Selecting A Monitor And Choosing Resolutions
Selecting a Monitor
Based on usage statistics, we standardized on a 16:9 aspect ratio for the charts (don't worry, you'll still see 2560x1600 in our reviews). We also expanded the number of screen resolutions that get benchmarked, testing at 1280x720, 1920x1080, and 2560x1440. At each resolution, we use a suitable combination of quality settings for entry-level, performance, and extreme usage scenarios. Those all get explained on the next page. In order to objectively assess image quality, we switched to a fast H-IPS panel, which achieves a broader color range than common TN-based panels, along with a larger viewing angle and higher brightness.
After careful analysis, we chose Dell's U2711 as the basis for our test platform.
|Make / Model||Dell U2711|
|Pixel Size (mm)||0.233|
|Default Resolution:||2560x1440 (16:9)|
|Actual Screen Size/ Diagonal (inches)||23.5x13.2 / 27.0|
|FPS (Hz)||56-75 (HDMI: 24 / 48 / 50 / 60)|
|Max. Line Frequency / Video Bandwidth (kHz/MHz)||30-89 / 165|
|Color Spaces Preset/User:||7/1 and 4/1|
Due to the noticeably increased performance of current and to-be-released high-end graphics cards, testing at 2560x1440 becomes more important. The ubiquitous 1080p resolution with 1920x1080 pixels, typically offered by LCD monitors in the 22” to 24” range, is the new mid-range charts setting. At the low end, we also test with the relatively smaller 720p resolution with 1280x720 pixels. Obviously, we can't test with all possible resolutions, but feel free to interpolate test results using this handy resolution table:
|Designation||Width in Pixels||Height in Pixels||Total Pixels||Aspect Ratio|
|1280||800||1 024 000||16:10|
|1366||768||1 049 088||16:9|
|SXGA||1280||1024||1 310 720||5:4|
|WSXGA||1440||960||1 382 400||3:2|
|SXGA+||1440||1050||1 512 000||4:3|
|WSXGA+||1680||1050||1 764 000||16:10|
|UXGA||1600||1200||1 920 000||4:3|
|HD1080||1920||1080||2 073 600||16:9|
|WUXGA||1920||1200||2 304 000||16:10|
|HD1440||2560||1440||3 686 400||16:9|
|WQXGA||2560||1600||4 096 000||16:10|
With our monitor choice established, let's have a look at the three different preset levels that we use to benchmark entry-level, mid-range, and high-end graphics cards.
I agree. I know Tom's spends a lot of time benchmarking, but Folding@home is something that is a bit more common. I would love to see F@H in some articles.
BTW, I appreciate all the work you guys do.
The 5760x1080 resolution will also push the GPU's harder than a 2560x1440/1600 could so why limit the resolution there?
So what would YOU like to see used then? If they were trying to push Nvidia wouldn't Hawx 2 be in the suite?