1920x1200 monitor or 32g Ipod Touch?

High community, I really don't know what to get for Christmas. I have to decide between a 24 inch monitor or an ipod. Considering my specs, I don't think games will perform well at 1920x1200.

- 2 gig DDR2 ram
- Old but trusty amd Athlon 64 x2 processor
- Nvidia Gtx 260 core 216 superclocked
-19 inch 1440x900 monitor

Specs are more than enough for than resolution, but I think that games like crysis will run like crap at 1920x1200 resolutions. So should I get an ipod?
10 answers Last reply
More about 1920x1200 monitor ipod touch
  1. spartan1081990 said:
    High community, I really don't know what to get for Christmas. I have to decide between a 24 inch monitor or an ipod. Considering my specs, I don't think games will perform well at 1920x1200.


    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-310-5970,2491-4.html

    GeForce GTX 260
    Great 1920x1200 performance in most games

    Like many cards, the GeForce GTX 260 is becoming very hard to find, and may soon be end-of-life'd. In any case, it does offer advantages in titles that run better on Nvidia's GT200 architecture, and it sports some GeForce-only value-added features like PhysX compatibility and support for GeForce 3D Vision.

    Once again, a little diligence is required on the part of the buyer to find out which card is best adapted for his or her favorite titles, and whether or not your motherboard supports SLI, CrossFire, or both multi-card technologies.
  2. JackNaylorPE said:
    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-310-5970,2491-4.html

    GeForce GTX 260
    Great 1920x1200 performance in most games

    Like many cards, the GeForce GTX 260 is becoming very hard to find, and may soon be end-of-life'd. In any case, it does offer advantages in titles that run better on Nvidia's GT200 architecture, and it sports some GeForce-only value-added features like PhysX compatibility and support for GeForce 3D Vision.

    Once again, a little diligence is required on the part of the buyer to find out which card is best adapted for his or her favorite titles, and whether or not your motherboard supports SLI, CrossFire, or both multi-card technologies.


    Yup, but most 260 owner have a decent processor, which is responsible for at least 20% of the frames they get
  3. Right but his CPU will bottleneck the performance of his card, he is correct in this.
  4. Quote:
    ???

    A cpu is responsible for all the frames you get, what exactly do you mean?


    Well you can get 20 more fps in crysis with a quad core processor but one can barely get decent fps with my processor, now imagine at high HD resolutions
  5. iPod Touch 32 GB all the way! That's ESPECIALLY true if you've still got a few years left on your current monitor's warranty.
  6. It really depends, if you are am MP3 freak and you do not have an ipod then I guess the touch would be a better investment. Personally I would opt for the monitor since you should get more use out of it in the longrun. I have a 16Gb touch and when I got it for the first time I could not let go of it... Now it's in a drawer somewhere in my room...

    Here is what I would do... The 32Gb touch is 299.99$ So that tells ya that you can get a decent 24" screen and still have enough for a faster CPU, something like a 6000+ ...

    SAMSUNG 2494SW Glossy Black 24"
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001338

    AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ Windsor 3.0GHz
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103772&cm_re=6000%2b_amd-_-19-103-772-_-Product

    270.00$ total... you might be able to squeeze in an extra stick of ram as well....

    Just trying to give you some options =)
  7. spartan1081990 said:
    Well you can get 20 more fps in crysis with a quad core processor but one can barely get decent fps with my processor, now imagine at high HD resolutions


    Crysis does not benefit from more cores. I have benched using a dual and a quad and the frames are the same. If the OP was playing a game like GTA4 then that would be another story...

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/build-balanced-platform,2469-8.html
  8. Quote:
    CPU's basically put out the same information regardless of resolution,. that is a gfx setting not a cpu one. Hence why you get cpu limits that can be offset by increasing the resolution.

    What fps is your cpu capable of outputting?


    I though the processor had a lot to do with the frames one gets, guess im partially wrong. But if I am, what is the point of buying a quad core processor over a centrino processor?
  9. OvrClkr said:
    It really depends, if you are am MP3 freak and you do not have an ipod then I guess the touch would be a better investment. Personally I would opt for the monitor since you should get more use out of it in the longrun. I have a 16Gb touch and when I got it for the first time I could not let go of it... Now it's in a drawer somewhere in my room...

    Here is what I would do... The 32Gb touch is 299.99$ So that tells ya that you can get a decent 24" screen and still have enough for a faster CPU, something like a 6000+ ...

    SAMSUNG 2494SW Glossy Black 24"
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001338

    AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ Windsor 3.0GHz
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103772&cm_re=6000%2b_amd-_-19-103-772-_-Product

    270.00$ total... you might be able to squeeze in an extra stick of ram as well....

    Just trying to give you some options =)


    Hey thanks for the options, is there really much difference between 1920x1200 and 1920x1080? It's still 1080p isnt it?
  10. spartan1081990 said:
    Hey thanks for the options, is there really much difference between 1920x1200 and 1920x1080? It's still 1080p isnt it?


    There is a very small difference in my opinion, 1920x1200 is a step up from 1080p...And of course they tend to be a bit more expensive than native 1920x1080 monitors...
Ask a new question

Read More

Tuner Cards iPod Touch Monitors Graphics Product