sub-1900 resolutions on a 24" LCD

[drbenjamin]

Guys

I'm an old school CRT user, thinking about making the switch to an LCD. I've pretty much decided that anything smaller than a 24" won't motivate me to switch, since I have a 20" CRT now. However, I doubt that my 8800GT will be able to run all the games I'm likely to play at 1900x1200. So, do any 24" LCD monitors allow for 1:1 pixel mapping on lower resolutions? I.e put a black border around a 1600x1050 image, displaying a smaller picture? Or do you think that it would be preferable to let the monitor interpolate a lower res image across the full screen?

Thanks!

 

[legcramp]

1440x990, 1600x1050 looks perfect on my 24" soyo, native resolution is 1900x1200.


It's basically like a 20" native is 1600x1050 but the 22" also use that res. You get a higher dot pitch but the image looks perfect to me.

 

[orangeble]

With your video card you shouldn't have a problem running any game except Crysis at 1920 x 1200 res. I have an 8800gts 640mb (< not as good as your card) and I can run games like COD4, Bioshock, and World in Conflict at that resolution with good performance.

Even if you do need to run something at a lower res, as long as your monitor has a built in scaler, the image quality should still look good. Running in 1:1 mode would just be a waste as you'll lose all the benefit of a 24" screen.

 

[chameleoneel]

even 1280x800 should look fine. it does on a 22 inch, and really only loses a small bit of sharpness. nowadays, non-native resolutions are only really bad below 720p.

 

[drbenjamin]

Good to hear that non-native resolutions aren't so bad, they used to suck out loud. I agree that today my 8800GT can handle anything but Crysis, but it wouldn't surprise me if 6-12 months away that's no longer true, so I just wanted to be certain that I wasn't going to regret getting a fixed-pitch monitor.

Thanks again!

 

[WaTaGuMp]

While they can do lower running anything other then native resolution on an LCD is just a crime, You spend good money on a qaulity LCD the damn thing better look like it, and running lower resolution it sure the hell wont.

 

[silent-circuit]

While they can do lower running anything other then native resolution on an LCD is just a crime, You spend good money on a qaulity LCD the damn thing better look like it, and running lower resolution it sure the hell wont.

.... Shhh.

 

[xlink]

While they can do lower running anything other then native resolution on an LCD is just a crime, You spend good money on a qaulity LCD the damn thing better look like it, and running lower resolution it sure the hell wont.

true but if you're playing a game and into it, you're be more concentrated on the enemy than on a slight amount of blurring. Atleast I'd hope so. back when i was using a 6200(was waiting for 8800s to come out) it was horrible and I don't seem to recall it being THAT bad as far as the monitors IQ goes.

if you're doing 2d though(gen use/ graphics), no question about it, native is the way to go.

 

[WaTaGuMp]

.... Shhh.

 

[E.T]

Or do you think that it would be preferable to let the monitor interpolate a lower res image across the full screen?

You don't want to interpolate it always across full screen because most older games don't have wide aspect ratio resolutions so what you want probably more is aspect scaling.
(image is scaled up as much as possible but so that aspect ratio is retained)

While they can do lower running anything other then native resolution on an LCD is just a crime,

Same could be said from getting shit design graphic cards which don't idle and consume same amount of power for showing static desktop image than C2Ds or new Penryn quad cores under full load.
And playing at playable framerate always wins slideshow!