I think 1366x786 is the max resolution for LED screens. I have no idea though, I've just seen a lot of laptops with LED screens and high-end GPUs not reaching above that resolution.
Reading this makes me think that there is no real border to determine when a PC screen becomes hd.
On TV screens you simply have SD:320-480 HD:720 Full HD:1080
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_video#Standard_high-definition_video_modes[/url]
I like the comment on Australia
[QUOTE=Within;20037552]I think 1366x786 is the max resolution for LED screens. I have no idea though, I've just seen a lot of laptops with LED screens and high-end GPUs not reaching above that resolution.[/QUOTE]
err no
[editline]01:57AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=taipan;20037692]Reading this makes me think that there is no real border to determine when a PC screen becomes hd.
On TV screens you simply have SD:320-480 HD:720 Full HD:1080[/QUOTE]
HD, no, HD resolution, yes.
as far as definition goes, monitors have been "high def" for ages.
[QUOTE=M_B;20037524]no, 1920x1200 is more prevalent, and considered better as it's a higher height.[/quote]
Oh really. Then why are there far more 1920x1080 monitors than there are 1920x1200 monitors? Also, there generally aren't any 1920x1200 monitors that are under $300 (with prices frequently being in the $1000 range), while 1920x1080 monitors can be as cheap as $140.
Generally the more prevalent monitor is the cheaper one, with proper format support of in this case 1080p.
Because everyone buys 1920x1200 $1,200 monitors :downs:
[quote=M_B]1920x1080 is only common among monitors because of HDTVs and HD content which is 1920x1080 (well most movies are actually about 1920x800 but that's a different story for another time).[/quote]
I like your condescending "different story for another time" off topic rant, and for the record, no they aren't 1920x800, you just have no idea what you're talking about.
[quote=M_B]1920x1080 is only common among monitors[/quote]
This whole discussion is on monitors, what on earth are you talking about then?
[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;20051412]Oh really. Then why are there far more 1920x1080 monitors than there are 1920x1200 monitors? Also, there generally aren't any 1920x1200 monitors that are under $300 (with prices frequently being in the $1000 range), while 1920x1080 monitors can be as cheap as $140.
Generally the more prevalent monitor is the cheaper one, with proper format support of in this case 1080p.
Because everyone buys 1920x1200 $1,200 monitors :downs:
I like your condescending "different story for another time" off topic rant, and for the record, no they aren't 1920x800, you just have no idea what you're talking about.
This whole discussion is on monitors, what on earth are you talking about then?[/QUOTE]
First off, 1920x1200 panels were around before 1920x1080, and the reason they're still higher priced is because as the number of pixels on a TN panel increases, the cost of production (due to error rates) is exponentially greater. Plus there's a bunch of overpriced models lingering around for sale. It's fair to say that a screen with more pixels is better, because it provides more real-estate to work with. That's not to say it's the best bang for the buck, but that doesn't negate the fact that they are "better" panels.
Also, he's not that far off the mark. A lot of movies don't stick to 16:9, but go for an even wider shot. Most movies go for 1.85:1 or even 2.39:1 occasionally, which puts his 1920x800 statement right on the money.
And as far as the monitors comment is concerned, I think he was trying to get at the fact that most screens follow the 16:10 aspect ratio, which was true a year or two ago.
I'm rating you dumb, because it's the closest rating to "Uninformed Asshole" facepunch has to offer.
[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;20017678]No. 1080i is only half the vertical resolution of 1080p. While 1080p is 1080 lines, 1080i is only 540 lines interlaced.
I hate how the trend is for monitors horizontal resolution is to get wider and wider and the vertical resolution is to get narrower and narrower. One of these days, they're going to have:
NEW! 10,000W x 64H WIDESCREEN MONITOR, IT'S THE NEW TREND, SLIT VISION! SEE YOUR ENEMIES FROM MILES TO THE LEFT OR RIGHT!!
Please tell me that's not your machine :tinfoil:[/QUOTE]
Of course it is! Where the hell would I get a picture like that!
But yes that computer is almost 8 years old. But I use it for Garry's Mod since my laptop BSOD's everytime I play it.
[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;20051412]Oh really. Then why are there far more 1920x1080 monitors than there are 1920x1200 monitors? Also, there generally aren't any 1920x1200 monitors that are under $300 (with prices frequently being in the $1000 range), while 1920x1080 monitors can be as cheap as $140.
Generally the more prevalent monitor is the cheaper one, with proper format support of in this case 1080p.
Because everyone buys 1920x1200 $1,200 monitors :downs:
I like your condescending "different story for another time" off topic rant, and for the record, no they aren't 1920x800, you just have no idea what you're talking about.
This whole discussion is on monitors, what on earth are you talking about then?[/QUOTE]
what the dick are you smoking bro, I've never seen a 1920x1200 monitor more expensive than $350 that wasn't overpriced. There's a fucking $270 1920x1200 monitor right on Newegg.
[QUOTE=Odellus;20055348]what the dick are you smoking bro, I've never seen a 1920x1200 monitor more expensive than $350 that wasn't overpriced. There's a fucking $270 1920x1200 monitor right on Newegg.[/QUOTE]
15 out of 20 monitors on newegg:
[url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010190020+1109909240&QksAutoSuggestion=&ShowDeactivatedMark=False&Configurator=&Subcategory=20&description=&Ntk=&CFG=&SpeTabStoreType=&srchInDesc=[/url]
are over $350, with many over $1,000.
This excludes the 4 on the second page, which are under $350 and two are unavailable. I wouldn't buy 2 of the 4 anyway due to one being recertified and the other made by an unknown manufacturer, which leaves the Samsung the lone dog.
Even so, 120 pixels of vertical resolution aren't worth $50 or more, especially if you want to watch 1080p movies and not have letterboxing.
[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;20051412]Oh really. Then why are there far more 1920x1080 monitors than there are 1920x1200 monitors? Also, there generally aren't any 1920x1200 monitors that are under $300 (with prices frequently being in the $1000 range), while 1920x1080 monitors can be as cheap as $140.
Generally the more prevalent monitor is the cheaper one, with proper format support of in this case 1080p.
Because everyone buys 1920x1200 $1,200 monitors :downs:
I like your condescending "different story for another time" off topic rant, and for the record, no they aren't 1920x800, you just have no idea what you're talking about.
This whole discussion is on monitors, what on earth are you talking about then?[/QUOTE]
dude hate to break it to you but you're retarded
my monitor, 1920x1200, which i bought 3 years ago, was $350 at the time.
most movies indeed are 2.4:1, which does translate to 1920x800 - the "different story for another time off topic rant" was about aspect ratio, which is actually irrelevant to the main topic of the thread.
i mentioned 1920x1080 only being common among monitors because of HDTVs [I]because it's only common among monitors due to the existence of HDTVs[/I]. i have no idea how or why you had so much trouble breaking that one down.
[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;20056154]15 out of 20 monitors on newegg:
[url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010190020+1109909240&QksAutoSuggestion=&ShowDeactivatedMark=False&Configurator=&Subcategory=20&description=&Ntk=&CFG=&SpeTabStoreType=&srchInDesc=[/url]
are over $350, with many over $1,000.
This excludes the 4 on the second page, which are under $350 and two are unavailable. I wouldn't buy 2 of the 4 anyway due to one being recertified and the other made by an unknown manufacturer, which leaves the Samsung the lone dog.
Even so, 120 pixels of vertical resolution aren't worth $50 or more, especially if you want to watch 1080p movies and not have letterboxing.[/QUOTE]
Reread my post please "that aren't overpriced".
[editline]02:38PM[/editline]
You know $1200 for a retarded HP 1200p monitor is way too much. I could just go buy a 30".
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.