• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Gaming Resolutions

I'm chugging along @ 2560 x 1600 on a 4870, with a 1920 x 1200 dvi #2 for client boxing, etc, but it's starting to show the age with newer releases (BC2, etc).
 
1920*1200 here. I had a 2560*1600, but it was just too physically large for my liking. If they could make one that was under 26" then I would be all over it.
 
I've been using 1680x1050 for years, first with the NEC 20WMGX2 and now with the Dell 2209WA, IPS panels ftw.
 
1680x1050 here. Im not about to break the bank every time a new piece of hardware comes out either though. I have better things to do with my money.
 
1920x1200 here. Best $600 I ever spent on anything for my PC. I can run most everything maxed out on this monitor with my current setup, but I have to turn down a couple games to 1680x1050 (Crysis) or even 1280x800 (Just Cause 2, Metro 2033) to keep things maxed out.

Before that I used CRTs and 1280x1024 or 1680x1050 TN LCDs. To quote Sean Connery in The Hunt For Red October about going back to TN displays...

"There is no going back."
 
Tolyngee said:
Once you go 2560x1600, you don't go back if you can help it.

But I imagine Eyefinity's actually cheaper.
Click to expand...

All depends on the monitors you get of course. One Dell 3007 and three Alienware AW2310s cost about the same.
 
SicKlown42012 said:
1920*1200 here. I had a 2560*1600, but it was just too physically large for my liking. If they could make one that was under 26" then I would be all over it.
Click to expand...

LuminaryJanitor said:
3840x2400 on a 22'' screen...
Click to expand...

The monitor's native refresh rate is 41 Hz. And can go much lower from there. LOL.

Funny thing is I went from 37" 1920x1080 DOWN to 30" 2560x1600. Just too proud to admit I wish mine was bigger.

heatlesssun said:
All depends on the monitors you get of course. One Dell 3007 and three Alienware AW2310s cost about the same.
Click to expand...

Well, I was thinking with Eyefinity you have the option to go cheap. Not really an option with the limited selection of 30" panels out there. People probably already own one of the three monitors they're going to use, so only two more max to buy, especially if you're going cheap.

But anything has the capability to cost more.
 
I've got a 1920x1080 120hz monitor I use for most everything but I've got a few 1920x1200 60hz monitors I'll use on and off.
 
I used a 1680x1050 for about 2-3 yrs. Great size for mid range cards. Recently switched to1920x1200 which I love but it defienetly requires a more hefty card in relation to 1680x1050.
 
Been running 1920 x 1200 for a while now, my poor SLI 8800GTs keep up with most everything I run right now but itching to upgrade.

Hopefully next year I can get a 5870 and try out some eyefinity goodness. :D
 
1920 x 1080 with 4890's in Crossfire.

The beauty of this setup is that my GPUs completely overpowers this resolution. Instead of having to compromise this or that setting to achieve playable framerates, I simply max everything out with 4xAA and end the story right there. This has saved me the headaches of wondering "what could've been" had I bought a better card.
 
1280x960 @85Hz as of last year. Was 1152x864, years before that 1024x768. I change slowly.

I use a 17" CRT and have been using it since 2002. I personally never want to get an LCD, but some day I must. This one's starting to fail, but I'm looking for a replacement CRT with something like 1920x1440 @85Hz. Would be a dream to use it, although a huge change.
 
Wow, almost 11% on Steam Survey use 1024x768. That is just...sad. :(

I'm running 1920x1200 here. Not long ago I was running 1680x1050, followed closely behind by 1280x1024.
 
MavericK96 said:
Wow, almost 11% on Steam Survey use 1024x768. That is just...sad. :(

I'm running 1920x1200 here. Not long ago I was running 1680x1050, followed closely behind by 1280x1024.
Click to expand...

I still know a few people who swear by older 1024x768 NEC CRTs for ANY type of gaming , I bet most of those steam users are CS players. Infact my friends who run at the low resolution pretty much just play CS...

I keep trying to tell them there is virtually no difference between that monitor in terms of input latency and a 120hz LCD monitor but none of them believe me :rolleyes:
 
2560x1600 is my preferred res. You do pay the price of having to upgrade more often however.
 
dose said:
Same here. Some of you guys are playing some some ridiculous setups. I'd love to play with some of those eyefinity setups, damn!
Click to expand...

It actually wasn't that difficult to do. I've owned one Dell 2007FPW since they came out and used it at 1680x1050 for 4 years. In March, I built my gaming SFF PC (see my sig for worklog) with an XFX 5850. I knew it could do Eyefinity but didn't really decide to do it until about a month ago. I did my research and bought 2 more 2007FPW's off eBay for $150ish each along with the $100 active DisplayPort to DVI adapter from Dell and haven't regretted it since. About $450 total spent was way cheaper than buying all new LCD's (PVA likely too, these are all IPS) or trying to find one IPS LCD with DisplayPort for the middle and a 2007FPW on each side. They all match too which is a huge plus because I hate inconsistency. I use two 19 LCD's at 1280x768 at work and my Eyefinity setup completely puts them to shame. I've shown co-workers pics of my setup and a few gaming vids of it and they are totally blown away. Some of these guys just bought 30-42" displays to play WOW and BC2 on are completely jealous of what I can do for a fraction of what they spent their money on. Larger isn't always better IMHO. Playing both my accounts in EVE online on 2 screens and a movie on the third as I type.
 
2560x1600 .. but if there's a game that's particularly demanding I have no probs gaming at 1920x1200, 1680x1050 or even 1280x800 with anti-aliasing cranked up, is all good. Just a matter of finding the balance of framerate vs image clarity depending on the game.
 
Mr. Bluntman said:
To quote Sean Connery in The Hunt For Red October about going back to TN displays...

"There is no going back."
Click to expand...

But did you burn your TN panels to motivate your current panels to live up to your expectations? :p

"Captain, I agree with the other displays, and with the mobo and RAM. You should not have informed the TN manufs your intention to defect."

"Oh, CPU, the TN manufs are not the worry, nor the whole display market. I know their viewing angles. The worry is with the video card manufs. We find the right one, and this will work. But we get some... GSODing POS?"
 
Yeah you never go back to TN panels after you've used a good IPS.

That's the great thing about the 30" panels is not only do you get a higher resolution, and a higher desnsity of pixels (sharper screen) but also you don't get TN 30" panels (to my knowledge) so the overall quality is just way higher.
 
I've been running 1440x900 for about a year and a half. JUST bought a 24" Asus 1080resolution that comes in the mail tomorrow. I'm running dual 4850's, so I should be fine.
 
Currently gaming at 1900 x 1200 for the past 3 year. Plan on going to 30" in the near future.
 
7680x1600 on everything that supports Eyefinity and my Crossfire system can muster. Anything that does not fit into that category is played at 2560x1600.















Working on Bad Company 2, Mass Effect 2 and both Crysis games. Cannot quite handle DX11 games like Metro 2033 and AvP yet. Love it when it works though!
 
^^^ Impressive.

I just bought a 22" 1920x1080, and I thought that was great.
 
I game at 5760 X 1080. I couldn't imagine gaming at 1280X1024. Even when I had a CRT I gamed at 1600X1200 :p
 
guitarguy6 said:
I game at 5760 X 1080. I couldn't imagine gaming at 1280X1024. Even when I had a CRT I gamed at 1600X1200 :p
Click to expand...

You just had to be there from the beginning.

Long ago, it was an absolute world of difference when a ~$150 voodoo1 card could take Quake (1, the original...) to an astounding 640x480 while increasing your framerate.

Seems unbelievable to run a game on a GPU @ 640 x 480. Even more unbelievable that it quadrupled your previous res of 320 x 240 in software.

Both resolutions look absolutely ridiculous on a 2560x1600 monitor.
 
I play at 1680x1050. My rationale was that at that resolution I could max out games with a single video card. The idea of messing around with sli/crossfire never appealed to me, and this way I can run games at native res without breaking the bank or having to upgrade every 6 months. Also the 22" monitor I bought (LG L227 WTG) came highly recommended for performance with games.
 
1920x1080p is the way to go... as far as I know, 2560x1600 is only available on 30" monitors... not nearly big enough sit comfortably sit in a recliner in front of. Spend hours gaming hunched over a desk? No thanks. Once you go La-Z-Boy + big TV + wireless you don't go back.

Also, "Eyefinity" is retarded. For a bunch of gamers who supposedly care about graphics, you'd think they'd be more upset about the massive annoying black bars going throughout the middle of their picture. Talk about one hell of a graphics artifact!
 
Xizer said:
1920x1080p is the way to go... as far as I know, 2560x1600 is only available on 30" monitors... not nearly big enough sit comfortably sit in a recliner in front of. Spend hours gaming hunched over a desk? No thanks. Once you go La-Z-Boy + big TV + wireless you don't go back.
Click to expand...

Well...you can put a 30" into 1920x1200 if you want more readable text or a bigger picture, I've been using my 30" at a decent distance in an executive office chair which tilts back, feet on sub, large screen, ultra high definition, that's how I roll :)
 
I checked my gaming resolution for BFBC2 last night and was surprised I couldn't get it to go to 1920 x 1200. When I set it to that, the picture was visibly shaky and made me feel like Michael J. Fox sitting on top of Ali. My desktop resolution is set to 1920 x 1200, so I'm not sure why I couldn't get it for the game.

I ended up leaving it at 1680 x 1050, which looks good, but isn't top notch.

Is it simply because my video card is so old? I don't have the funds right now to move up to what I'd like to get (likely a 5770 due to limited budget).
 
@Frraksurred:

A+



My desktop monitor is 1680x1050 and I've got my computers hooked to both of them and my 47" 1080p.

RTS/FPS at the desktop, racing on the big screen with the PSEVO/G25.
 
Xizer said:
Also, "Eyefinity" is retarded. For a bunch of gamers who supposedly care about graphics, you'd think they'd be more upset about the massive annoying black bars going throughout the middle of their picture. Talk about one hell of a graphics artifact!
Click to expand...
To each his own. I don't see what's worth getting so upset/angry about.

PrincessFrosty said:
Well...you can put a 30" into 1920x1200 if you want more readable text or a bigger picture
Click to expand...
Or increase Windows' DPI settings.
 
Godmachine said:
I still know a few people who swear by older 1024x768 NEC CRTs for ANY type of gaming , I bet most of those steam users are CS players. Infact my friends who run at the low resolution pretty much just play CS...

I keep trying to tell them there is virtually no difference between that monitor in terms of input latency and a 120hz LCD monitor but none of them believe me :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

lots of professional gamers do it.

Quake players tend to use 800x600@120 or 125hz.

lcds have a long long way to go till they can fully replace crts for gaming
 
PC = 1920x1200
Console=1080p(when available), 1080i/720p for everything else.
 
Simon said:
lots of professional gamers do it.

Quake players tend to use 800x600@120 or 125hz.

lcds have a long long way to go till they can fully replace crts for gaming
Click to expand...

These are the hardcore "professional" gamer types. For a person who takes gaming seriously in an FPS, 120Hz LCDs are a tolerable replacement to the old fashioned CRT. For a person whose gaming endeavors don't extend beyond MMOs, RTS and slow-paced single player FPS, then 60Hz, while shitty, is tolerable. I'm personally to the point where I can't even stand moving around the mouse on the desktop on a 60Hz monitor. It's just so fucking choppy and unsmooth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top