• 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.

Why is 16:9 popular

A

Akogot

n00b
Joined
Sep 11, 2005
Messages
9
I currently run a 16:10 1920-1200 monitor for my comp and cant seem to figure out why they make more of the 16:9 ones.

Inform me
 
Cheaper to produce and plays 16:9 media (dvd, bluray, etc.) without black bars or a complex scalar or 1:1 pixel mapping mode. Most 16:10 displays will overstretch the media unless they have a scalar chip to handle that.
 
Marketing.
Also, they are amazing for gaming because of the wider field of view and for videos because you don't have black bars.
In every other field they suck.
That's why I'm crying for the fact that i have to get rid of the hh281 because of the pathetic colours, and I'll probably have to buy a 1080p 27''.... :(

EDIT: also, they can be used with the console without any scaling problem. Fuck the consoles. They are killing pc. :(
 
i'm guessing for multimedia purposes?

i have a 16x9 1080p monitor and i love it. i love the extra width on the screen for gaming.

obviously 16x10 would be best for work/business use. but gaming and watching movies is nice on 16x9.
 
Meh, aren't most blu ray movies wider than 16:9 so you still end up with black bars anyway?

16:9 is too wide/too short vertically for computer usage imo. I would actually prefer a 4:3 screen for work but 16:10 was a good compromise so I don't mind it either.
 
I never understood the hoopla about black bars. Maybe on a 4:3 display where the picture actually gets kinda small but on big displays and HDTVs...who cares. You still have "black bars" on most displays, aka the bezel.
 
16:9 would be great if they just kept the same vertical resolution as 16:10 (1600x900 vs. 1440x900, 2133x1200 vs. 1920x1200, 2844x1600 vs. 2560x1600, etc etc). Sometimes they do, in the case of 1600x900 in laptops, but most of the time they don't. Because that would defeat the real point of 16:9, to make screens cheaper to produce and NOT pass the savings to the consumer.
 
I dont like 16:9. It is too squash. 16:10 makes thing so much better for browsing. How would you like to read 1/3 of a newspaper and keep flipping?

To get rid of the two black lines on 16:10, just zoom in a little on your movies and the lines are gone. Its that easy.
 
I believe that 16:9 monitors are pushed by the manufacturers not the consumer.
 
Akogot said:
I currently run a 16:10 1920-1200 monitor for my comp and cant seem to figure out why they make more of the 16:9 ones.

Inform me
Click to expand...

Some of the dumb 16:10 ones would actually stretch 1080p video feeds to 1200p (my samsung 244t annoyingly did that) so maybe after the complaints they started making 16:9 ones instead of just adding a proper mode to center the unscaled video.

16:9 is more cost effective and efficient if all you do is play games and watch movies/tv, for photos (or perhaps general usage, although it doesn't bother me much there myself) it can be worse though since the final shape is only sometimes that wide.
 
Last edited:
King of Heroes said:
16:9 would be great if they just kept the same vertical resolution as 16:10 (1600x900 vs. 1440x900, 2133x1200 vs. 1920x1200, 2844x1600 vs. 2560x1600, etc etc). Sometimes they do, in the case of 1600x900 in laptops, but most of the time they don't. Because that would defeat the real point of 16:9, to make screens cheaper to produce and NOT pass the savings to the consumer.
Click to expand...

nah that would squash everything! and you'd either have to deal with reduced image quality from scaling or squashed movies/tv
 
Akogot said:
I currently run a 16:10 1920-1200 monitor for my comp and cant seem to figure out why they make more of the 16:9 ones.

Inform me
Click to expand...


1. Cost-effective: The panel can be used in TVs, monitors and hybrids
2. Content and marketing. It helps to have the Full HD logo to pull ill informed consumers
 
vjcsmoke said:
Cheaper to produce and plays 16:9 media (dvd, bluray, etc.) without black bars or a complex scalar or 1:1 pixel mapping mode. Most 16:10 displays will overstretch the media unless they have a scalar chip to handle that.
Click to expand...

Mine has a scaler chip but movie players allow you to select correct aspect ratio so that they don't overscan. It's a non issue really and many movies on even a 16:9 LCD will still have black bars because all movies are not filmed at 16:9.
 
A 26 inch 16:10 will look bigger than a 26 inch 16:9 for example. 16:10s are becoming extinct unfortunately.
 
mortonP said:
Mine has a scaler chip but movie players allow you to select correct aspect ratio so that they don't overscan. It's a non issue really and many movies on even a 16:9 LCD will still have black bars because all movies are not filmed at 16:9.
Click to expand...

you will actually just have larger black bars with a 16:10 in that instance thats all.
 
I think 16:9 is fine. My cousin has a 1920x1200 24" monitor, but I never seemed to see the benefit of it. I think 1080p is definitely better for gaming and movies. I just don't see the benefit of having a 16:9 monitor, even on regular desktop applications. 16:9 is fine with me and frankly, I never understood why people would pay so much more money just for a few extra pixels.
 
chong67 said:
To get rid of the two black lines on 16:10, just zoom in a little on your movies and the lines are gone. Its that easy.
Click to expand...

But that would cut the top and the bottom of the movie. I don't think some of you guys are really thinking this through.
 
Last edited:
Nielo TM said:
Consoles aren't killing PC gaming, piracy is
Click to expand...

lol, please. With every PC game being released today turned into a dumped down, consoletarded piece of shit (if you'll pardon my french), its no wonder that the industry is going down the drain. Piracy is just an excuse. The fact of the matter is that companies are no longer able to release quality products, and do not understand how to capitalize on niche markets anymore. They are desperately tying to turn the gaming industry into the digital counterpart to Hollywood, just as Hollywood keeps losing money for being unable to produce good movies anymore.
 
I mean honestly dude, I went from a 16:10 1440x900 to a 1080 16:9 and it's a godsend to people like us. It's an upgrade and bigger screen still means more vertical height.

now if I went from a 24" 16:10 to a 24" 16:9, I probably wouldn't be this optimistic.
 
Lyric Suite said:
lol, please. With every PC game being released today turned into a dumped down, consoletarded piece of shit (if you'll pardon my french), its no wonder that the industry is going down the drain. Piracy is just an excuse. The fact of the matter is that companies are no longer able to release quality products, and do not understand how to capitalize on niche markets anymore. They are desperately tying to turn the gaming industry into the digital counterpart to Hollywood, just as Hollywood keeps losing money for being unable to produce good movies anymore.
Click to expand...

Also quoting for truth. And I can prove it.
Wanna know how?


Ask yourself this:
How many times have you bought a PC game within the past 2 to 3 years and DIDN'T have to do research on the game because solely on the fact the game was probably a flop and you were going to waste your money.
 
Bdonedge said:
I mean honestly dude, I went from a 16:10 1440x900 to a 1080 16:9 and it's a godsend to people like us. It's an upgrade and bigger screen still means more vertical height.

now if I went from a 24" 16:10 to a 24" 16:9, I probably wouldn't be this optimistic.
Click to expand...

That's exactly the reason we're bitching... :D
 
I hate 16:9 ratio. Why do manufacturers believe that computer monitors should be TVs? Its absurd. I makes me want to round up all the CEOs, pull their pants down, and spank their asses till they're redish pink and sowllen. Then, have my way with them.

On another note, is 1:1 mapping over HDMI possible? I am planning to buy an Asus VK266H or VW266H, which ever I find cheaper, and use the DVI for PC and HDMI or xbox 360. Will it stretch out the image if I dont use component? Because I heard that 1:1 mapping is only via component. any feedback would be much appreciated.

Sorry to high jack your thread.
 
kache said:
That's exactly the reason we're bitching... :D
Click to expand...

Well, my point was there are a lot of people like me. We are now finally starting to upgrade to this set from the older monitors. A lot of the market is still running at low resolutions, and now that the prices have plummeted from what they were in the 1080 market, a lot of producers are conforming to that market
 
I think 16:9 is fine. My cousin has a 1920x1200 24" monitor, but I never seemed to see the benefit of it. I think 1080p is definitely better for gaming and movies. I just don't see the benefit of having a 16:9 monitor, even on regular desktop applications. 16:9 is fine with me and frankly, I never understood why people would pay so much more money just for a few extra pixels.
Click to expand...

Sir. I stand at an intersection every sunday morning with a sign that reads: "Will work for pixels"
 
messyrimjob said:
I hate 16:9 ratio. Why do manufacturers believe that computer monitors should be TVs? Its absurd. I makes me want to round up all the CEOs, pull their pants down, and spank their asses till they're redish pink and sowllen. Then, have my way with them.
Click to expand...

You truly live up to your username.
 
Watch the industry switch over to 16:8. :(

16:9 in anything less than a 23 inch monitor gets ridiculous. Too much scrolling, and it just does not look natural for web browsing and office work. Movies? Depends.

Very reluctant on giving up my Acer X263w monitor for a 16:9 unless I can find something with equal vertical height.
 
Lyric Suite said:
But that would cut the top and the bottom of the movie. I don't think some of you guys are really thinking this through.
Click to expand...

Actually, it would cut off a very small amount of the sides, not the top/bottom, a small portion of the sides that is not used much if at all.
 
ScourggeFX said:
Watch the industry switch over to 16:8. :(

16:9 in anything less than a 23 inch monitor gets ridiculous. Too much scrolling, and it just does not look natural for web browsing and office work. Movies? Depends.

Very reluctant on giving up my Acer X263w monitor for a 16:9 unless I can find something with equal vertical height.
Click to expand...

Not sure why'd you want to go down from a 26" to a 23" in the first place?
 
Regarding the general computer use issue. Most websites and program design and interface philosophies are designed around the old 4:3 format. As such if you view content designed for that format on a 16:9 screen, it is of course less then optimal, just like viewing media format designed for a 16:9 display on a 4:3 screen.

However with 16:9 moving to become the standard, would things not eventually be redesigned for a 16:9 format?
 
Actually to me, the optimal format is to use a 20" in at 1600x1200(protrait) and another wide screen display.
 
I'm trying to find why some of you are upset. Are you having to downgrade to 16:9? If not, and you're continuously going to use, 16:10, why the hostility?
Is 16:9 that bad? my monitor comes in the mail tomorrow. I use it for gaming, I'm genuinely excited
 
Bdonedge said:
I'm trying to find why some of you are upset. Are you having to downgrade to 16:9? If not, and you're continuously going to use, 16:10, why the hostility?
Is 16:9 that bad? my monitor comes in the mail tomorrow. I use it for gaming, I'm genuinely excited
Click to expand...

Speaking for myself.
I am angry because the fact that the industry is moving to the 16:9 means that I will not have a good quality version of the hz281, which is simply perfect from the dimension and resolution point of view.
Instead, I will have to go with the pg276, which isn't even out...
 
Nielo TM said:
Consoles aren't killing PC gaming, piracy is and forcing DRM isn't helping
Click to expand...

crappy-ass ports too

look at far behind they left the graphics and audio on the PC versions of Madden despite PCs having a lot more power and they wonder why nobody bothered to buy the last 2-3 seasons on the PC? cheap excuse on EA's part

granted in other cases the story may be different, but some of it just cheap excuses even the new baseball games they dont' let you do all the sorts of things that you used to be able to do once upon a time on the PC no custom leagues, high limited seasons lengths, pain in the ass editing etc.

sometimes it also starts to get tiresome that 99% of PC game release these days are FPS
 
monitorrat said:
crappy-ass ports too

look at far behind they left the graphics and audio on the PC versions of Madden despite PCs having a lot more power and they wonder why nobody bothered to buy the last 2-3 seasons on the PC? cheap excuse on EA's part

granted in other cases the story may be different, but some of it just cheap excuses even the new baseball games they dont' let you do all the sorts of things that you used to be able to do once upon a time on the PC no custom leagues, high limited seasons lengths, pain in the ass editing etc.

sometimes it also starts to get tiresome that 99% of PC game release these days are FPS
Click to expand...

Also, this: http://corporate.newzoo.com/press/GamesMarketReport_FREE_030510.pdf

Basically, it says that PC market has the same revenue as a single console market (x360 or ps3).
And this without counting browser games and similar crap...
So, all the "piracy is killing pc" is crap.
 
kache said:
Also, this: http://corporate.newzoo.com/press/GamesMarketReport_FREE_030510.pdf

Basically, it says that PC market has the same revenue as a single console market (x360 or ps3).
And this without counting browser games and similar crap...
So, all the "piracy is killing pc" is crap.
Click to expand...

Piracy is directly and indirectly damaging the PC gaming industry and many develops have complained about it (with the latest being CtyTek). After all, it is extremely easy to download cracked games on PCs than to mod a console. Also, the term PC gaming is very loose as it's do diverse. However, titles that pushes the limits of hardware is less common thanks to half-baked ports from the X360, where most of the processing cycles are wasted. But that doesn't mean people have stopped buying the PC version.

There's also a reason why NVIDIA and ATI are marketing their GPUs as more than just a gaming hardware. Femi is a grate parallel processor that can be used for tasks other than gaming, which means they don't have to rely on gamers as they previously did. Rumor is, ATI is planning something similar to Femi for next year.

PS: If you looks at the charts, consoles (as a whole) have over-taken PC.
 
I guess it depends on how much HD content (movies etc) you plan on watching on your PC monitor, other than that I don't see a good reason to prefer 16:9.

However, Personally I like the idea of watching 720p/1080p content without any black bars and I'm currently using a 1080P 16:9 Samsung PX2370 monitor, No real complaints here other than coming from a FW900 CRT and having to get used to the reduced contrast ratio.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top