Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

1600x900 vs 1920x1080 resolution?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 1, 2011 8:39:59 PM

I was wondering which resolution would be better?

I would be mostly using the monitor for gaming, but also for casual internet browsing, listening to music, and school work. I hear that using 1920x1080 can really strain your eyes reading text, but is good for gaming, whereas 1600x900 won't strain your eyes and still looks good for gaming?

My two choices are:
HANNspree 21.5" 5ms LCD Monitor (1920x1080) - $119.99 - $8.99 shipping
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Acer 20" 5ms LCD Monitor (1600x900) - $109.99 ($99.99 now on sale but normally $109.99) - Free Shipping
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Is it worth the extra 19 dollars to get and 1.5" bigger screen and 1920x1080 resolution? I wouldn't think so, since I don't aim to be playing games on ultra settings, medium is fine, with an Intel Core i3 2100 processor and a Sapphire Radeon HD 5770 graphics card.
a b U Graphics card
September 1, 2011 8:57:10 PM

I'd go with a 1920x1080 any day, but i'm not a big fan of Hannspree.
m
0
l
September 1, 2011 9:00:38 PM

Should I try to find an Acer one instead?
m
0
l
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
September 1, 2011 9:32:30 PM

^ +1


Asus makes great monitors from what i've seen and used, and the prices are reasonable.

m
0
l
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b 4 Gaming
September 1, 2011 9:33:54 PM

brands i would stay away from are and chingchong, hannspree, or any of that other generic crapola, and acer, acer are not good quality. if you want it to last go for one of the more well known brands, LG, Samsung, Asus, viewsonic etc.
m
0
l
a c 376 U Graphics card
September 1, 2011 9:41:40 PM

Eye strain really shouldn't be an issue but if you like to play on high settings and have an HD5770 then 1600x900 would be more appropriate for that card.
If you are looking for a good deal on a monitor this is a good page to keep an eye on;
http://www.logicbuy.com/categorydeals/computers/lcd-mon...
m
0
l
September 1, 2011 10:18:43 PM

That's a bunch of nonsense. Text will appear larger on the screen with the lower resolution (1600 x 900), but text will appear sharper (less pixelated) with higher resolutions (1920 x 1080).

If you really must read on your lcd monitor, get one with a very high resolution, and adjust the font size to a larger size (modern web browsers can do this). You'll lose some of the page formatting, but gain great looking text.

If you have the budget, don't even bother with a TN panel (most cheaper monitors use this technology), get an IPS lcd monitor. Warning: they cost twice as much and fast moving games might be bury (they refresh about half as fast), but damn they look good.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 1, 2011 10:21:16 PM

Remember that the 1.5" bigger is diagonal.
For compaision: These are approximates. 1.5 x .8 = 1.2 " longer 1.5 x .5 = .75" higher.
Works out that 1.5" dia is approx 26 sq inches more space.
m
0
l
a c 376 U Graphics card
September 1, 2011 10:35:39 PM

RetiredChief said:
Remember that the 1.5" bigger is diagonal.
For compaision: These are approximates. 1.5 x .8 = 1.2 " longer 1.5 x .5 = .75" higher.
Works out that 1.5" dia is approx 26 sq inches more space.

This is a good page for doing all relevant calculations for you as well as providing a visual comparison;
http://www.displaywars.com/
m
1
l
September 1, 2011 11:54:35 PM

I have a 20" Hannspree (1600x900) and have no issues with it. I use it for casual browsing and Starcraft.

What are your goals for a new monitor? My goal was to find a cheap 20" widescreen as I was upgrading from a 7-year old 18" 4:3; got mine for $90 shipped from Newegg.

Is it as nice as an Asus or Samsung? Absolutely not. Does it display my desktop, browser and games crisply? Yes it does.

To each their own.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 2, 2011 12:09:07 AM

If you think that 19x10 can strain you eyes reading, just wait until you see 25x16.
m
0
l
!