The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Ive been thinking about getting a new monitor and Im not sure what I should get, mainly because I dont know what resolution I should be using. I see a lot of monitors do 1920x1080, but there are some that do 1920x1200. Since both are widescreen, and my 1680x1050 is already plenty wide enough, I dont think the extra side pixels with the x1200 arent necessary for everyday use. But which is better for gaming?
Also, say I make the move up to 1920x1080, will my ATi 4850 be able to handle modern games (Ive mainly been playing BFBC2, but I would like to also handle The Old Republic when it comes out) at that resolution, or should I look into buying a new video card (Nvidia GTX 460?)?
16:10 (1920x1200) versus 16:9 (1920x1080) is really just a matter of personal preference. I don't know that there's any substantive case to be made that one is "better" than the other for gaming. If you haven't formed a preference, then I would just ignore the issue of 16:10 or 16:9 and pick out a monitor you like based on more important considerations.
It really depends on the game and what settings you use. Also what you find to be acceptable performance.
Your best bet is to look up reviews for your card that has similar system specs in comparison to what you have. See how games perform and what settings were used.
Will my 4850 be able to handle gaming at 1920x1080?
Do more games natively support 16:9 than 16:10?
I think 4850 should do fine unless you crank up the Anti-Aliasing or play Crysis :P. Remember, most games nowadays are ported from consoles anyway and don't seem to require that much horsepower. My system at my parents home is a small Shuttle PC with a mid range Core 2 and a 8800GTX - basically high end 2007 tech and it runs everything from Mass Effect 2 to Fallout Las Vegas (although I only have a 1680x1050 screen there) with all settings cranked up.
16:9 more popular?. Actually, in the past it was the other way around. 16:10 was _the_ widescreen resolution for PC screens 200x - 2008.
(Back when 16:10 screens were the most common ones most of them (except the high end models) hadn't that much scaling capabilities - this made connecting consoles (16:9 stretched to 16:10 or even 4:3 to 16:10 - ugh) really annoying.)
I noticed a shift of this trend to 16:9 in 2009 (at least in France) - it seems that most screen producers noticed that they could save cost because a 16:9 display includes less display elements than a 16:10 screen. Most of them also advertised 21,5'' screens as 24'' at this time which annoyed the heck at of me when I was looking for a secondary screen.
Nowadays nearly all games support various widescreen modes, so you shouldn't worry about that. 16:10 - 16:9 - its your preference - if you go for a low price screen and want to connect a console as well I suggest you buy a 16:9 screen, so you don't have to bother with scaling or other settings related to that. I personally prefer 16:10 because I also work with graphics / documents and like the extra space.
Screen size and technology: If you chose a large screen 24'', 27'' and up think about getting a IPS panel - these panels have a wider viewing angle. Even 24'' inch screens benefit from this technology. I have a Dell U2410 and it is nice to change positions in front of the screen without gamma / color shifts occuring. (I wouldn't recommend this particular model, because this monitor line has issues).
I have seen the Dell U2311H for $200 - $230 which is a great price for a IPS based screen.
I guess I can buy it and then see if I need a new video card. Hopefully there will be a sweet deal on one in the semi near future? If not I can always wait until Black Friday...
Posts
The quality of the panel used and what inputs it supports would weigh more heavily with me over which aspect ratio it has.
Generally nowadays most monitors use 16:9. Might as well get one of those.
It really depends on the game and what settings you use. Also what you find to be acceptable performance.
Your best bet is to look up reviews for your card that has similar system specs in comparison to what you have. See how games perform and what settings were used.
For the most part, ya, but you might have to crank down the graphics a bit.
I think 4850 should do fine unless you crank up the Anti-Aliasing or play Crysis :P. Remember, most games nowadays are ported from consoles anyway and don't seem to require that much horsepower. My system at my parents home is a small Shuttle PC with a mid range Core 2 and a 8800GTX - basically high end 2007 tech and it runs everything from Mass Effect 2 to Fallout Las Vegas (although I only have a 1680x1050 screen there) with all settings cranked up.
16:9 more popular?. Actually, in the past it was the other way around. 16:10 was _the_ widescreen resolution for PC screens 200x - 2008.
(Back when 16:10 screens were the most common ones most of them (except the high end models) hadn't that much scaling capabilities - this made connecting consoles (16:9 stretched to 16:10 or even 4:3 to 16:10 - ugh) really annoying.)
I noticed a shift of this trend to 16:9 in 2009 (at least in France) - it seems that most screen producers noticed that they could save cost because a 16:9 display includes less display elements than a 16:10 screen. Most of them also advertised 21,5'' screens as 24'' at this time which annoyed the heck at of me when I was looking for a secondary screen.
Nowadays nearly all games support various widescreen modes, so you shouldn't worry about that. 16:10 - 16:9 - its your preference - if you go for a low price screen and want to connect a console as well I suggest you buy a 16:9 screen, so you don't have to bother with scaling or other settings related to that. I personally prefer 16:10 because I also work with graphics / documents and like the extra space.
Screen size and technology: If you chose a large screen 24'', 27'' and up think about getting a IPS panel - these panels have a wider viewing angle. Even 24'' inch screens benefit from this technology. I have a Dell U2410 and it is nice to change positions in front of the screen without gamma / color shifts occuring. (I wouldn't recommend this particular model, because this monitor line has issues).
I have seen the Dell U2311H for $200 - $230 which is a great price for a IPS based screen.
I was thinking of picking up this monitor:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009255&nm_mc=EMC-IGNEFL012111&cm_mmc=EMC-IGNEFL012111-_-EMC-012111-Index-_-LCDMonitors-_-24009255-L03A
I guess I can buy it and then see if I need a new video card. Hopefully there will be a sweet deal on one in the semi near future? If not I can always wait until Black Friday...