which monitor size for 4850 gfx?
- Thread starter HamZilla
- Start date
If you're talking about a 512MB 4850 then 1680x1050, the native resolution for most 22" monitors, is about as far as you want to take it. At higher resolutions, and especially if you want to use AA you'll probably want a card with more memory.
Associate
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2007
- Posts
- 284
The 4850 is a pretty powerful modern gfx card, I don't see why you would encounter many difficulties with a 24" display (that'll have a native resolution of 1920x1200) with the vast majority of games as long as you don't overcrank the AA/AF settings too high.
22" displays will mostly have a resolution of 1680x1050 (except for the occasional 1920x1080 "full hd" resolution screens you get at this size but text size would be quite small) and therefore put less strain on the graphics card allowing you to turn up the AA/AF image quality without too much effect (where you could really do with a couple of 4850's in crossfire if you were to do this and maintain a high framerate on a 24"+ screen).
Remember it is easier to buy a second 4850 at a later date on the cheap when the enevitably (sp?) will come down in price when new tech is released and run this in crossfire, rather than getting a 22" screen today and wishing you'd have bought a 24" screen instead 6 months down the line.
Also the 24" screen resolution of 1920x1200 will allow you to use "Full HD" movies on it (1080p) from a blueray disk that, again, will almostly certainly drop in price over time.
I normally change my screens in cycles of 4 years and I've just today received a Hazro HZ26Wi (yet to test it) but I wouldn't want to consider changing again until 2012 (hopefully SED screens will be the norm by then!)
If it was me, I'd go with a 24" screen purely based on the fact you are more likely to change graphics cards more frequently than monitors
22" displays will mostly have a resolution of 1680x1050 (except for the occasional 1920x1080 "full hd" resolution screens you get at this size but text size would be quite small) and therefore put less strain on the graphics card allowing you to turn up the AA/AF image quality without too much effect (where you could really do with a couple of 4850's in crossfire if you were to do this and maintain a high framerate on a 24"+ screen).
Remember it is easier to buy a second 4850 at a later date on the cheap when the enevitably (sp?) will come down in price when new tech is released and run this in crossfire, rather than getting a 22" screen today and wishing you'd have bought a 24" screen instead 6 months down the line.
Also the 24" screen resolution of 1920x1200 will allow you to use "Full HD" movies on it (1080p) from a blueray disk that, again, will almostly certainly drop in price over time.
I normally change my screens in cycles of 4 years and I've just today received a Hazro HZ26Wi (yet to test it) but I wouldn't want to consider changing again until 2012 (hopefully SED screens will be the norm by then!)
If it was me, I'd go with a 24" screen purely based on the fact you are more likely to change graphics cards more frequently than monitors
I bought the 4850 a year ago but have been using it with a 8 yr old Sony CRT 19" which due to faults needs replacing and I'm trying to decide which monitor size and budget. I use a resolution of 1152 x 864 on 19" for general use in Windows, the text is too small foor me any higher than this unless I stick my head into the screen.
How will this resolution translate to 22" and 24?"?
Thanks for the help.
How will this resolution translate to 22" and 24?"?
Thanks for the help.
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17960843 might help.. scroll down a bit, there's a nice picture
I got a 512mb asus 4850 and a 27'' 2709w monitor.
The native res is 1900x1200 and I play a few games (although not a hardcore gamer) every now and then such as, crysis warhead, left4dead, spore, fall out 3, bioshock you get the idea.
I play pretty much every game (almost) at max res and all details at high or whatever their highest is..admittedly it won't go into high figures of anti-aliasing but then again i am not bothered as i am not that fussy to spot the difference between 4aa and 5aa and so on. As long as it's around the max settings (which it is) and plays at a high res without feeling choppy i'm happy and that's how it is.
As far as screen size is concerned I stand by this:
get the biggest/best monitor you can buy and then some. Your monitor will stay with you for years upon years. The gpu is sth that you will change much sooner than your monitor.
That's what I did and I couldn't have made a better choice. Maybe the screen is slightly bigger for the card but i will change the card anyway in a year or so.
The native res is 1900x1200 and I play a few games (although not a hardcore gamer) every now and then such as, crysis warhead, left4dead, spore, fall out 3, bioshock you get the idea.
I play pretty much every game (almost) at max res and all details at high or whatever their highest is..admittedly it won't go into high figures of anti-aliasing but then again i am not bothered as i am not that fussy to spot the difference between 4aa and 5aa and so on. As long as it's around the max settings (which it is) and plays at a high res without feeling choppy i'm happy and that's how it is.
As far as screen size is concerned I stand by this:
get the biggest/best monitor you can buy and then some. Your monitor will stay with you for years upon years. The gpu is sth that you will change much sooner than your monitor.
That's what I did and I couldn't have made a better choice. Maybe the screen is slightly bigger for the card but i will change the card anyway in a year or so.