      0.258   -12.2%
BenQ 17"        1280x1024      0.264   -10.2%
Dell 23"        1920x1080      0.266    -9.5%
Samsung 24"     1920x1200      0.27     -8.2%
BenQ 24"        1680x1050      0.276    -6.1%
Viewsonic 22"   1680x1050      0.282    -4.1%
Viewsonic 19"   1280x1024      0.294	  0.0%
Dell 27"        1920x1080      0.303     3.1%

As you can 19" monitors have no one-to-one correspondence for widescreen sizes. The closest are the 1680x1050 22" monitors and the biggy Dell 27" 1920x1080. Even so these are 3-4% off. This doesn't sound like much but if you put a 22" next to the 19" not only would the vertical size be smaller; the resolution would be higher.

Note 17" to 23" looks like it would work well, with the 23" just extending slight below the bottom level of the 17".

Looks like another cheap 19" is the smartest move...

str · 15 Feb 2009 at 13:12

I have an Asus 22" (1920x1080), a dell 2001FP (1200x1600 portrait mode) and another Asus 22" (1920x1080) connected to one PC and it didn't take very long to get used to the difference in pointer position when moving from one screen to another.

The only gripe is when the pointer is in the bottom quarter of the 2001FP I have to move it up and then left or right to get it to move to one of the other monitors (otherwise it doesn't move to the other monitor) but again I do it on auto-pilot already.

gdpayne · 18 Feb 2009 at 12:21

str said:
I have an Asus 22" (1920x1080), a dell 2001FP (1200x1600 portrait mode) and another Asus 22" (1920x1080) connected to one PC and it didn't take very long to get used to the difference in pointer position when moving from one screen to another.

The only gripe is when the pointer is in the bottom quarter of the 2001FP I have to move it up and then left or right to get it to move to one of the other monitors (otherwise it doesn't move to the other monitor) but again I do it on auto-pilot already.

Just thought I'd say that I eventually decided to go with a 1680x1050 22" widescreen - on the basis that its the closest match of the widescreens, basically as cheap as the 19" 5:4 options and gives 400 extra pixels to play with.

Of course, if it turns out to be a bad move I'll be hunting you down