GPU Decision

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, I guess a 15" monitor is pretty ridiculous when there are cheap 19" and 20" LCD's available.

Hussein, by "bigger improvement on the gaming experience", you just mean a bigger monitor, right? Or will games actually look better on the bigger monitors? Because that goes back to the last thing I wrote in the first post (which I think I should post on a thread of its own) of whether a lower resolution can look just as good as a higher resolution as long as its on an appropriately smaller monitor.

If games do simply look better on bigger monitors, I'll look into getting a 19 or 20 inch LCD
 
Well, I thought how good a game (or anything else) looks depends mostly on resolution (maybe the monitor in terms of contrast ratio and brightness), while how well you're able to run that particular resolution depends on the GPU. What I'm asking is, does a lower resolution (1024 x 768) really look just as good as a higher resolution (1920 x 1200) as long as the lower resolution is on a smaller screen (15 in.) and the higher resolution is on an appropriately bigger screen (24 in.)?

Like I said though, I think I should have posted that question on another thread, as it's a bit off topic here.
 
Bigger monitor = Bigger resolution

Bigger resolution = better gaming experience

Unless the resolution is like something ridiculously huge.

There is nothing wrong with bigger monitors. So long as you get a graphics card that will handle its native resolution, then you shouldn't worry.

Once again though the best bang for your buck in this case would be a 22" monitor paired with a 4850. Or a 19" monitor paired with a 9600GT/8800 GT probably even a 3870.

On the bright side if you go with a 19" monitor you'd save a bit of money. But 22 inches with a card decent enough to max all games is AMAZING.
 
Well one's going to be square, and one's going to be big a wide, if you're talking about those two resolutions. You should get a 1280x1024 monitor, if you're going with the lower res, it's a lot clearer, and barely affect you performance compared to the 1024x768 res. If you really don't care too much about how the monitor looks, you should get 19" LCD with 75 Hz@ 1280x1024 res. Your performance should be similar, but will look better than a 1024x768 monitor.
 
my dads gtx 260 core 192 maxes out crysis at 1440x900 getting around 30-40fps with 2x aa that's paired with a q9450 also.
 
Well, most of the reason I didn't want to get a 22" or 24" monitor is because I figured they'd be way more expensive; I only wanted to spend about $150 on it.

But there's this:Acer X223Wbd Black 22" 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor 300 cd/m2 2500:1. It's a pretty good deal; too bad it ends today.
If I don't get the chance to order that, maybe: Hanns·G Hi-221DPB Black 22" 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor 300 cd/m2 1000:1
And if I go the 20" route: Acer X203Wbd Black 20" 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor 300 cd/m2 2500:1

So, one 1GB 4850 would be fine for a 22" LCD? Would I be able to max out most games? Probably not Crysis, but who knows how much I'll even play that...

The 20" widescreen I mentioned has the same res (1680 x 1050) as all the 22" widescreens. This seems to be true for all 20" and 22" widescreens. Doesn't this mean the image quality will be just a little bit better on the 20 inch, because it's the same number of pixels with a slightly smaller screen (without being too much smaller)?
 
512MB 4850 handles a 22" monitor well.
Why do you think I and everyone else have been recommending it so much?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom