• 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.

Performance on 2005fpw

B

Borealis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 28, 2004
Messages
180
Ok, I'm sooo close to saying to hell with another vid. card upgrade, one thing is stopping me though. I've asked this in a couple other threads but didn't really get any direct answers.

What kind of vid. cards are you people running that own this monitor? Also, what kind of fps do you get in the popular games, namely HL2 and CS:S?

I'm in love with the idea of widescreen CS:S but I can't stand the idea of having to run @ medium settings or running high settings with shitty fps.

Help a guy out here! :D
 
You have a 6800, that's a way above the average video card. You might not be able to run at the native 1680*1050 all the time with high details with AA, but nothing wrong with running at 1280*800 as it doesn't look that bad interpolated on this screen, especially with 2xAA thrown in.

So you don't need to run games at the max res the screen can go. And anyone would probably rather run at a lower interpolated resolution with full high details and some AA instead of the full native resolution at medium settings.
 
Switching from native resolution doesn't fudge up the looks of games, like stretching and all that? Sorry, I'm new to lcd's.
 
Borealis said:
Switching from native resolution doesn't fudge up the looks of games, like stretching and all that? Sorry, I'm new to lcd's.
Click to expand...

You'll get interpolation, were it looks a little blurry around aliased edges. This looks pretty bad when on your desktop trying to read text, but in a game it's less noticable, especially with AA. Infact, it kind of gives a partial AA effect.

To better explain, an LCD has individual pixels built into a screen, unlike a crt. So the native resolution is that exact number that matches the number of pixels built into the screenl. So if you try to run at a lower resolution lower the pixels get larger and stop matching up perfectly with the screens physical pixels, they might land halfway between them and such, and again, larger . So it interpolates it, giving a soft blurry look to the pixels. Luckily the 2001 and 2005fpw does this pretty well compared to smaller LCDs

Then imagine on a 2001fp, it has a resolution of 1600*1200. If you divide that by 2, you'd get 800*600. And at that size the pixels are 4 times larger, so on pixel is represented by 4 pixels built into the screen, and thus probably will look razor sharp in that case.

On stretching and squishing, there shouldn't be any if you stay in the same aspect ratio. The 2005fpw is 16:10 widescreen. If you divide 10 into 16, you get 1.6. If you divide 1050 into 1680 you get 1.6 also. 1280*800 comes out to the same too, that's why I mentioned it so nothing will get stretched. If you try 1280*960, it's a 4:3 ratio, like a normal monitor, it will then scale it to fit the screen but then squish it vertically, or can be centered in the screen matching the pixels and leaving the extra pixels on the sides and such blank.
 
Borealis said:
Switching from native resolution doesn't fudge up the looks of games, like stretching and all that? Sorry, I'm new to lcd's.
Click to expand...

With most LCDs yes. But the 2001fp/2005fp are among the best in this category.
 
TimothyB said:
...or can be centered in the screen matching the pixels and leaving the extra pixels on the sides and such blank.
Click to expand...

Ok then I have a question. How would I go about doing that?

The reason I'm asking is because I'm considering a 2001fp, but the 2005fpw is the same price. If I can run the 2005fpw at an actual 1600:1200 then what is the disadvantage?

Are the response times the same between the 2001fp and 2005fpw?
 
baja150 said:
Ok then I have a question. How would I go about doing that?

The reason I'm asking is because I'm considering a 2001fp, but the 2005fpw is the same price. If I can run the 2005fpw at an actual 1600:1200 then what is the disadvantage?

Are the response times the same between the 2001fp and 2005fpw?
Click to expand...

Sorry if I said something that got mixed up. You can not run 1600*1200 on a 2005fpw because it can only do a max of 1050 vertical pixels, as it's native res is 1680*1050. You actually get more pixels with the 2001fpw being at 1600*1200.

The 2005 has auto controls. Like if you run at 1024*768, it will auto resize it to fit the screen without stretching it, but keeping the aspect ration of that res. Or, you can have it centered in the screen taking up exactly that amount of pixels built into the screen, so it will remain sharp, but you'll have wasted screen area all around it.
 
TimothyB,

Sorry I misunderstood, but thanks for clearing that up. I didn't know that the 2005 had controls on the monitor to choose stretch or actual. If the 2005fpw was 1680 (or more):1200 then I'd go that route, but I don't really want to run at a resolution with less than 1200 vertical.

I think I'll stick with the 2001fp... or actually the Viewsonic vp201b since I don't really like the "Dell" name either; I have my reasons for that though. I work at Ford and we get a discount on Dell PC's and notebooks so everyone I work with has one and they all think they're soooo great. I don't think they're bad computers, but I don't think anyone who has built their own computer would buy a Dell or any "name" computer.

Thanks again,
Rich
 
I didn't go with the 2001fp because I heard of that screendoor effect. Something like every other row or column of pixels is dimmer, giving a screendoor effect. But atleast there's no backlighting problems with it compared to the 2005fpw.

Also, if you can wait longer, the 24inch Dell LCD Widescreen will be out soon, that's 1920*1200 pixels. I hear it starts at $1199, way below the competition and who knows what kind of discounts they'll ahve.
 
Borealis said:
Switching from native resolution doesn't fudge up the looks of games, like stretching and all that? Sorry, I'm new to lcd's.
Click to expand...

Dude , i have run the 2005 on a 66000gt at naitive res with no issues . Enjoy
 
I am running an MSI 9800 Pro 128mb in a Dell Tower (crappy cooling) and I am running at 1680x1050 with all the settings at high with the exception of AA & AF. Looks incredible.

I say go with the widescreen, HL2 and many of the future games will be made to look best in WS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top