which is the 15.4 "Inches screen res. best 4 games

I am planning to buy a notebook in place of upgrading my desktop. Although the purpose of the computer is to work (as the most times I got in front of my computer and I ended gaming...)
I am thinking of a Dell Inspiron 8600 P4M 1.7Ghz with 512MB a fast 7000rpm disk and a Radeon 9600 with 128Mb, so I think gaming should be possible, but unfornately i am going to keep a Black & White CRT screen for my desktop...
There are 3 possible screens for this notebook with 3 different resolutions (1280x1024, 1600x1080, 1940x1080 I'm not sure of y sizes ...).
PLaying with an adequate framerate I suppose is restricted to a maximum 1024x768 but I don't mind if I have to go to 800x600.
And the question is: !!! ;-)
To use the TFT screen with games, which resolution should I go: it is best to use the interpolated modes (if so, which screen is best) or should I use native resolution (in that case, the smaller resolution is a must ...) ?

For 2D work, "price to price, bigger shoes" so I would go for the 1900x1080...
5 answers Last reply
More about which inches screen games
  1. Gaming makes no difference really. You should base your LCD resolution on text size and anything else you intend to use your notebook for (WUXGA = 1920x1200; WSXGA+ = 1680x1050; WXGA = 1280x800). With the M10 graphics array, you should be able to play most games at WUXGA Resolution (or at least 1600x1200 as most games don't offer 1920x1200 res), even my GF4Go 4200 can manage that, but the text when reading webpages, for example, is very small. You can not really base your decision for an LCD on games, as in the end when you're playing a game, you can hardly tell the difference.


    Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
  2. I recommend the SXGA 1680 x 1050, the fonts sizes are
    still readable while maximizing your workspace.

    I have the SXGA and also had the XGA 1280 x 800.
    The XGA was good enough but felt too much like a standard
    desktop of 1024 x 768.

    Sometimes the SXGA fonts are too small, so I really
    dont want to think how small things will be on the UXGA
    screen, however there is the option of increasing the font size and icons, etc etc, but this to me seems to defeat the object of having the bigger screen in the first place and when using this option fonts and icons look more blocky and loose there quality. So I would recommend the XGA or SXGA,


    Opel Superboss, now that was a car!
  3. You are getting your acronyms confused:
    XGA = 1024x768
    SXGA = 1280x1024
    SXGA+ = 1400x1050
    UXGA = 1600x1200
    QXGA = 2048x1536

    WXGA = 1280x800
    WSXGA+ = 1680x1050
    WUXGA = 1920x1200

    While WUXGA makes normal fonts really small, by increasing the DPI from 96 (default) to 120, the fonts all get bigger and thus more legible, but you get the bonus of a superbly crisp, and incredibly clear display. The dot pitch on the WUXGA Panel is smaller than on any other display on the market.

    As far as 'icons looking blocky', I'm not sure where you got that impression, but they seem to scale just as well to me.

    My only advice would be to take a look at each of the panels that you are considering, and choose the one that you like best. Everything is personal preference.


    Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
  4. Thanks for the corrections, however because the original post was regarding widescreen displays I didnt bother to
    insert the W for wide before my acronyms. I am sure the original poster got the jist of what I was saying.

    So I was more lazy than confused.

    Anyway regarding his original post I suppose the WXGA screen would be the best as if a widescreen game supports the resolution of 1280x800 and not 1920x1200 and he bought the WUXGA screen, he would loose quality when he downsizes his display to 1280x800. And I doubt the Laptop could handle a game anyway at 1920x1200 resolution , so the best bet might be the WXGA screen for gaming

    Opel Superboss, now that was a car!
  5. No probs, but the thing with games - unlike applications - is that when you do run at a lower than native resolution, it is hardly noticable. However, most, if not all, of the games that I have used on my notebook have supported (sometimes not from the offset) 1920x1200 resolution, and even my 'mere' GeForce 4 ti 4200 can run them at this resolution (i.e. CS; EF2; NFSU; BF1942; UT2k3 etc). I still believe that you should choose your display based on applications with respect to your preference. If you want to play games with it, do so because they will work just as well anyway.


    Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
Ask a new question

Read More

Mobile Computing Product