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

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

computernewbie

Distinguished
Jan 13, 2009
576
0
18,980
Title says it all, also, if i get a monitor with a recommended resolution (1920x1200), and lower its resolution to say 1680x1050, will another monitor with a recommended resolution of 1680x1050 have better quality? Or is it all the same either way you put it
 
down scaling can lose quality so a 1680x1050 would look better, especially if the screen is larger. The larger the screen, the larger the pixels, so it will look worse sitting the same distance away (nominally). However, why wouldn't you want 1920x1200? And your question in the post has nothing to do with the question in the title. 1920x1200 is a 16x10 screen (common for computer monitors) and 1920x1080 is a 16x9 screen (common for TVs).
 
@carickw, they are starting to go to 16x9 res for monitors (thats what mine is)

as for lowering the resolution, why would you, just keep it at the native res

the difference between the 1920x1200 and 1920x1080(1080P) is the aspect ratio (16:10 vs 16:9) and 120 pixels vertically

i have a 23.6" 1920x1080 monitor got it for 171 @ newegg
 
the resolution is the number of pixels width x height. so if you count the number of pixels across the screen on a 1920x**** (recommended) monitor, there will be 1920. If you count the number of pixels on a ****x1200 (recommended) there will be 1200.
 
@mindless: interesting... i like 16x10 better, except i lose pixels when i watch TV or Movies (i got a T260HD..which rocks, but overpriced). I can't stand the super-wide that a lot of movies are in...its much harder to watch than a 16x10 or 16x9.
 
i thought pixels were the same size no matter what. Simply that when you get a 1920x1200, there a more pixels so the image has more area and better detail, in a smaller resolution there are simply less pixels so less indepth quality

Its actually two questions, the one in the title and the one in my first post.

So should i get a 1920x1200 or a 1920x1080 LCD monitor? I was thinking that the 1920x1200 might stretch out the image more since there are more pixels, dunno
 
it won't stretch it if you use the native resolution (ie don't use 1680x1050 on these displays)

though its up to you if it is worth the extra money (if there is any) for the extra 120 pixels high
 
will older games have to be scaled down to like 1680x1050 if u have a 1920x1080 monitor? i heard that somewhere, that older games don't like the newer 16:9 aspect ratio....

any help here? (i think that's what the OP wants...)
 
Ok, but what happens when you use, for example a 24 inch monitors, one has 1920x1200 res. and the other 1920x1080 res. Assumingly the 1920x1200 has more and smaller pixels, for better quality

So which one should i get?!?!! lol
 
Native resolution is always the best. Scaling something down will always result in lower image quality. Like softer edges, and less sharp images. Some monitors scales better than other monitors, of course you can always set your video card to do the scaling which in turn may or may not do a better job than the monitor.

Basically the difference between a 1920 x 1200 and 1920 x 1080 are the 120 rows of pixels. I prefer 1920 x 1200 monitors. However, I did buy a 1920 x 1080 for my HTPC because when it is connected to whatever HDTV I intend to buy both HDTV and the 1920 x 1080 monitor will have display the same desktop (clone mode). Since HDTVs are 1920 x 1080 (except the really low end HDTVs) a 1920 x 1080 monitor will display what is also on the HDTV without the black horizontal bars.

 
Just about every decent widescreen LCD monitor allows users to configure video scaling settings.
Basically you should be able to configure your LCD to do the followings:

(I'm using the terminology from my HP L2335 monitor so your monitor may use different names for these settings).

a) 1 to 1:
In this mode video is displayed without any scaling. Any none native resolution will be displayed in the center with the appropriate black horizontal or vertical space surround the image. If you display 800x600 video, the LCD monitor will display exactly 800x600 pixels in the center of the screen.

b) Fill to Screen:
In this mode, none native resolution video will be stretched to fill the entire screen and may stretch the video vertically or horizontally if the source video is not using the same aspect ratio as the monitor.

c) Fill to Aspect Ratio:
In this mode, none native resolution video will be stretched vertically and horizontally to fill the screen while keeping the aspect ratio unchanged.
This is the mode that you want to have if you intend to display non-native resolution video.
Before you purchase any widescreen monitor, make sure it can do video scaling for non-native resoution while keeping the same aspect ratio.

As for 1920x1200 vs 1920x1080 monitors, I personally prefer 1920x1200 for the following reasons:
1) More vertical space when using windows desktop. Yes, there are black bars displayed on the top and bottom when viewing 16:9 video or movies but for everyday computer usage, 1920x1200 is better than 1920x1080.
2) I can play games in 1920x1080 and 1600x1200 without any video scaling.
That's right. Although 1920x1080 and 1600x1200 are non-native resolution on a 1920x1200 monitor, because they either use the same number of vertical or horizontal pixels as 1920x1200, you do not need to scale the video (assuming that your monitor does not blindly stretch video to fill the whole screen).
If you need to play some older games in 4:3 aspect ratio, you can choose 1600x1200 without video scaling.
And if in some rare situation the game you are playing only support up to 1920x1080, you can also play the game without any video scaling.
 
depends on the game. DOS games don't support either... RA2 only supports 4:3, same with Generals, but 16:10 is more common for computers so it should be supported more
 
thanks carickw
so basically, from what saiyan said, get any monitor that can enlarge the image, while keeping the aspect ratio the same , and it doesn't really matter what ratio...but 16:10 is better...but not worth too much extra cost
 
Older games (e.g. games from 5+ years ago) most likely only support up to 1600x1200 or another 4:3 aspect ratio mode.
Some games may be modded into supporting 16:9 or 16:10 resolution.
I think widescreengamingforum.com has some info that.

BTW, another factor you want to consider when purchasing LCD monitor for gaming is "input lag". (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_lag)
Based on what I read, "input lag" is usually associated with combination of certain LCD panel type and video scaler/processor used.
The best panel type (also most expensive) for gaming is probably S-IPS.
My old HP L2335 is a S-IPS monitor and I never noticed any "input lag" when playing games.

So you probably want to Google around and read some review before making any purchase.
Good reviews should have information on whether the monitor reviewed has "input lag" issue or not.
 
sweet....saiyan...good info...im in the same boat as the OP, and am looking at BenQ monitors, mainly the 24" 1920x1080 atm... i think its pretty good...u?
 
If it makes you feel better, I use a Hanns G 24 inch (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824254040). It runs starcraft and diablo2 just fine! And yes i'm being serious, sometimes the classics are still good!

It also has dual HDMI in, works great for xbox/ps3.
 


how do you know if a monitor uses a fill to aspect ratio?
 
I think I can help you out Computernewbie. Over the last 2 years I have changed monitor 3 times. My first was a 22" viewsonic with 1680x1050 resolution, my second was an awesome Samsung 25.5" with 1920x1200, and right now I am using a Sharp Aquos 52" LCD HDTV which is 1920x1080.

Don't fill your head with useless technical knowledge, you're not builing the monitor you're just using it. If you stick with the high end brands like Samsung, Hp, Dell, Viewsonic, they should all have the features we told you about throughout this thread. Even the HDTVs, which are not intended for usage with computers primarily, are equipped with features to compensate for the change of resolutions. I found some of the better monitors I have seen out there are the Samsung, especially in the 1920x1200 range. If you go with a 1920x1080, its the same as a 1080p HDTV, it will play blu-rays, and so will any monitor with higher resolutions. If you pick a 1920x1200 monitor, and change windows to 1680x1050, it won't look as good, and you will regret doing so very soon. Use the native resolution in windows, and you can adjust the video games to lower resolutions (such as the 16080x1050 you were mentioning) in order to gain more performance during play.

What would I recommend? Well if you can't afford a big HDTV like I bought, I would recommend getting a 24"-26" monitor with 1920x1200 if you need more windows space and play many old games, or the 1920x1080 for movies, blurays, and recent video games. Both will suffice, there are no significant downsides to either. So in this case, what should affect your decision is the quality and price of your purchase, whatever it may be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom