| Widescreen Gaming Forum http://www.wsgf.org/phpBB3/ |
|
| Something that always bothered me: real 16:9? http://www.wsgf.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=21670 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Takezo [ 11 Mar 2011, 21:13 ] |
| Post subject: | Something that always bothered me: real 16:9? |
Hello guys, how are you doing? Actually I have something in my mind, which is about: are there a true, or native 16:9? The true 16:9 would be the FullHD resolution? I ask that because I own a P7908u Gateway laptop, and it has a resolution of 1440x900, with a ratio of 16:10, so, sometimes, that's my impression, altough some games fits really fine with the ratio, some images or icons in the game (like some on MW2) get, I don't know, kinda streched (could be my imagination). For example, will a 16:9 screen with a resolution of 1366 x 768 get no black stripes if watched a FullHD movie? The FullHD movie in a FullHD pannel would not get any black stripes? I ask that to know what resolution would fit perfectly on a 16:9 pannel. Between 16:9 and 16:10, what would you prefer? Thanks |
|
| Author: | Seraph [ 12 Mar 2011, 00:18 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Something that always bothered me: real 16:9? |
1600 x 900 would be the native resolution of a 16:9 panel |
|
| Author: | Takezo [ 12 Mar 2011, 01:01 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Something that always bothered me: real 16:9? |
That makes a lot of sense, and it's so obvious. I think it was because I never thought of it as 1600/900... So guys, I was thinking about 1366x768 gaming, mostly because of the performance, what you guys think about it? Also, do anyone here know some benchmarks where it focus mostly on different resolutions, better if it mentions 1366x768 against a 1600x900? In 1366x768 do I lose much when gaming in 16:9? Thanks at all guys! |
|
| Author: | Tanuki [ 12 Mar 2011, 05:49 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Something that always bothered me: real 16:9? |
For example, will a 16:9 screen with a resolution of 1366 x 768 get no black stripes if watched a FullHD movie? The FullHD movie in a FullHD pannel would not get any black stripes? It depends on the movie. A 16:9 movie should not have any black bars. Most movies are not 16:9 but 1.85:1 or 2.39:1. Many 1.85:1 movies are reformatted to 16:9 to display without black bars. I ask that to know what resolution would fit perfectly on a 16:9 pannel. Any resolution that has the same ratio as 16/9 is a perfect 16:9 resolution. 16/9 = 1280/720 = 1600/900 = 1920/1080 = etc.. |
|
| Author: | Dem Pyros [ 12 Mar 2011, 06:34 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Something that always bothered me: real 16:9? |
1600 x 900 would be the native resolution of a 16:9 panel The native resolution of a 16:9 panel would be whatever the manufacturer determines is the native resolution. Generally speaking it depends on size with an average PPI of 72. |
|
| Author: | Armenius [ 12 Mar 2011, 16:32 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Something that always bothered me: real 16:9? |
That makes a lot of sense, and it's so obvious. I think it was because I never thought of it as 1600/900... The monitor's native resolution has nothing to do with the performance of a game. A game will always perform better the smaller the resolution because there are less pixels the graphic card(s) have to process. In your case, 1366x768 has 1,049,088 pixels while the native resolution of 1440x900 has 1,296,000 pixels. That difference of 246,912 pixels is quite significant, especially on a low-end or low-power GPU such as those in laptops. I usually hear that people like 16:10 better than 16:9 because there is more vertical space for viewing normal applications such as web browsers. It all comes down to personal preference, though the market is now saturated with 16:9 monitors because of this whole "HD" marketing campaign. In reality any large resolution regardless of the aspect ratio is high-definition. When it comes to gaming, if the game is properly Hor+ then you would benefit more from 16:9 because the vertical viewing space would be the same as 16:10, but you would see more horizontally. This is important because of the way human eyes work. If your display's native resolution is 16:10 then you're better off using it because the LCD is designed to be optimal at a PPI of 72. Any other resolution on a LCD is upscaled to that PPI and will cause the image to look more blurry the farther away from its native resolution you go. |
|
| Author: | Takezo [ 13 Mar 2011, 04:02 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Something that always bothered me: real 16:9? |
Guys, thanks a lot for the answers, it is indeed helping me a lot. About my question, it's not that I'll use it on my current laptop (1440x900). I know that using always - or whenever you can - the native resolution is better, but it's because I'm thinking on selling it and getting a newer model. I did a little search on WSGF and found an outstanding benchmark focusing on resolutions, but would you guys know more websites that's benchmarking different resolutions on gaming? Thanks |
|
| Author: | DaFox [ 13 Mar 2011, 22:55 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Something that always bothered me: real 16:9? |
I really like Tech Power Up, Takezo. http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/Radeon_HD_6990/6.html They do their benchmarks across a number of different resolutions as well. |
|
| Author: | Takezo [ 14 Mar 2011, 03:30 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Something that always bothered me: real 16:9? |
Thanks DaFox! |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|