Native Res

stickroad · 12 Jun 2007 at 13:44

Hey guys, just slightly confused at the moment about Native Res. Is it true that if you dont play at your Native Res it dosent look quite right?

Well i have a 19Inch screen, so my Native is 1440x900, personally to me it just looks funny to cramped for me. So i have my screen set to 1280x1024, so much nicer, but i don't see any loss in quality.

stickroad · 12 Jun 2007 at 14:01

This one:

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-003-AS

stickroad · 12 Jun 2007 at 14:17

squiffy said:
After changing it to native, have you run the monitor auto-scan thingy? Adjusts placement/phase etc.

Native will always look better than non native. I'm running 1280x1024 on a LG 17" (native)

Yep, still dosent look quite right if you ask me.

stickroad · 12 Jun 2007 at 14:31

squiffy said:
Take a photo? Also take one close up. Open paint, and paint one pixel. It should look 1 pixel wide & high.

Is this your first widescreen monitor?

Yep its my first, sorry what do you mean by the above statement: (in bold)

stickroad · 12 Jun 2007 at 15:14

Clarkey said:
stretching a 5:4 ratio onto a 16:10 screen, how on earth can this look better

Because it does

, it dosent seem as cramped.

stickroad · 12 Jun 2007 at 15:42

Its hard to explain. It seems more stretched at 1280x1024, and the icons are much smaller which i like I cant really explain it.

stickroad · 12 Jun 2007 at 15:46

squiffy said:
Take a photo with digital camera please. If you're outputting 1280x1024 (which I doubt as previous poster said it's out of range) but even if you could it'll look horrible, stretching up and scaling down both H&V.

Digital Camera, dont have one in the house

sorry. Im defiantly running at 1280x1024 no dought about it.

It dosent look awful one bit. Any chance someone could take a shot of their screen using a 1280x1024 Res pretty please

? So i can compare.

Didnt know their was such a strong view on this.