Any advantage to widescreen monitors?

L

lingding

n00b
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
41
I've been searching all over the place for a great gaming LCD screen, 20- 20.1 inch, and the viewsonic 2025 looks pretty nice so I went to check it out at fry's. Compared to this 19 in samsung, the thing looks small. Is there any advantage to playing with Widescreen? Or are they just for watching DVDs? I only play BF2 which doesn't support widescreen. Also, which monitor would you guys recommend for hard gaming?
 
Widescreen typically offers a larger FOV in games. Such as in CS:S I can see more area to my right and left.

Personally I'm a widescreen person. I like viewing multiple applications side by side.
 
i had a pretty heated discussion with someone recently about widescreen or 4:3

basically it came down to this

4:3 1280x1024 = 1,310,720
16:9 1440x900 = 1,296,000 (about 2% less pixels)

one you get a large FOV, which is fantastic for movies and games, u lose 2% pixels

but you get about 12% larger FOV combined on left and right

and typically in games you need to worry about stuff on ur left and right, not above you.

i prefer widescreen for the reason listed above.

some more numbers

1600x1200 = 1,920,000
1920x1080 = 2,073,600 about 10% more pixels than 1600x1200


the human eye, atleast mine rofl sees more on its left and right than it does top/bottom


if i had to guess i'd say my viewing angle is 170(85/85) horizontal and 45* veritcal up 65* veritcal down
 
todlerix said:
some more numbers

1600x1200 = 1,920,000
1920x1080 = 2,073,600 about 10% more pixels than 1600x1200
the human eye, atleast mine rofl sees more on its left and right than it does top/bottom
if i had to guess i'd say my viewing angle is 170(85/85) horizontal and 45* veritcal up 65* veritcal down
Click to expand...
Close.
computer monitors use 1920x1200, so 20% more pixels (1920/1600)
 
GLSauron said:
Close.
computer monitors use 1920x1200, so 20% more pixels (1920/1600)
Click to expand...

Widescreen 20" monitors are typically 1680 x 1050 24" are 1920 x 1200.

For 20" monitors I prefer 4:3, 1600x1200 is a good everyday resolution, unfortunately no one makes 4:3 LCDs bigger than that, so to increase the resolution you need to go 24" or 30" widescreen.

I don't see the reason for widescreen for computers personally, since I don't watch movies on my computer, and rarely use it for games, but if you want the highest possible res, it is the way to go.

I guess overall it could be a good thing though, eventually once everything converts to widescreen at least it will be the standard.
 
jcll2002 said:
or just go widescreen for that matter
Click to expand...

I have a widescreen TV, the advantages are obvious there for DVDs and HD content that is widescreen native, for a computer monitor I still fail to see why it would be better.
 
going widescreen and seeing my old 17in makes me realize why i've been staring into a square all these years and have not complain about it
 
Asian Dub Foundation said:
going widescreen and seeing my old 17in makes me realize why i've been staring into a square all these years and have not complain about it
Click to expand...

But anything is better than a 17". I have a 20" 4:3 now (Dell 2001fp) and it makes me wonder how I ever lives with the KDS 17" CRT, MAG 15" CRT, Compaq 14" CRT and whatever 12" CGA I had before that. I am sure when I get a 30" WS Monitor I will wonder how I ever lived with this one...
 
Yea i guess widescreen definitely is better for gaming, a wider range of view is better than looking above you. Now the question is which one? the Viewsonic 2025, or the Dell 2407?
 
When we are talking 20" monitors the 4:3 makes more sense to me. 1.92 MP (1600x1200) vs 1.76 MP (1680x1050).

The 4:3 is nearly as wide, but much taller, even for watching movies there wont be that much difference. The black bars are just slightly bigger on the 4:3.

I have been running 1600x1200 for years on CRT and I am unwilling to give up the screen real estate.

The 20" 4x3 1600x1200 is the only thing I am considering, but when the prices drop more a 1920x1200 would also work out nicely.

I have nothing against widescreen but more pixels are king and my minimum is 1600x1200.
 
Snowdog said:
When we are talking 20" monitors the 4:3 makes more sense to me. 1.92 MP (1600x1200) vs 1.76 MP (1680x1050).

The 4:3 is nearly as wide, but much taller, even for watching movies there wont be that much difference. The black bars are just slightly bigger on the 4:3.

I have been running 1600x1200 for years on CRT and I am unwilling to give up the screen real estate.

The 20" 4x3 1600x1200 is the only thing I am considering, but when the prices drop more a 1920x1200 would also work out nicely.

I have nothing against widescreen but more pixels are king and my minimum is 1600x1200.
Click to expand...


totally agreed. 1600X1200 is where its at in my opinion. WS gaming is just not well accepted by gaming manufacturers. 1600X1200 is considerably wider than 1280X1024 but not a WS and to me is the sweet spot.
 
I agree as well on the 1600x1200. That's what I'm running on a 204T.

What's the point of getting widescreen if you're used to 4:3? 4:3 just looks natural to me. Overall, it's preference, I'd say. There aren't really any benefits to either one.
 
GLSauron said:
Close.
computer monitors use 1920x1200, so 20% more pixels (1920/1600)
Click to expand...


i have a 37in 1920x1080p monitor

says so on the box,

miness 16:9 not 16:10
 
GLSauron said:
Close.
computer monitors use 1920x1200, so 20% more pixels (1920/1600)
Click to expand...


i have a 37in 1920x1080p monitor

says so on the box,

miness 16:9 not 16:10
 
I just snatched a deal on the 2005FPW (thanks to the person who posted in the [H]ot Deals section) upgrading from a 19" CRT, and I must say it was well worth the money. But yea, if you do decide to go widescreen, you better make sure you want it because there is no turning back. I am an average gamer and use my monitor mainly for word documents, graphics programs as well as web browsing, and some gaming, and the monitior works great for all purposes.

Widescreen is great because its so much easier to read stuff. Think about all the times you had to alt + tab or minimize because you couldn't see two different things side by side.

Yea i guess widescreen definitely is better for gaming, a wider range of view is better than looking above you. Now the question is which one? the Viewsonic 2025, or the Dell 2407?
Click to expand...
Someone just posted this article http://www.xyzcomputing.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=620&Itemid=0&limit=1&limitstart=4
of the Viewsonic and it mentions "No matter how well this monitor does in its testing or how good its specifications are, it still has one major hurdle to jump- Dell's dominance in the 20" widescreen category. The 2005FPW has become the king of performance and value in this class and the newer 2007WFP is poised to keep that run going. I wouldn't be as presumptuous as tell you to get the Dell or the ViewSonic, but both brands should definitely be considered before a purchase is made."

I don't have any personal experience w/ the viewsonic or the newer so Im not gonna tell you which one to get, but Im pretty sure you cant go wrong with either..so why not just get which one has a better price.
 
Same argument could be made for stacking things on top, and since overall pixels is greater, you'd have a bit more space, wouldn't you? I'll continue to quote my previous statement: it's a matter of preference... (and I'll add the following) and habit.

Grap3S0da said:
I just snatched a deal on the 2005FPW (thanks to the person who posted in the [H]ot Deals section) upgrading from a 19" CRT, and I must say it was well worth the money. But yea, if you do decide to go widescreen, you better make sure you want it because there is no turning back. I am an average gamer and use my monitor mainly for word documents, graphics programs as well as web browsing, and some gaming, and the monitior works great for all purposes.

Widescreen is great because its so much easier to read stuff. Think about all the times you had to alt + tab or minimize because you couldn't see two different things side by side.
Click to expand...
 
todlerix said:
i have a 37in 1920x1080p monitor

says so on the box,

miness 16:9 not 16:10
Click to expand...

It's a "monitor" in that it does not include a tuner. That's all.
 
Non-gaming opinion (like anyone cares....:D ) - At work, I have a 21" CRT dead center on my desk and a 19" panel set up to the left as a second monitor. I could have gone to a single wide screen panel, but thought I'd give this a whirl. No going back; I can put the CAD / documents / whatever I'm primarily working on dead center on the "big" CRT and the panel holds the e-mail, CAD menus, text editor, WinAmp, etc. I find it tremendously productive and can't imagine working on a single screen.

FWIW - B.B.S.
 
BlindedByScience said:
Non-gaming opinion (like anyone cares....:D ) - At work, I have a 21" CRT dead center on my desk and a 19" panel set up to the left as a second monitor. I could have gone to a single wide screen panel, but thought I'd give this a whirl. No going back; I can put the CAD / documents / whatever I'm primarily working on dead center on the "big" CRT and the panel holds the e-mail, CAD menus, text editor, WinAmp, etc. I find it tremendously productive and can't imagine working on a single screen.
Click to expand...
That's my opinion as well:
I bought a nice 19" CRT last year, which has served me incredibly well. I thought at first I would like a single 1600x1200 screen over my 2 old craptastic 1024x768 17" CRTs - I hooked up the better of the two within a week. Anyone who thinks a single widescreen (even a 24") display is all you could ever want - hook up a 17" CRT, and you'll realize how much you've been missing.

Back on topic, widescreen gaming is pretty fun, and certain games that support WS simply feel better and more natural. In WoW, WS can let you fit in more UI addons and generally makes your view feel less cramped (1440x900 in WoW works better than 1280x1024, even with less pixels). I'm looking for an LCD right now mostly for LANs, but also to finally replace my slowly dying 17" second monitor, so I have been thinking about the utility of of fitting 2 windows in a WS. Then again, I've also been thinking about getting a $20 PCI video card card to have a 3 monitor setup, with both of my second (non main/gaming) displays on the second card to take the graphic load off of 6800nu.
(Sorry for the rambling.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top