1366x768 vs 1600x900 on 20inch

[anukul]

I'm buying a new PC for which I have chosen a Sapphire HD6670 GDDR5 but now I am confused between a 1366x768 and a 1600x900 display of 20 inches. Which one should I buy?
I'll be playing games on it like Battlefield 3, FIFA 14, Counter Strike: GO, etc and want a good fps on medium settings.

 

[Deus Gladiorum]

Well an HD 6670 is very weak, and so at 1600x900 games will look better, sharper, and crisper than they would at 1366x768, but they'll perform worse. For FIFA 14 and Counter Strike: GO, you won't see a performance difference because you'll still be able to run those games at maximum settings and even if you went for 1920x1080 you'd still get above 60 fps.

Battlefield 3 is another story, though, because it's a much more demanding game. At 1600x900 on medium settings with 0xAA and 0xAF on Battlefield 3, you'll probably get around 30 - 40 fps average. If that's an acceptable frame rate to you, then without a doubt you should go for 1600x900. If that's not acceptable for you and 60 fps is your standard, you can still play at 1366x768 on a 1600x900 monitor, but the image will appear less crisp than if you were to play it at 1366x768 on a 1366x768 native monitor. It honestly shouldn't look that bad at all, though, and overall there's more benefits to have a 1600x900 monitor such as bigger desktop work space and such. Overall, it's a better idea to get a 1600x900 monitor, even if all your games can't play well at 1600x900.

 

[anukul]

Well an HD 6670 is very weak, and so at 1600x900 games will look better, sharper, and crisper than they would at 1366x768, but they'll perform worse. For FIFA 14 and Counter Strike: GO, you won't see a performance difference because you'll still be able to run those games at maximum settings and even if you went for 1920x1080 you'd still get above 60 fps.

Battlefield 3 is another story, though, because it's a much more demanding game. At 1600x900 on medium settings with 0xAA and 0xAF on Battlefield 3, you'll probably get around 30 - 40 fps average. If that's an acceptable frame rate to you, then without a doubt you should go for 1600x900. If that's not acceptable for you and 60 fps is your standard, you can still play at 1366x768 on a 1600x900 monitor, but the image will appear less crisp than if you were to play it at 1366x768 on a 1366x768 native monitor. It honestly shouldn't look that bad at all, though, and overall there's more benefits to have a 1600x900 monitor such as bigger desktop work space and such. Overall, it's a better idea to get a 1600x900 monitor, even if all your games can't play well at 1600x900.

Right now, I have a Gigabyte 945GCM-S2C and its onboard Intel 945 graphics chipset. So you can expect what frame rates will be acceptable for me.

What about the GDDR5-6770 or GDDR5-7750? And what about the other DDR3 cards in the same price range, is the 6670-GDDR5 weaker than them too?

 

[youssef 2010]

6670 is an older card now and won't provide good performance on the latest games. If you provide your budget and the specs of the system you chose, we'll be able to help you more.

But if you're just wondering about the monitor, I always believe you should go for the higher resolution

 

[youssef 2010]

How much are you willing to spend on the graphics card?

 

[anukul]

6670 is an older card now and won't provide good performance on the latest games. If you provide your budget and the specs of the system you chose, we'll be able to help you more.

But if you're just wondering about the monitor, I always believe you should go for the higher resolution

My budget is 35000 INR which is roughly 565USD, but the prices of these cards here in India and in US (Newegg) have a drastic difference.

My preferred build:
Cooler Master 430 Elite
Corsair VS450 PSU
Gigabyte B75M-D3H
Intel Pentium G2010
Philips 202EL2
WD 1TB HDD
Sapphire ATI Radeon 6670-GDDR5
Transcend/Kingston 4GB-DDR3 RAM
HP 1260i DVD-RW
Microsoft DT600 KB-Mouse

 

[Deus Gladiorum]

The HD 6670 is a weaker card than either an HD 6770 or an HD 7750. If you can afford to, go for the HD 7750.

For the same price range, that's about as good as it gets. You could look at Nvidia and a GTX 650 though. It's about equivalent to an HD 7750. Also, don't bother considering DDR3. GDDR5 makes a huge difference in frame rate. A card with DDR3 that could produce 30 fps could potentially produce 40 fps if not more with GDDR5 equipped.

 

[anukul]

How about I ditch the VS450 and get a local 500W and the 7750?

 

[youssef 2010]

Depends on the efficiency of the "Local" 500W unit. I'd stay away from most PSU that don't have the 80 plus certification