Next Generation Emulation banner

What is your preferred gaming resolution?

  • 640x480

    Votes: 6 7.8%
  • 800x600

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • 1024x768

    Votes: 3 3.9%
  • 1152x864

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1280x1024

    Votes: 14 18.2%
  • 1600x1200

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • 1280x600

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1280x720

    Votes: 5 6.5%
  • 1280x768

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1280x800

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1280x960

    Votes: 4 5.2%
  • 1366x768

    Votes: 4 5.2%
  • 1440x900

    Votes: 5 6.5%
  • 1600x900

    Votes: 2 2.6%
  • 1680x1050

    Votes: 19 24.7%
  • 1900x1200

    Votes: 4 5.2%
  • 2560x1600

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • Other (please specify)

    Votes: 8 10.4%

  • Total voters
    77
101 - 120 of 157 Posts

·
Hackin 'n Slashin
Joined
·
28,628 Posts
Then why do 24 inch screens cost an arm and a leg (especially from LG) but the 23.5 inch HD 1920x1080 screens can be had for peanuts?
 

·
From Love and Limerence
Joined
·
6,574 Posts
Newegg has plenty of cheap 1920x1200 monitors, but they're all TN panels, which are cheap in both sense too, to me. I won't take a TN panel, and don't want to go smaller with resolution than what I currently use for the desktop, so that only really leaves 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 PVA or IPS LCDs for me to even consider. Both types will be very expensive, especially in the case of the latter (which is also somewhat limited in choice still), and in the case of the former, it's just a wide version of what I already have. If I move up, I want to add vertical resolution too. I'll also lose resolution flexibility on any LCD, and have to deal with possibly less than adequate response time for gaming of those two types of LCD. These things are really why I'm still on a CRT, not simply because I dislike LCD for the sake of it, and likely will be on one for the foreseeable future since I don't see these variables changing (but you never know). I know in a straight one versus the other comparison, that for most people, LCD really is the better choice, but not for me. The good news is that many of the "better" and larger TN panels can be had cheap for most other people now.

I expect that once 1280x1024 users shift up, and those still on 1024x768 CRTs get an LCD, which will happen as better LCDs continue to get cheaper, that those two standards (they're the top two right now) will fade out, and we'll truly be in a widescreen standard resolution computing world. Then polls like this will lack many of the 4:3 ratios.

Edit: I also realized that 1900x1200 is in the poll, but the correct resolution is 1920x1200. There's also 1920x1080 and 1920x1440 (the 4:3 1290 resolution that sits just below 2048x1536).
 

·
...and now they do.
Joined
·
20,001 Posts
I'd turn off AA before going below the native res...
Get a system like mine, and you'll be doing way more than taking off AA. You'll remove shadows, texture details, view distance...
 

·
VBA 2 developer
Joined
·
404 Posts
I have a 1080p TFT monitor, so I only play at that resolution. If the game runs below 60fps with VSync, I even disable quality settings.

But seriously, anything above 1024x768 is fine for me as long as it is the monitor's native resolution AND runs at 60fps Vsynced :)


I had a Xbox 360 for a while and couldn't stand the tearing in many games. So I sold it and only use PC for gaming now. And my DS :)
 

·
Hackin 'n Slashin
Joined
·
28,628 Posts
Youch....so is Oldblivion any good? or does it not help?
 

·
Registered Anime Hater
Joined
·
8,674 Posts
Discussion Starter #110
You actually like 17"- 19" widescreens as compared to the standard ones? oO That's a first timer.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
443 Posts
Again, this must be a CRT (no 1280x1024 LCD does 100Hz that I know of), so that's not a native resolution, nor does it's aspect ratio match your monitor. 1280x960 is the 4:3 1280 resolution.

Now, as for me, I use many, and that's at least half the reason I'm still on a CRT.

For emulators, I often use 640x480 or maybe 800x600. Sometimes 1024x768 makes an appearance.

For games, it's often 1280x960, 1400x1050, 1600x1200, or perhaps 2048x1536 when possible. Again, sometimes 1024x768 makes an appearance. I never have to go lower, if to that at all. 1280x960 is usually the lowest I need to go, and I prefer 1400x1050 or 1600x1200 where I can get good speeds with good quality.

For desktop use, it's mostly 1600x1200 (@100Hz).
Yes CRT it is. When my last 19 inch CRT went I had a real hard time tracking down another CRT monitor, the guys at the store I bought it at (still under warranty) kept trying to give me a 17inch LCD because it's "better".

Until LCD monitors can pull over 100Hz for me a decent resolutions I will always use a CRT monitor.

Its a Philips 201B 21inch, at max I can do 1920x1440 @ 60Hz, but I find with anything below 85Hz I can really notice the flicker especially on whites and it gives me a headache after a couple hours.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,720 Posts
Oh wait, further point proving- my old standard monitor was only 15" instead of a presumed 17" and had a max resolution of 1024768. 3.5" increase is probably only due to the widescreen aspect, but it has the same height if I'm not mistaken. For the price of the monitor (under $100) I would have bought it anyway for its quality:price ratio.
 

·
...and now they do.
Joined
·
20,001 Posts
Youch....so is Oldblivion any good? or does it not help?
I imagine it would. I haven't actually tried playing Oblivion yet since I played Morrowind with an outdated computer, and the experience isn't quite as exciting with castrated graphic settings. I'm going to hold out on trying Oblivion for a while, in case I stumble upon a new computer.
 
101 - 120 of 157 Posts
Top