16:10 or 16:9 advice please?

[boka]

Template below.

I’m looking to get a new monitor to use with my laptop, which will replace my current 17” external monitor.

I had done a lot of research into 24”monitors that were 16:9, but now realise that for what I would predominantly use it for, I’d be better off with a 16:10 display. However, it seems these are being phased out and those that do still exist, you have to pay a premium for.

I’m undecided as to which route to take. I’m wondering if the increased cost of a 16:10 is worth the money, or if I would be better off saving the money and just make do with a 16:9 for desktop usage. I figure I could always move the taskbar from the bottom of the screen to the side to regain 62 pixels in height. Although I’m not sure if I should go with 16:10 and just settle for a smaller screen and lower resolution. Not really sure where to make the compromise.

Another factor I should probably take into consideration is my laptop’s onboard graphics card, which is a Radeon HD 3200. Would this limit the resolutions I could run on the monitor or would it cope with all resolutions up to 1920x1200, without stuttering for desktop usage?

I guess my options are:

1. 24” 16:10 (ideal, but possibly more money and I’d preferably like to keep it under £200)
2. 22” 16:10 (not keen on the idea of smaller screen and resolution, although still a big improvement over my current 17”)
3. 24” 16:9 (often have multiple applications open, so side by side viewing would be no bad thing, but think I’d prefer additional vertical space)


------------------------
Approximate Purchase Date: This month

Budget Range: ~£200 (realistic for 24” 16:10?)

Monitor Usage from Most to Least Important: Primarily surfing the internet and programming... only very occasionally watching DVD’s and playing older games.

Preferred Website(s) for Parts: Amazon.co.uk, Ebuyer.co.uk and other reputable UK sites.

Country of Origin: UK

Brand Preferences: No preference

Physical Size (Diagonal): Ideally 24”, but if price isn’t realistic, possibly 22”

Resolution(s) You'll Consider: 1920x1200, 1680x1050, 1920x1080

Inputs Needed: (VGA and/or DVI) + (HDMI possibly for future usage, but not required)

Panel Type(s) Desired: TN would probably be sufficient

LED Backlight: Desired due to power consumption/cost over time, but not required.

Speakers: Indifferent

Wall-Mount: Indifferent

Stand Functions: Tilt as a minimum

Additional Comments: As above.


Any thoughts or advice to help me decide?

Many thanks

 

[ssddx]

if you don't plan to do any hardcore rendering or play newer games maxed out then sure, pretty much any card available now can handle these resolutions. if it doesnt have the ratio listed you could always do a driver update (of ati catalyst )

if you are buying two monitors with the same resolution but at two different physical sizes the larger one will not be as crisp and detailed as the smaller one due to the pixels being larger. if you sit further back from your monitor, this is negated, however both would appear to be around the same size visually. at such small sizes (anything below 24" pretty much) this is fairly minimal so you shouldnt notice too much unless you are a videophile.

quite a few new monitors use either dvi or hdmi input. if your output is a native DVI then you can use a DVI->HDMI conversion cable which works perfectly.

 

[Guest]

16:10 simply isnt worth it any longer. To expensive and really bad value for money.

16:9 apart from that the prices are much better have other advantages.

* wider Field-Of-View in games.
* Better for movies and internet-TV

I went from 1920*1200 to 1920*1080 and couldnt be more happy. The difference in pixels is something you only notice on paper.

I have a Samsung P2770FH and can higly recommend it. A friend of mine has BenQ EW2420 and that one is great too.