1900x1200 vs 1900x1080

[cannondale06]

Someone above me had mentioned that a 1920x1080 display is wider then a 1920x1200 monitor... ::

Look at it this way. Take 2 1920mm x 1200mm pieces of cardboard. Cut the top and bottom off one of them till you get a 16x9 ratio. They are still both the identical width..... common sense people.

for games it is wider. its the aspect ratio not the number of pixels that determines what you see. 16:10 adds more to the sides than 4:3. 16:9 adds more to the sides than 16:10. now that is how it works for games that implement widescreen properly.

 

[King of Heroes]

well i hate to break it to you but 25 million worldwide users on Steam is a not as many people as you think. that 25 million probably covers almost every pc gamer there is since almost every person would have had to gotten Steam account by now. I mean what pc gamer doesnt own at least one Valve title and/or has not bought a game through Steam at some time?

I doubt that, considering the rate of growth they're experiencing right now. But we'll have to wait for the next time they release growth data numbers to be sure.

really of those people many are casual gamers, people that only bought a couple games and some users with multiple accounts. heck my parents have an account there for one casusal game. the reality of it is that is not a lot of people worldwide when you break it down.

Actually, according to Steam's stats most of those people are playing first-person shooters (specifically, Modern Warfare 2 and Counter-Strike: Source). And if the 205% increase in unit sales is any indication, those people are much more likely to have more than one game attached to their account (and are likely to add more later). But hey, for all I know you probably consider FPSes to be 'casual games' so you're probably right here.

sometimes 90% or more of games sales goes to consoles so again the reality is that pc gaming is a very small market. really if it wasnt for Valve, pc gaming would be an even smaller market so I am glad they exist and I personally like Steam quite a bit.

Yeah, damn Steam for selling PC games! If it wasn't for that, PC gaming would be much smaller than it is now!

 

[baco80]

for games it is wider. its the aspect ratio not the number of pixels that determines what you see. 16:10 adds more to the sides than 4:3. 16:9 adds more to the sides than 16:10. now that is how it works for games that implement widescreen properly.

Are you suggesting pc games running on 1920x1080 have more view at sides than 2560x1600?

 

[cannondale06]

Are you suggesting pc games running on 1920x1080 have more view at sides than 2560x1600?

yes because the the actual resolution is meaningless for games when it comes to what you will see on the screen. the aspect ratio determines what your view is within the game. just like people that run 1280x1024 are actually seeing less on the sides than running 1280x960. all 16:10 resolutions no matter if its 1680x1050 or 2560x1600 have the SAME viewing area in a game. a 16:9 resolution will add more picture on the sides than a 16:10 aspect ratio. now this applies to properly implemented widescreen that the majority of modern games use.


you can look here http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12341

 

[cannondale06]

I doubt that, considering the rate of growth they're experiencing right now. But we'll have to wait for the next time they release growth data numbers to be sure.



Actually, according to Steam's stats most of those people are playing first-person shooters (specifically, Modern Warfare 2 and Counter-Strike: Source). And if the 205% increase in unit sales is any indication, those people are much more likely to have more than one game attached to their account (and are likely to add more later). But hey, for all I know you probably consider FPSes to be 'casual games' so you're probably right here.



Yeah, damn Steam for selling PC games! If it wasn't for that, PC gaming would be much smaller than it is now!

most of the growth is because many pc users are not buying retail anymore. and again there are plenty of Steam users that barely play any games at all. the actual number of users on there that are buying most of the latest titles would probably be around half of that 25 million. as long as Steam keeps having good sales thats where I will be buying all my games if possible.

 

[baco80]

yes because the the actual resolution is meaningless for games when it comes to what you will see on the screen. the aspect ratio determines what your view is within the game. just like people that run 1280x1024 are actually seeing less on the sides than running 1280x960. all 16:10 resolutions no matter if its 1680x1050 or 2560x1600 have the SAME viewing area in a game. a 16:9 resolution will add more picture on the sides than a 16:10 aspect ratio. now this applies to properly implemented widescreen that the majority of modern games use.


you can look here http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12341

but isn't possible setup games res. on a 16:10 display to view it 16:9 AR? I.e, running a game at 16:9 (1:1 pixel mapping) on a 16:10 display (2560x1600) at 2560x1440?

 

[cannondale06]

but isn't possible setup games res. at 16:10 display to view 16:9? I.e, running a game at 16:9 (1:1 pixel mapping) on a 16:10 display at 2560x1440?

not always.it depends on the game but many games do not run properly run in 16:9 on anything but 16:9 monitors. if all games could run in 16:9 on 16:10 monitors and just simply add black bars then there would be no real reason to go with 16:9 monitors.

 

[Deadgye]

yes because the the actual resolution is meaningless for games when it comes to what you will see on the screen. the aspect ratio determines what your view is within the game. just like people that run 1280x1024 are actually seeing less on the sides than running 1280x960. all 16:10 resolutions no matter if its 1680x1050 or 2560x1600 have the SAME viewing area in a game. a 16:9 resolution will add more picture on the sides than a 16:10 aspect ratio. now this applies to properly implemented widescreen that the majority of modern games use.


you can look here http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12341

While this is true, there's no reason to not play the game in 16:9 on the 16:10 monitor if you want that slight extra field of vision. The black bars are not noticeable. And if black bars really bother you for some reason, then I sure hope you aren't watching any movies since they're most commonly done in a aspect ratio that will give black bars on both monitors.

not always.it depends on the game but many games do not run properly run in 16:9 on anything but 16:9 monitors. if all games could run in 16:9 on 16:10 monitors and just simply add black bars then there would be no real reason to go with 16:9 monitors.

I've yet to find one; maybe I'm not trying hard enough?

 

[cannondale06]

While this is true, there's no reason to not play the game in 16:9 on the 16:10 monitor if you want that slight extra field of vision. The black bars are not noticeable. And if black bars really bother you for some reason, then I sure hope you aren't watching any movies since they're most commonly done in a aspect ratio that will give black bars on both monitors.


I've yet to find one; maybe I'm not trying hard enough?

actually most games do not play properly if trying to use a 16:9 res on a 16:10 screen. non of Valves games or any other hor+ game and I checked this on my 1680x1050 monitor before I bought the 1920x1080 monitor.

 

[obobski]

yes because the the actual resolution is meaningless for games when it comes to what you will see on the screen. the aspect ratio determines what your view is within the game. just like people that run 1280x1024 are actually seeing less on the sides than running 1280x960. all 16:10 resolutions no matter if its 1680x1050 or 2560x1600 have the SAME viewing area in a game. a 16:9 resolution will add more picture on the sides than a 16:10 aspect ratio. now this applies to properly implemented widescreen that the majority of modern games use.

actually the FOV settings determine how "wide" things are in-game, and some games don't have dynamically sized objects, so more resolution = more screen area

as far as "16:9 can't run on 16:10", my XHD3000 would like a word with you, because it has no issues with 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 any day of the week, doesn't matter what game

works fine with 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 too

and I've had no problems running 1440x900 or 1680x1050 into my 2343BWX

basically there is not a single thing you've said that I find to be true yet, I agree with criccio and deadgye

 

[cannondale06]

actually the FOV settings determine how "wide" things are in-game, and some games don't have dynamically sized objects, so more resolution = more screen area

as far as "16:9 can't run on 16:10", my XHD3000 would like a word with you, because it has no issues with 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 any day of the week, doesn't matter what game

works fine with 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 too

and I've had no problems running 1440x900 or 1680x1050 into my 2343BWX

basically there is not a single thing you've said that I find to be true yet, I agree with criccio and deadgye

well I can try and run some hor+ games like those from Valve in 16:9 on my 16:10 monitor and they do NOT look right. most 16:9 game do not just magically run on a 16:10 regardless of what you say. if they did then I would have bought a 1920x1200 monitor. I wanted the wider 16:9 view and you can NOT make many of those games run properly on 16:10 monitors. of course 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 will run on 16:9 monitors just fine. btw 1440x900 is a 16:10 ratio just like 1680x1050.

 

[obobski]

well I can try and run some hor+ games like those from Valve in 16:9 on my 16:10 monitor and they do NOT look right. most 16:9 game do not just magically run on a 16:10 regardless of what you say. if they did then I would have bought a 1920x1200 monitor. I wanted the wider 16:9 view and you can NOT make many of those games run properly on 16:10 monitors. of course 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 will run on 16:9 monitors just fine. btw 1440x900 is a 16:10 ratio just like 1680x1050.

it works, whine all you want
and no game is locked to 16:9, unless you're coming from a console, again, not biting

and yes, I realize 1440x900 is 16:10, why did you feel the need to point this out? (oh, you didn't go and look up the monitor being discussed, did you?)

and can I ask, what was your rationale for derailing this thread to rant about why apparently everything is inferior to your 1920x1080 monitor?

 

[Mr_Coffee]

actually most games do not play properly if trying to use a 16:9 res on a 16:10 screen. non of Valves games or any other hor+ game and I checked this on my 1680x1050 monitor before I bought the 1920x1080 monitor.

I have a 4:3 screen and all of my games, Valve's included, run fine at 16:9 resolutions. Now admittedly it get's a little tricky when you want custom resolution (such as 1680x945) but that's really beside the point since this thread concerns 24"+ monitors where the horizontal resolution is maintained when the aspect ratio changes. Even if a 16:10 monitor doesn't support 1:1 scaling the minimum caliber of card required to drive one can handle this without issue.

 

[cannondale06]

it works, whine all you want
and no game is locked to 16:9, unless you're coming from a console, again, not biting

and yes, I realize 1440x900 is 16:10, why did you feel the need to point this out? (oh, you didn't go and look up the monitor being discussed, did you?)

who said a game was locked at 16:9?

I certainly can not run most 16:9 games on my 16:10 monitor and I thats what I was saying. it just doesnt work for most of them as it looks distorted.

I was saying that both 1440x900 and 1680x1050 are 16:10 resolutions so of course they will run on any widescreen monitor. 16:10 on 16:9 monitors has never been a problem and no one ever said it was.

 

[obobski]

who said a game was locked at 16:9?

I certainly can not run most 16:9 games on my 16:10 and I thats what I was saying. it just doesnt work for most of them as just look distorted.

I was saying that both 1440x900 and 1680x1050 are 16:10 resolutions so of course they will run on any widescreen monitor. 16:10 on 16:9 monitors has never been a problem and no one ever said it was.

most 16:9 game do not just magically run on a 16:10 regardless of what you say.

there are no explicitly 16:9 games, unless you're coming from a console (for the second time); your posts would imply the opposite. the rendering engine actually couldn't care less what resolution or aspect ratio its dealing with; aside from hardware limitations (both the GPU/rendering hardware, the display, and the I/F), FOV can be adjusted or modeled accurately for any given resolution, and the vast majority of modern titles already have pre-configured settings for a myriad of resolutions/aspect ratios (and then sometimes theres a screw-up like Bioshock).

short and sweet of this:
if you're using a fixed pixel display, like an LCD, running stuff at native resolution is always the best choice, period
if you have some belief that a given resolution is superior, then buy something that is natively that resolution, and go for it

if you're having issues configuring your monitor, I'm sure theres plenty of people who'd be happy to help you if you made your own thread

 

[cannondale06]

there are no explicitly 16:9 games, unless you're coming from a console (for the second time); your posts would imply the opposite

if you can't figure out how to configure things for your monitor, I'm sure plenty of people would be happy to help you if you made a thread, but I promise there isn't some magical issue which prevents this from working, theres also no magical reason that 16:9 is any different from 16:10, aside from the height, as cricco said (technically it may allow for a *slightly* "wider" image, really depends on the internals of the software)

short and sweet of this:
if you're using a fixed pixel display, like an LCD, running stuff at native resolution is always the best choice, period
if you have some belief that a given resolution is superior, then buy something that is natively that resolution, and go for it

what the hell are you talking about? where have I ever said some games are 16:9 only??? both 16:9 and 16:10 resolutions are in every modern game that I know of so I have no idea why you keep thinking I said differently.

sorry but only some games like those that use anamorphic like movies work in 16:9 on my 16:10 monitor. others 16:9 games just get distorted when I try to run them. really if a 16:10 monitor could run every 16:9 game correctly then why would they even make 16:9 pc monitors? I certainly would have bought a 1920x1200 monitor if I could run all 16:9 games perfectly on it.

 

[Mr_Coffee]

really if a 16:10 monitor could run every 16:9 game correctly then why would they even make 16:9 pc monitors? I certainly would have bought a 1920x1200 monitor if I could run all 16:9 games perfectly on it.

The industry is shifting to 16:9 because it is slightly cheaper and can be marketed as a feature. There is no reason a 16:10 monitor can't display a 16:9 game letterboxed. All you have to do is configure the scaling of either your monitor or graphics card.

 

[cannondale06]

The industry is shifting to 16:9 because it is slightly cheaper and can be marketed as a feature. There is no reason a 16:10 monitor can't display a 16:9 game letterboxed. All you have to do is configure the scaling of either your monitor or graphics card.

well for some reason it would not work on that monitor I was using. I used Nvidia scaling and could run 4:3 resolutions just fine but most 16:9 games were not done properly.

 

[TomGreen321]

Im prefer 1080p. Never been a fan of 16:10. It's just not the aspect ratio for me.

 

[Walker]

well for some reason it would not work on that monitor I was using. I used Nvidia scaling and could run 4:3 resolutions just fine but most 16:9 games were not done properly.

Must be a driver/graphic card thing. I have an older graphic card and a 5:4 monitor and sometimes in order to boost performance I have to choose a lower resolution so I configure the scaling of my video card, set the game to 1280x800 and it works fine at 16:10 aspect ratio with black bars. I see no reason why a 16:10 1920x1200 screen wouldn't be able to do that with the 1920x1080 resolution.

 

[cannondale06]

Must be a driver/graphic card thing. I have an older graphic card and a 5:4 monitor and sometimes in order to boost performance I have to choose a lower resolution so I configure the scaling of my video card, set the game to 1280x800 and it works fine at 16:10 aspect ratio with black bars. I see no reason why a 16:10 1920x1200 screen wouldn't be able to do that with the 1920x1080 resolution.

I will certainly try again next time I get a chance to play around with it. I gave the monitor to my parents a little over a year ago and they live an hour from me. anyway, I want to go with a 120 Hz monitor next and it looks like I will probably just stick with 1920x1080.

 

[TheCommander]

Stick with 1920x1200. I own a couple 26' LCDs and one runs at 1920x1200 and the other at 1920x1080. The 16:10 one has a larger screen and I guess it feels more like a PC monitor as opposed to a TV.

 

[criccio]

There are a lot of very confused people here, cannondale being the most confused. 16x9 is NOT wider then 16x10 PERIOD. Its impossible. Get over and move on.

Games don't magically allow you to see more on the sides when you chop off the top and bottom.... how retarded is that?

 

[cannondale06]

There are a lot of very confused people here, cannondale being the most confused. 16x9 is NOT wider then 16x10 PERIOD. Its impossible. Get over and move on.

Games don't magically allow you to see more on the sides when you chop off the top and bottom.... how retarded is that?

its the aspect ratio that makes the games wider. PROPERLY done widescreen does NOT chop off the top and bottom. the wider the aspect ratio the more you ad on the sides and thats a fact. if you dont get that then look at some screenshots and learn something. http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14798 http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12341

for games, properly done 16:10 just adds more to the sides of 4:3. properly done 16:9 just adds more to the sides of 16:10.

 

[cannondale06]

oops

 

[evilsofa]

There are a lot of very confused people here, cannondale being the most confused. 16x9 is NOT wider then 16x10 PERIOD. Its impossible. Get over and move on.

16x9 is wider than 16x10 when the height is the same.

Games don't magically allow you to see more on the sides when you chop off the top and bottom.... how retarded is that?

What you are describing is a Vert- widescreen game. They do in fact chop off the top and bottom without allowing you to see more on the sides. This is improper widescreen support, and way too many games do this.

Fortunately, most Vert- games can be fixed to do Hor+, in which the top and bottom of the screen is NOT chopped off, and you can see more on the sides. See the WSGF Games List to see how for each game.

 

[criccio]

We are not talking about the height being the same... We are talking about a 1920x1080 monitor and a 1920x1200 monitor. You can go on and on about FOV all you want, you still have one thousand nine hundred twenty pixels to play with, there is no way around that. You have LESS vertical pixels, therefore in the end you see less... stupid.

I have a Dell 2405wfp and an NEC23WMi right in front of me with Borderlands on both and my character is standing in the same spot in both. The image is identical horizontally but you just see less on the top and bottom.. how is this so hard to understand?

 

[cannondale06]

We are not talking about the height being the same... We are talking about a 1920x1080 monitor and a 1920x1200 monitor. You can go on and on about FOV all you want, you still have one thousand nine hundred twenty pixels to play with, there is no way around that. You have LESS vertical pixels, therefore in the end you see less... stupid.

I have a Dell 2405wfp and an NEC23WMi right in front of me with Borderlands on both and my character is standing in the same spot in both. The image is identical horizontally but you just see less on the top and bottom.. how is this so hard to understand?

by putting bars at the top and bottom if you are running 16:9 on your 16:10 screen thats making it seem smaller. nothing is actually getting chopped of though if that is a proper widescreen game. thats just what happens when you run 16:9 on a 16:10 screen. it just like watching a widescreen move on regular 4:3 screen. you arent losing info from the top and bottom but it doesnt fill the screen because its a 4:3 screen so it just uses black bars. this is WHY some of us want the 16:9 monitors in the first place so we dont have to see that. did you even look at the screenshots I linked too? they show HL2 Ep2 at 1600x1200, 1920x1200 and 1920x1080 and each one just adds more to the sides. thats the way it works for proper widescreen.

 

[evilsofa]

We are not talking about the height being the same... We are talking about a 1920x1080 monitor and a 1920x1200 monitor. You can go on and on about FOV all you want, you still have one thousand nine hundred twenty pixels to play with, there is no way around that. You have LESS vertical pixels, therefore in the end you see less...

On a 1920x1080 display in a Vert- game, you will see less vertically and the same horizontally; in a Hor+ game, you will see the same vertically and more horizontally. I speak in terms of content on the screen, not the physical location of pixels; you seem unable to separate one from the other, which is necessary to understand how FOV works.

stupid.

I am being polite, and ask that you be polite as well.

I have a Dell 2405wfp and an NEC23WMi right in front of me with Borderlands on both and my character is standing in the same spot in both. The image is identical horizontally but you just see less on the top and bottom.. how is this so hard to understand?

I understand perfectly. Borderlands is a Vert- game with improper widescreen support. Fix it, and you will see more to the sides on the EA231WMi than you do on the 2405wfp, but you will also see less vertically on the EA231WMi than you do on the 2405wfp; the picture titled "16:10 Gameplay (FOV 85)" will be what is on the 2405wfp, and the picture titled "16:9 Gameplay (FOV 95)" will be what is on the EA231WMi.

You don't have to fix Borderlands' widescreen if you don't want to, but just be aware that it is possible for your 1920x1080 monitor to show more to the sides than your 1920x1200 monitor does, should you choose to do so; the tradeoff for doing that is that you will see less vertically.

 

[criccio]

Sigh... 99% of the time people don't want to/don't care to go through all these hacks... I don't know what you mean by the polite comment, you seem to have taken my stupid comment in the wrong context. It wasn't directed at anyone.

 

[obobski]

cannondale: now I understand your point (read through your link), I think we see eye to eye here:

on a 1200p monitor, you could simply letterbox a 1080p input and have the same image, however you're just saying that you'd rather buy the 1080p monitor of the same ~24" diag. size and skip that

my main contention is in-line with what walker said, you can run 16:9 on 16:10 (and either stretch it or letterbox it), if you're having issues with that, WGF is probably more helpful than [H], but I'd be happy to take a stab at helping you as I'm sure other members would as well

sofa ->

cricco:
I think the disagreement is more or less what I stated just above, you are correct in saying that your 1920xwhatever is the same width, however if the application supports the aspect ratio correctly, its going to have different FOV profiles for that aspect ratio which *should* "Widen" the image slightly, unless its "bad" like Bioshock, you could entirely run the thing letterboxed and have the same image as a slightly smaller 1080p monitor, that would work just fine

and your comment "stupid" seems pretty directed at sofa

sofa/cannondale:
I've been involved with computers for over a decade and it took me a bit to figure out what the hell you both meant with "hor+" and "vert-", perhaps try less forum-specific slang in general explanations in the future (indeed neither wikipedia nor a general google search yielded an exacting definition, simply thousands of forum articles mentioning "ZOMG THIS IS HOR+ DAWG")

 

[evilsofa]

sofa/cannondale:
I've been involved with computers for over a decade and it took me a bit to figure out what the hell you both meant with "hor+" and "vert-", perhaps try less forum-specific slang in general explanations in the future (indeed neither wikipedia nor a general google search yielded an exacting definition, simply thousands of forum articles mentioning "ZOMG THIS IS HOR+ DAWG")

The WideScreenGamingForum FAQ shows, with pictures, what Hor+ and Vert- means, about halfway down, in the area titled "Screenchange".

 

[sethk]

There are a lot of very confused people here, cannondale being the most confused. 16x9 is NOT wider then 16x10 PERIOD. Its impossible. Get over and move on.

Games don't magically allow you to see more on the sides when you chop off the top and bottom.... how retarded is that?

The "Field of View" (FOV) setting in many games determines how wide the displayed content is. Usually it defines in radians or degrees how wide a field of view to render. Some games calculate the FOV differently for 16:9 and 16:10. It is possible that you can see more content in a 16:9 vs 16:10 display in certain games, and in others you may see more in 16:10.

 

[obobski]

The WideScreenGamingForum FAQ shows, with pictures, what Hor+ and Vert- means, about halfway down, in the area titled "Screenchange".

yes, and after quite a bit of digging about I was able to arrive at a working definition, but when cannondale just jumps in here "no you're all wrong its hor+", I'm thinking "what the hell is hor+ and stop inventing terms"

all is well

The "Field of View" (FOV) setting in many games determines how wide the displayed content is. Usually it defines in radians or degrees how wide a field of view to render. Some games calculate the FOV differently for 16:9 and 16:10. It is possible that you can see more content in a 16:9 vs 16:10 display in certain games, and in others you may see more in 16:10.

and with most games you can adjust FOV to compensate for whatever aspect ratio you like, just gotta know where to look (and WGF is a great resource, apathy is not a valid argument)