Whats the difference between a 1920x1200 and 1920x1080 res.?

[OvrClkr]

Sorry mate but I have to dispute that as I use my PC to watch HD movies and I've installed quite a few PC based media servers where the customer specified HD output @ 1080 on the PC in the Study/Office/Bedroom.

+1 [:jaydeejohn:5]

I use my pc for HD viewing as well..... [:lectrocrew:6]

 

[Mousemonkey]

+1 [:jaydeejohn:5]

I use my pc for HD viewing as well..... [:lectrocrew:6]

I'm still surprised at the amount of people who have a TV and PC on in the same room at the same time, I still think it's only a matter of time before 'over the counter' PC's and laptop's have built in TV tuners as standard.

 

[invisik]

1920x1200 monitors run around $300 for a 24in. Where you can get 23.6in running at 1920x1080 for under $200. They look very similar no real lose with 1920x1080 in my opinion.

 

[senvae]

I'm still surprised at the amount of people who have a TV and PC on in the same room at the same time, I still think it's only a matter of time before 'over the counter' PC's and laptop's have built in TV tuners as standard.

I don't use a TV tuner. I simply plugged my PC to my big screen in order to play games, watch Blu Rays or DVDs. As for TV, many TV networks now offer their shows on the web, you can watch them anytime you want and the commercials are only 30seconds long TOTAL. Much more pleasant to watch.

 

[OvrClkr]

I'm still surprised at the amount of people who have a TV and PC on in the same room at the same time, I still think it's only a matter of time before 'over the counter' PC's and laptop's have built in TV tuners as standard.

Yep, I agree.... Would be nice to buy a laptop with a built in tv-tuner.....But then again you would get charged with the premium.....

 

[computernewbie]

I dont actually care about the resolution, the thing i cared about the whole time is how games would look like, as if the screen would be stretched out or such, you know, because then it'll just ruin the whole picture.

Wait, so is 1920x1200 native or 1920x1080 native? Do games use both resolutions? (like crysis)

Also which brand would you recommend? Reliable, has none of that latency someone explained before, uses an aspect to ratio to fill the screen perfectly, and such

(BTW, how do you know if a screen uses an aspect to ratio filling of graphics?)

 

[cjl]

Games use both resolutions for the most part, though in older games, 1920x1200 is more likely to be supported (since 1920x1080 is a more recent trend in computer monitors).

 

[senvae]

I dont actually care about the resolution, the thing i cared about the whole time is how games would look like, as if the screen would be stretched out or such, you know, because then it'll just ruin the whole picture.

Wait, so is 1920x1200 native or 1920x1080 native? Do games use both resolutions? (like crysis)

Also which brand would you recommend? Reliable, has none of that latency someone explained before, uses an aspect to ratio to fill the screen perfectly, and such

(BTW, how do you know if a screen uses an aspect to ratio filling of graphics?)

Crysis is compatible with 1080 and 1200. Whether you buy a 1920x1200 or a 1920x1080 res screen, you will not be terribly disapointed in either resolution. Some monitors will stretch out the games to fill the widescreen, but most recent models wont. If you play a square resolution only game, the monitor will display black bars on either side and give you a square picture. It will fill the screen from top to bottom though, so smaller resolutions will be blown up to the full size.

Here, the Samsung Syncmaster 2693HM 25.5-inch LCD Monitor, will be perfect for you. Its the best computer monitor I ever worked with. Colour and contrast was awesome, high res enough to play Blu-Ray, will work with square resolutions and has HDMI entry as well as DVI and VGA. You could probably get something better nowadays, but I have used this one and I can vouch for its greatness. I got mine for 450$ Canadian at Bestbuy as an openbox special, so shop around you can find a good deal I am sure.

 

[stevensl2]

1920x1080 is full HD 1080p, as in movies would fill up the entire screen without black bars or stretching. it is 16:9, while 1920x1200 would probably be 16:10, 16:9 also include 1280x720 which is known as 720p.

 

[successful_troll]

I'm making the move to a 30 incher soon anyway since 1920 x 1200 has become more the norm. I stay ahead of the noobs can't have what they do or can afford. I've got to be different! 2560 x 1600 here I come!

+1

 

[computernewbie]

Oh, i thought any monitor can play blu-ray, it just depended if you had the optical drive

 

[senvae]

Oh, i thought any monitor can play blu-ray, it just depended if you had the optical drive

As long as everything is rated HTCP compliant, you can play High Def stuff. But if you're playing it on less than 1920x1080 resolutions, you will take an image quality hit, which is just sad when you consider how pretty Blu-Rays can be.

 

[micky_lund]

@senvae : is BenQ classified as high end brand? do u think it would have 'aspect ratio enlargement'? (only reason, is there cheap in AUS here, and the rest are like 50-75aud more, for same size, refresh, contrast, size, etc)

any help is greatly appreciated
MICK

 

[senvae]

I've browsed through some of the BenQ products and I haven't seen a truly bad review so far. In fact, before buying the 25.5" Samsung, I also had my eye on a 24" BenQ due to its price. The best way to prevent failure by buying an unknown product is to use a google search in order to read at least 3 different reviews on the specific product. (example, type in google: "BenQ series XXXX review") I put the X where a model number should be.

 

[micky_lund]

@senvae
thanks again for the information...it greatly helps...u just don't think to do that kinda stuff sometimes...

@OP
sorry for hijacking ur thread, but i got some useful information from it, and i hope u did too

thanks all for the info
MICK


BTW: found this
http://www.hardware.info/en-US/productdb/compareproducts/bGRkaZiXmJLK,bGZkbJiWmJTKYsg,!/
compares heaps of monitors, and other hardware... its useful

 

[d_mon1]

I've had my 24 inch 1920 x 1200 monitor long before they were standard and affordable And 1920 x 1200 monitors will always be better because mire pixels means more detail period. I never understood the move to these wider smaller pc monitors with weird sizes 23.4 and the like. Saving money can't be the issue since 24" monitors have come down under $300 now (I paid $730 for mine 2.5 years ago). I'm making the move to a 30 incher soon anyway since 1920 x 1200 has become more the norm. I stay ahead of the noobs can't have what they do or can afford. I've got to be different! 2560 x 1600 here I come!

I'll be happy to take your current monitor off your hands for a reasonable price. hehe

 

[jking81]

This post is great as I have been researching this issue for the past week. Let me explain my dilemma...

I got a Blu Ray drive for Xmas for my PC. I currently have a Dell Ultrasharp 2407WFP 24" monitor that I got free through work about three years ago.

When I got my Blu Ray this past Xmas, I immediately thought "well, I guess I better sell the Dell and get an "HD" monitor now so I can watch Blu Ray".

Now I'm beginning to wonder. With my Dell's native resolution of 1920 x 1200, and a new HD monitor with it's 1920 x 1080 resolution, would I actually be downgrading?? I watch movies now and then, but mostly I use my computer for just computer work (email, documents, browsing, etc). I don't play computer games.

So am I right in thinking to just stick with what I have? After all, my Dell is a beautiful monitor and I never had any issues with it at all. So would I even see an improvement with a new $200 "HD" monitor?

Thanks!

Jeff

 

[senvae]

This post is great as I have been researching this issue for the past week. Let me explain my dilemma...

I got a Blu Ray drive for Xmas for my PC. I currently have a Dell Ultrasharp 2407WFP 24" monitor that I got free through work about three years ago.

When I got my Blu Ray this past Xmas, I immediately thought "well, I guess I better sell the Dell and get an "HD" monitor now so I can watch Blu Ray".

Now I'm beginning to wonder. With my Dell's native resolution of 1920 x 1200, and a new HD monitor with it's 1920 x 1080 resolution, would I actually be downgrading?? I watch movies now and then, but mostly I use my computer for just computer work (email, documents, browsing, etc). I don't play computer games.

So am I right in thinking to just stick with what I have? After all, my Dell is a beautiful monitor and I never had any issues with it at all. So would I even see an improvement with a new $200 "HD" monitor?

Thanks!

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

I hope its not too late to clarify this issue. I've been away from this website for a while and was just revising my most recent threads.

The pixel resolutions in your monitor of 1920x1200 are obviously greater than the 1920x1080. 1920 is the length, 1200 is the height by pixels. The 1080p HD you keep hearing about does not mean pixel but progressive lines, hence why the 1080i is interlaced resolutions which are not as good. Don't worry, I won't fill your head with useless knowledge, I will simply tell you that progressive is a far better video playback mode than interlaced, thus 1080p is greater than 1080i. Also, 1080pixels can handle 1080p. Your monitor is HD ready, hopefully your video card is as well. If you use the DVI wire, the signal will be digital, or else you use VGA for analog signals. VGA can handle higher resolutions than 1080p HD, but I never personally tried it and DVI is pretty much the same as HDMI so I would recommend DVI. If you're uncertain about all this, you can look up for some softwares that will test your PC and let you know if it is completely ready for Blu Ray playback. I know Cyberlink (makers of the Power DVD 9 Ultra software, probably the best blu ray player out there) has a free software to test your machine for compatibility. Try it: http://www.cyberlink.com/prog/bd-support/diagnosis.do

 

[jking81]

Hi Jeff,

I hope its not too late to clarify this issue. I've been away from this website for a while and was just revising my most recent threads.

The pixel resolutions in your monitor of 1920x1200 are obviously greater than the 1920x1080. 1920 is the length, 1200 is the height by pixels. The 1080p HD you keep hearing about does not mean pixel but progressive lines, hence why the 1080i is interlaced resolutions which are not as good. Don't worry, I won't fill your head with useless knowledge, I will simply tell you that progressive is a far better video playback mode than interlaced, thus 1080p is greater than 1080i. Also, 1080pixels can handle 1080p. Your monitor is HD ready, hopefully your video card is as well. If you use the DVI wire, the signal will be digital, or else you use VGA for analog signals. VGA can handle higher resolutions than 1080p HD, but I never personally tried it and DVI is pretty much the same as HDMI so I would recommend DVI. If you're uncertain about all this, you can look up for some softwares that will test your PC and let you know if it is completely ready for Blu Ray playback. I know Cyberlink (makers of the Power DVD 9 Ultra software, probably the best blu ray player out there) has a free software to test your machine for compatibility. Try it: http://www.cyberlink.com/prog/bd-support/diagnosis.do

Senvae,

Thank you very much for your reply!

I understand all about 1080i and 1080p, in fact, I have a 55" 1080p HD RPTV out in the living room. I was mainly asking if I would see an improvement in going from my current Dell monitor to a new 1080p monitor for my computer.

Sorry, but in my original post I should have stated that my computer is ready for Blu Ray playback. I actually recently purchased Cyberlink's latest version of their Blu Ray player (which is excellent by the way!) and according to their diagnostic test, my PC is good to go for Blu Ray!

So it all comes down to, should I go with a 1080 HD monitor, or stick to my 1920 x 1200 Dell?

Thanks!

 

[senvae]

Senvae,

Thank you very much for your reply!

I understand all about 1080i and 1080p, in fact, I have a 55" 1080p HD RPTV out in the living room. I was mainly asking if I would see an improvement in going from my current Dell monitor to a new 1080p monitor for my computer.

Sorry, but in my original post I should have stated that my computer is ready for Blu Ray playback. I actually recently purchased Cyberlink's latest version of their Blu Ray player (which is excellent by the way!) and according to their diagnostic test, my PC is good to go for Blu Ray!

So it all comes down to, should I go with a 1080 HD monitor, or stick to my 1920 x 1200 Dell?

Thanks!

I am using PowerDVD 9 actually. It's also great for playing HD .mkv or .mp4 files. The only reason you would buy an HD monitor is if you absolutely have a problem with having black bars on bottom and top of the screen. Power DVD 9 will automatically make those bars in order to conserve the true size of the movie and its aspect ratio. I personally have a 25.5inch Samsung (1920x1080) on my second computer which looks amazing with Blu Ray, the only reason I bought my TV was to have the size of 52". For personal viewing the 1920x1200 resolution monitor will give you a bigger desktop during windows operation, a bigger screen for gaming, and will display 1080p no problem. No need to buy a new one unless you think your contrast ratio is weak or the colours are bad. If the quality of your screen is ok, then buying a 1080p monitor would be a waste of money unless you're looking to upgrade the size.

 

[jking81]

I am using PowerDVD 9 actually. It's also great for playing HD .mkv or .mp4 files. The only reason you would buy an HD monitor is if you absolutely have a problem with having black bars on bottom and top of the screen. Power DVD 9 will automatically make those bars in order to conserve the true size of the movie and its aspect ratio. I personally have a 25.5inch Samsung (1920x1080) on my second computer which looks amazing with Blu Ray, the only reason I bought my TV was to have the size of 52". For personal viewing the 1920x1200 resolution monitor will give you a bigger desktop during windows operation, a bigger screen for gaming, and will display 1080p no problem. No need to buy a new one unless you think your contrast ratio is weak or the colours are bad. If the quality of your screen is ok, then buying a 1080p monitor would be a waste of money unless you're looking to upgrade the size.

Perfect. That's what I had expected, that dumping my nice Dell for a new 1080p would not give me any improvement and would end up being a waste of money.

Thanks again for your help.

 

[Guest]

1920x1080 is better for games. It lets you see more than 1980x1200. Example: http://www.gamespot.com/features/6272315/p-3.html

 

[bystander]

1920x1080 is better for games. It lets you see more than 1980x1200. Example: http://www.gamespot.com/features/6272315/p-3.html

This depends on the game a lot. First person shooters may actually feel better with the wider view (1920x1080), but RTS games, and Diablo style games feel better on the 1920x1200, because the image gives you a little more view at the top and bottom of the screen.

Your example isn't the typical one. Almost every other game of that nature allows you to zoom out a tad and get the same viewable area, but gives you a better centered view. Of course you can always set your 1920x1200 to 1920x1080 if you there is a rare advantage in doing so.

 

[forcemarker]

Why is it at 1920X1200 the desktop icons & webpage font is so small? I'm using a new 24" LCD at that res & straining to read/type this for instance. I've changed various settings, etc & the ONLY thing "makes" webpages, etc proper size to be readable is LOWERING the res? (Forgive my ignorance. I've looked into it & still don't get it).

 

[Mousemonkey]

Try holding down the ctrl key and using the mouse wheel to enlarge the webpage font size or use the zoom function in the "View" menu at the top of the page.