Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Upgrade to 1080p from a 900p Monitor?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 9, 2013 5:50:46 PM

I play on PC (main platform). I currently have a 1600x900 Acer G205HV and its great, the resolution is nice, games look nice etc. My parents have a 1080p monitor for their home PC and they let me borrow it so I could compare with my 900p monitor. I didnt find too much of a difference between them, I played several games and took several screenshots (yes I viewed the screenshots on the 1080p display, and they looked EXACTLY THE SAME).

The only difference I found gamewise was on shooters, its easier to see targets from far away (although this could be because the 1080p screen is 4inches larger). So what gives? Why does everyone praise 1080p and say its such a huge difference, are they coming from 480p or something? I can chose between a 1080p monitor ($200 Benq RL2455HM) or a Wii U ($300) as a Christmas present from family. What would you guys go with? Since PC IS my main platform should I just go with the monitor for just the fact that it is truly higher res and to enhance my gaming experience or what? I doubt monitors will ever get "cheaper" as they make newer models that are better and the same price as the ones that were once before "newer".

What do you guys think?
December 9, 2013 5:56:34 PM

There is a massive difference

480 is svhs

1080 is blueray
test for yourself


m
0
l
December 9, 2013 5:58:39 PM

spentshells said:
There is a massive difference

480 is svhs

1080 is blueray
test for yourself



I dont think you read.
m
0
l
Related resources

Best solution

December 9, 2013 6:05:35 PM

1080p and say its such a huge difference, are they coming from 480p

Quote

1600x900
vs 1920x1080
is barely any difference

300 pixels taller and 180 taller
Share
December 9, 2013 6:06:55 PM

spentshells said:
1080p and say its such a huge difference, are they coming from 480p

Quote

1600x900
vs 1920x1080
is barely any difference

300 pixels taller and 180 taller

Ah I understand what you mean, sorry about that.
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
December 9, 2013 6:14:33 PM

1600x900 is only a 44% increase in pixel count, coming up from 1280x720 (720P) is a 2.25x increase in pixel count, far more significant.

You will also notice a far more impressive difference when moving up to a larger or better quality screen, something with richer colors and better contrasts will look better regardless of pixel density. You also don't have to spend $200 on a good 1080P monitor, you can generally get some good ones for $160 which is far less than the price of a Wii U, I just picked up two Asus VS248H-P screens for $120 each a couple weeks ago, they were a phenomenal upgrade from the older 21.5" eMachines(1080P) screen i had.
m
0
l
December 9, 2013 6:17:08 PM

hunter315 said:
1600x900 is only a 44% increase in pixel count, coming up from 1280x720 (720P) is a 2.25x increase in pixel count, far more significant.

You will also notice a far more impressive difference when moving up to a larger or better quality screen, something with richer colors and better contrasts will look better regardless of pixel density. You also don't have to spend $200 on a good 1080P monitor, you can generally get some good ones for $160 which is far less than the price of a Wii U, I just picked up two Asus VS248H-P screens for $120 each a couple weeks ago, they were a phenomenal upgrade from the older 21.5" eMachines(1080P) screen i had.

Wow, so you went from already 1080p to a newer 1080p display and there was a dramatic difference? I should have listed the 1080p monitor I used to compare with my Acer, its an HP 2310m. I didnt notice much of a difference however which is strange. Did you go from TN to ISP panels or something? I would prefer TN as they usually have lower input lag and response time. The HP 2130m seems to be an IPS panel by its viewing angles (they are greater than 70 and 90, not sure if thats a legit way to tell if a monitor is TN/IPS) and I didnt notice much of a difference.
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
December 9, 2013 6:30:47 PM

Nope, i moved from a not so good panel from 2009 to a good 2013 panel, the ASUS screens have much richer colors and better blacks along with being significantly larger. Input lag and response time are really moot points for most applications and most screens, 60 Hz refresh rate is only a new frame every 16.6 ms, and input lag is pretty small, i was more concerned about getting a bigger better looking image on my screens to replace the 19" and 21.5" screens I had.

Go to the HDTV aisle of a walmart and best buy and look at the screen, for the most part they all have the same resolution and refresh rate, but their picture quality is vastly different, some show image smearing, some have overly rich colors, some have very dark blacks, it all really depends on what you are looking for in your screen.
m
0
l
December 9, 2013 7:38:14 PM

So I'm still a bit confused though. Is there that much of a difference between 900 and 1080p for me to spend $150 minimum on a new monitor? Should I just keep my money or??
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
December 9, 2013 7:44:36 PM

Go look at the monitors in a store, can you see a difference? If not, then there is no reason for you to buy a new monitor. Image quality is viewer dependent, some people will pick out small differences between the images, some never will, it is really up to you and your preferences.
m
0
l
December 10, 2013 4:38:47 AM

The 1080 display that I used to compare appeared to look "sharper" and I noticed using windows by itself my 900p monitor had more of a Grey tint but if I'm not comparing it with the 1080 p monitor I don't even notice it. However, the 1080p display is 4 inches bigger, making things look larger or so which could make it seem like it's "sharper". Id,k If I'm going to buy a monitor it's going to be one with sound in it and the best one I've found all around with sound is the BenQ I listed. That acer someone listed has ghosting problems.
m
0
l
a c 196 C Monitor
December 10, 2013 5:05:41 AM

Since there are more pixels in a 1080p monitor vs 900p monitor you can generally see a bit more detail in games. In FPS games you can notice the difference (which you did) when sniping at long range. It is easier to do with a 1080p monitor because of more pixels.

For example, I play two separate characters in Skyrim; one on my laptop (1366x768 resolution) and another on my desktop (1920x1200 resolution). It is much easier to spot and it an enemy from a distance with an arrow on the 1920x1200 resolution because from the distance I am aiming at the target is very small (and since it is Skyrim there is no scope). On the 1200p monitor the target may be 4 pixels wide, however on the 1366x768 resolution screen of my laptop, the target may only be 2 pixels wide because the screen is simply lower resolution.

Technically speaking moving up to a 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 can mean it gets a bit easier to snipe at long distance, but to play games at those resolutions you need a pretty powerful graphics card or two in Crossfire or SLI.
m
0
l
December 10, 2013 11:31:19 AM

I see what you mean, but you are comparing 1366x768 to 1080p where as I am comparing 900p to 1080p. Should I shell out the money and get a higher res just to max out my PC/Gaming experience, the difference is minimall but it's there?
m
0
l
a c 196 C Monitor
December 10, 2013 12:31:47 PM

Like I stated, you already noticed the difference in FPS games between 1080p and 900p since targets were easier to see. I was simply explaining why you see the difference with my 1080p and 768p example.

It is up to you to decide if upgrading to a 1080p monitor is worth it for you. You also have to take into consideration the cost of a new graphics card if you want to at least maintain the performance you are experiencing with your current setup.
m
0
l
!