so what do you consider high resolution gaming?

H

haadij404

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Messages
2,280
high resolution for me is 19x12. I used to think that 16x10 was high but it doesn't really tax hardware too much (which is why its such a popular resolution).

where do you stand?
 
i use 16x10

its still high enough where i get the high resolution but i dont have to shell out as much for hardware to run it unlike the 19x12 resolution for most games; plus you get to max out almost everything if you run a lower resolution. of course with todays tech and current game engines that are basically going as powerful as the consoles can push it then 19x12 you can easily turn everything up.
 
i suppose nowadays even 19x12 is becoming more of a norm, have to go to 30" 25x16 to go hi res nowadays, might not reflect the majority still on 12 x10 but hi res is really the highest you can go and that is 25x16 AFAIK.
 
greater then or equal to 1200 pixels vertical. So that's 1600x1200 and up.

1680x1050 is not, since it has stupid low vertical resolution
 
i would consider 19x12 to be "high res" but i mean, its all relative to what you are using at the moment.
 
jcvjcvjcvjcv said:
greater then or equal to 1200 pixels vertical. So that's 1600x1200 and up.

1680x1050 is not, since it has stupid low vertical resolution
Click to expand...

Any resolution capable of 1080p. The amount of 19x12 monitors and 1080p TVs makes 1080p a "minimum" amount for truly high resolution gaming. Any hardware solution for the segment must be at least capable of upscaling to 1080p (PS3;)).

But the top end market for VGAs is truly oriented towards 2560x1600, hence the market demand for 4870X2s and 280s when the 4850 is so much cheaper. I would never get a 4870X2 without my 30" or plans to buy one in the near future:D
 
Domini said:
i use 16x10

its still high enough where i get the high resolution but i dont have to shell out as much for hardware to run it unlike the 19x12 resolution for most games; plus you get to max out almost everything if you run a lower resolution. of course with todays tech and current game engines that are basically going as powerful as the consoles can push it then 19x12 you can easily turn everything up.
Click to expand...

+1. I could easily get myself a 24" monitor, but then I'd have to get a better video card or possibly even go SLI or crossfire, which I don't want to do. I like 16x10 just fine and it's a lot less expensive since I don't have to ugrade the video card as often... ;)
 
1920x1080 on my 37' Westy..Thought about going higher but I would have to go down in screen size..
 
Nowadays: 1920 x 1080/1200.

:( My 1600 x 1200 display is low rez.
 
Silus said:
Anything equal to or higher than 1920x1200.
Click to expand...

g1xx3r said:
1920x1080 on my 37' Westy..Thought about going higher but I would have to go down in screen size..
Click to expand...

CrimsonKnight13 said:
1920x1200 & above
Click to expand...

Mark_Warner said:
1080p and up is high-resolution gaming, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Mr. Stryker said:
1920x1200 as well. Had 1680x1050 for 2 1/2 years, then finally moved on.
Click to expand...

geok1ng said:
Any resolution capable of 1080p. The amount of 19x12 monitors and 1080p TVs makes 1080p a "minimum" amount for truly high resolution gaming. Any hardware solution for the segment must be at least capable of upscaling to 1080p (PS3;)).

But the top end market for VGAs is truly oriented towards 2560x1600, hence the market demand for 4870X2s and 280s when the 4850 is so much cheaper. I would never get a 4870X2 without my 30" or plans to buy one in the near future:D
Click to expand...

+ 1 to all of these: 1080P to 1920x1200 and above.
 
I accept the meaning of HD to 1920x1080 or for PC monitors 1920x1200

However that's not the top end of the scale, 2560x1600 is about twice as many pixels as 1920x1080, in comparison "HD" is acutally quite small.

However definition is relative to size, if you want more pixels you tend to want more space to put them across. The apparant size of the pixels is important, so if you have 1920x1080 but you stretch it across 52" worth of screen, then thats going to look quite low definition if you sit at the same distance away compared to a 1920x1200 24" monitor.

The 30" 2560x1600 models are the best of both worlds, they've got a large physical size, but a resolution so high that despite the large panel size they've still got more pixels per unit area than almost all other standard sized screens.

So I'd argue that something like 1680x1050 is quite "high def" if you put it on a smaller screen of say 17" rather than 22" which is standard.
 
To me "high resolution" depends on the size of the display. Right now I game at 2304x1440 on a 24" display. I consider that a "high resolution" for a 24" display, but I wouldn't consider that a "high resolution" on a 30" display.

Are there any 24" displays that do 2560x1600? That's what I would like when my FW900 dies.
 
joikd said:
To me "high resolution" depends on the size of the display. Right now I game at 2304x1440 on a 24" display. I consider that a "high resolution" for a 24" display, but I wouldn't consider that a "high resolution" on a 30" display.

Are there any 24" displays that do 2560x1600? That's what I would like when my FW900 dies.
Click to expand...

Pixel pitch is a big part of it, no doubt. I would love a 24" monitor @ 2560x1600.
 
Cheffy said:
Anything above 800x600.

I'm old school.
Click to expand...

My actual definition is a little higher then this, but not by much. I think high res gaming is anything above 1024x768 or 1280x1024. I think there's a difference between high resolution gaming and HD gaming. HD gaming would certainly be 1080P or higher, but I think high res is a different thing entirely.
 
I could afford a nice 30" monitor but no way I'm gonna keep up with hardware upgrades...so my next screen is most likely gonna be a 22 or hopefully a 24"
 
Anything larger than 1280x720 is technically "high definition", but my own standard is that "high definition gaming" starts at 1920x1080. So, 1920x1080, 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 are "high resolution" in my book.
 
I went from 20" wide to 24" widescreen and now i want 30" widescreen. I keep seeing people talking about their 1080p TV's they are using as monitors, and that just makes the pixel pitch too big. Plus i want the extra real estate that comes with 25x16.
 
haadij404 said:
high resolution for me is 19x12. I used to think that 16x10 was high but it doesn't really tax hardware too much (which is why its such a popular resolution).

where do you stand?
Click to expand...

I remember when cards came out that for the first time allowed you to play games at more than 1024x768 and still get decent framerates...

I was a bit worried that my 4850 wouldn't keep up when I moved from a 19" to 22" monitor but of course it didn't even break a sweat. There's a tiny bit of lag in Oblivion when running tons of mods and 4X Adaptive AA/16X AF at 1680x1050 but I don't think it's a low framerate or anything, just some kind of lag.

So yeah, 19x12 is "high resolution" to me as well, because it requires a GTX260/4870 for optimum gameplay while you can get away with a 4850 or even slower cards for 16x10.
 
1080p+ (I'm at 1920x1200)

High res starts at 1080p. Mostly because thats when SLI/Crossfire starts to be worth it.
 
Anything about 1280x1024, I normally use 1280x1024 simply because it provides good fps but still great quality. It just seems overkill to go any higher than that =o
 
Crispy002 said:
Anything about 1280x1024, I normally use 1280x1024 simply because it provides good fps but still great quality. It just seems overkill to go any higher than that =o
Click to expand...

If I was still using a CRT I would rather use 1280x1024 with 4X AA/16XAF than anything higher with lower AA/AF settings. However with a LCD monitor, everything except the native resolution looks like @ss so you don't have much of a choice.
 
I would say in general 1920x1200 is "high resolution gaming" but pixel pitch is a pretty big factor. I use a 27" and it is probably the cap of what is tolerable pixel pitch wise, I doubt I could handle 1920x1200 at 30" and up. At that point it would feel very "low res". Pretty soon though I wouldn't be surprised it 2560x1600 become more normal. We easily have the hardware for the resolution now, and the displays are getting much better.
 
It's all about pixel pitch. 1280x1024 on a 17" lcd or 1680x1050 on a 19-20" widescreen both look incredibly sharp to me. A good 22" with 1680x1050 seems to be the current sweet spot, and I like that too, but I wouldn't complain if they started making 22" wides that could do 1920x1200. 24" and larger screens just seem like too much physical screen for PC gaming to me. I don't like having to move my head/eyes excessively to look at diff parts of the screen, and I don't like sitting farther away from my computer to compensate for that.
 
exploding5heep said:
I would say in general 1920x1200 is "high resolution gaming" but pixel pitch is a pretty big factor. I use a 27" and it is probably the cap of what is tolerable pixel pitch wise, I doubt I could handle 1920x1200 at 30" and up. At that point it would feel very "low res". Pretty soon though I wouldn't be surprised it 2560x1600 become more normal. We easily have the hardware for the resolution now, and the displays are getting much better.
Click to expand...

Running a 30" monitor at 1920x1200 should be illegal.
 
just to change the idea on this thread.. HD at first was considered (in the video world) to be 720p or 1280x720 resolution

That is still considered high definition...

now in my opinion (coming from a dell 2560x1600 30 incher and a 32 inch 1080p sony.). that is high resolution gaming... but i wouldn't toss out somebody using a 720p capable monitor/TV to not be high resolution gaming.. anything above 480p should be considered gaming with a high resolution display
 
No offense but this just seems like an E-Peen thread; as in, state the native res of your display, then pat yourself on the back by stating that you don’t consider anything less than that to be “High resolution gaming” :rolleyes:

Realistically I think it would be pretty hard to say that 1680x1050 doesn’t qualify. AA obviously comes into play as well.
 
1680x1050 on a 17" laptop screen maybe. 1920x1200 and up seems high res to me as far as desktop/tv display. Stating that I have a 30" dell with a 4870x2 has nothing to do with my penis, I was merely stating what is "high-res" gaming for ME, as in what I play on. Maybe I was mistaken on the question by the OP, sorry.
 
GotNoRice said:
No offense but this just seems like an E-Peen thread; as in, state the native res of your display, then pat yourself on the back by stating that you don’t consider anything less than that to be “High resolution gaming” :rolleyes:

Realistically I think it would be pretty hard to say that 1680x1050 doesn’t qualify. AA obviously comes into play as well.
Click to expand...

kenham40 said:
1680x1050 on a 17" laptop screen maybe. 1920x1200 and up seems high res to me as far as desktop/tv display. Stating that I have a 30" dell with a 4870x2 has nothing to do with my penis, I was merely stating what is "high-res" gaming for ME, as in what I play on. Maybe I was mistaken on the question by the OP, sorry.
Click to expand...

lol, i don't think gotnorice's comments were directed at you ken, but the thread in general.

high resolution gaming? anything more than the one on my old gameboy.
 
kumquatsrus said:
lol, i don't think gotnorice's comments were directed at you ken, but the thread in general.

high resolution gaming? anything more than the one on my old gameboy.
Click to expand...

Wow, my old gamegear was high-res gaming, hilarious man, I love it! ;)

(although, I gotta say, the screen on my 1st gen PSP was the closest thing to hi-res gaming on a portable I have ever seen.)
 
JacobC1983 said:
just to change the idea on this thread.. HD at first was considered (in the video world) to be 720p or 1280x720 resolution

That is still considered high definition...

now in my opinion (coming from a dell 2560x1600 30 incher and a 32 inch 1080p sony.). that is high resolution gaming... but i wouldn't toss out somebody using a 720p capable monitor/TV to not be high resolution gaming.. anything above 480p should be considered gaming with a high resolution display
Click to expand...

Well there's a difference between "High Definition", a term used mostly to describe consoles and TVs, and "High Resolution", used mostly to describe video cards and computer monitors. With a computer monitor, you're (usually) sitting very close to the screen, where as movies and console games are enjoyed from a couch, bed etc. several meters from the screen. This means the requirements are completely different and you're comparing apples to oranges.

I'ved used 1024x768 (nearly 720p) ever since the Voodoo3 nearly ten years ago. When I got the original Radeon 64MB a little later, I switched to 1152x864 (slightly faster than 12x10 and more natural aspect ratio) and then 12x10 when I got a 19" display in 2003. Noone called that "High Definition", because the term wasn't coined yet. We just said that the new cards allowed for "high resolution" gaming. High Definition is just a buzzword invented by the HDTV and gaming console industry because it's easier for people to understand the word "Definition" than "Resolution". "High Definition" on the PC has been around for over 10 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top