GTX 260 + 22/24" Monitor

Pages: 1

Index »
Community »
Tech »
GTX 260 + 22/24" Monitor

2009-01-25 11:29:46

Microwave: _; +515|6919|Loughborough Uni / Leeds, UK

Alright.

I'm looking at a new monitor and I'm looking for abit of insight about how well my graphics cards are going to cope with the resolutions.

I'm undecided between a 22" at 1920x1080- http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showprodu … mp;subcat=

and a 24" at 1920x1200 - http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showprodu … mp;subcat=

I'm wanting to know how well do you think my GTX 260 would be able to cope with those res' for games - playing at highest graphics settings.

(Alternative monitor ideas are welcome [available from overclockers] but primarily it's the question above ^)

Thanks

2009-01-25 11:33:34

Stimey: +786|6384|Ontario | Canada

There won't really be any difference in frame rates with those resolutions.
I would go for the larger one, I <3 my 24" Samsung.

2009-01-25 11:35:07

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6717|The Twilight Zone

I would go with 24". GFX card will do just fine on it. You will have to make your own wallpaper if you chose to go with 1920x1080

https://www.shrani.si/f/3H/7h/45GTw71U/untitled-1.png

2009-01-25 11:37:33

Microwave: _; +515|6919|Loughborough Uni / Leeds, UK

.Sup wrote:
I would go with 24". GFX card will do just fine on it. You will have to make your own wallpaper if you chose to go with 1920x1080

That's what I was thinking... I was attracted by the full HD and figured I wouldn't need a bigger res. But yeah.... I thought about the wallpaper and games not default-ly supporting the weird resolution.

So you think it'll be fine playing games at 1920x1200 high quality?

2009-01-25 11:42:00

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6717|The Twilight Zone

james@alienware wrote:
.Sup wrote:
I would go with 24". GFX card will do just fine on it. You will have to make your own wallpaper if you chose to go with 1920x1080
That's what I was thinking... I was attracted by the full HD and figured I wouldn't need a bigger res. But yeah.... I thought about the wallpaper and games not default-ly supporting the weird resolution.

So you think it'll be fine playing games at 1920x1200 high quality?

Yeah cos 896 RAM is great for high res monitors. Playing on high settings depends on how much a game is demanding. But I'm going sideways here. Go with 24"

2009-01-25 11:45:04

Microwave: _; +515|6919|Loughborough Uni / Leeds, UK

.Sup wrote:
james@alienware wrote:
.Sup wrote:
I would go with 24". GFX card will do just fine on it. You will have to make your own wallpaper if you chose to go with 1920x1080
That's what I was thinking... I was attracted by the full HD and figured I wouldn't need a bigger res. But yeah.... I thought about the wallpaper and games not default-ly supporting the weird resolution.

So you think it'll be fine playing games at 1920x1200 high quality?
Yeah cos 896 RAM is great for high res monitors. Playing on high settings depends on how much a game is demanding. But I'm going sideways here. Go with 24"

Awesome, thanks!

There's also the possibility of SLI in the near future when I get my motherboard back

2009-01-25 11:45:40

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6461|Winland

I play with an 8800GT 512 on a 1920x1200. It does 90% of things flawlessly. Considering that a 260 is basically equal to two 8800GTs slammed together, I think you're quite safe.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2009-01-25 11:46:29

Stimey: +786|6384|Ontario | Canada

My 88GTS 512 Handles everything at 1920x1200.
Crysis at High, no problem.
That card should be fine.

2009-01-25 11:47:15

Scorpion0x17: can detect anyone's visible post count...; +691|7030|Cambridge (UK)

.Sup wrote:
james@alienware wrote:
.Sup wrote:
I would go with 24". GFX card will do just fine on it. You will have to make your own wallpaper if you chose to go with 1920x1080
That's what I was thinking... I was attracted by the full HD and figured I wouldn't need a bigger res. But yeah.... I thought about the wallpaper and games not default-ly supporting the weird resolution.

So you think it'll be fine playing games at 1920x1200 high quality?
Yeah cos 896 RAM is great for high res monitors. Playing on high settings depends on how much a game is demanding. But I'm going sideways here. Go with 24"

How well a card handles hi-res has very little to do with how much RAM it has on-board these days.

A single 1920x1200 32bit surface requires just under 9MB.

Most of the RAM on modern cards is used for storing geometry and texture information, not frame buffers.

2009-01-25 11:50:24

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6717|The Twilight Zone

Scorpion0x17 wrote:
.Sup wrote:
james@alienware wrote:

That's what I was thinking... I was attracted by the full HD and figured I wouldn't need a bigger res. But yeah.... I thought about the wallpaper and games not default-ly supporting the weird resolution.

So you think it'll be fine playing games at 1920x1200 high quality?
Yeah cos 896 RAM is great for high res monitors. Playing on high settings depends on how much a game is demanding. But I'm going sideways here. Go with 24"
How well a card handles hi-res has very little to do with how much RAM it has on-board these days.

A single 1920x1200 32bit surface requires just under 9MB.

Most of the RAM on modern cards is used for storing geometry and texture information, not frame buffers.

Hmm are you talking the ram on the card is used 9MB when theres no game running and I'm looking at the desktop?

2009-01-25 11:50:47

Microwave: _; +515|6919|Loughborough Uni / Leeds, UK

Freezer7Pro wrote:
I play with an 8800GT 512 on a 1920x1200. It does 90% of things flawlessly. Considering that a 260 is basically equal to two 8800GTs slammed together, I think you're quite safe.

Stimey wrote:
My 88GTS 512 Handles everything at 1920x1200.
Crysis at High, no problem.
That card should be fine.

Cheers guys

2009-01-25 11:51:41

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6717|The Twilight Zone

Freezer7Pro wrote:
I play with an 8800GT 512 on a 1920x1200. It does 90% of things flawlessly.

yeah same here

2009-01-25 11:52:09

Scorpion0x17: can detect anyone's visible post count...; +691|7030|Cambridge (UK)

.Sup wrote:
Scorpion0x17 wrote:
.Sup wrote:

Yeah cos 896 RAM is great for high res monitors. Playing on high settings depends on how much a game is demanding. But I'm going sideways here. Go with 24"
How well a card handles hi-res has very little to do with how much RAM it has on-board these days.

A single 1920x1200 32bit surface requires just under 9MB.

Most of the RAM on modern cards is used for storing geometry and texture information, not frame buffers.
Hmm are you talking the ram on the card is used 9MB when theres no game running and I'm looking at the desktop?

That's a single surface, yes.

Games utilise multiple surfaces, but not many, and not all at full screen res.

2009-01-25 15:47:57

ReDevilJR: Member; +106|6615

I have the GTX 260 core 216 OC'd a bit.. Let me say that there is a HUGE drop off from 1680 x 1050 to 1920 x 1200... I got a 24" monitor thinking it would handle the higher res just fine on highest settings.. Well, it does OKAY, (Crysis/Warhead, Far Cry 2 lag at full settings and resolutions (No AA), Fallout 3, Left 4 Dead, run perfectly at highest of every setting. Call of Duty WaW runs well at full settings, but is a significant difference from lower resolutions.. I haven't tried COD4, but I assume the same.. What games do you play? That will depend on it the most..

P.S. I'm stepping up to the GTX 285 for better performance at that resolution..

2009-01-25 15:51:13

Microwave: _; +515|6919|Loughborough Uni / Leeds, UK

ReDevilJR wrote:
I have the GTX 260 core 216 OC'd a bit.. Let me say that there is a HUGE drop off from 1680 x 1050 to 1920 x 1200... I got a 24" monitor thinking it would handle the higher res just fine on highest settings.. Well, it does OKAY, (Crysis/Warhead, Far Cry 2 lag at full settings and resolutions (No AA), Fallout 3, Left 4 Dead, run perfectly at highest of every setting. Call of Duty WaW runs well at full settings, but is a significant difference from lower resolutions.. I haven't tried COD4, but I assume the same.. What games do you play? That will depend on it the most..

P.S. I'm stepping up to the GTX 285 for better performance at that resolution..

COD4, CSS, Fallout 3, Far Cry 2, occasionally Crysis.

I've got the GTX 260 OC2 (bfg). I know it wont play Crysis maxed but aslong as it's mostly fine that's ok. I might be looking at SLI later too which would handle anything else I would think.

2009-01-25 15:59:06

ReDevilJR: Member; +106|6615

james@alienware wrote:
ReDevilJR wrote:
I have the GTX 260 core 216 OC'd a bit.. Let me say that there is a HUGE drop off from 1680 x 1050 to 1920 x 1200... I got a 24" monitor thinking it would handle the higher res just fine on highest settings.. Well, it does OKAY, (Crysis/Warhead, Far Cry 2 lag at full settings and resolutions (No AA), Fallout 3, Left 4 Dead, run perfectly at highest of every setting. Call of Duty WaW runs well at full settings, but is a significant difference from lower resolutions.. I haven't tried COD4, but I assume the same.. What games do you play? That will depend on it the most..

P.S. I'm stepping up to the GTX 285 for better performance at that resolution..
COD4, CSS, Fallout 3, Far Cry 2, occasionally Crysis.

I've got the GTX 260 OC2 (bfg). I know it wont play Crysis maxed but aslong as it's mostly fine that's ok. I might be looking at SLI later too which would handle anything else I would think.

I take back my statement. The 'new' video drivers make Crysis Warhead playable at the highest video settings (No AA), haven't tried the original Crysis. Far Cry 2 is still laggy to me, but again, it's your preference. Your other games will run just fine though.

2009-01-25 16:01:36

Little BaBy JESUS: m8; +394|6413|'straya

You dont have to make your own wallpapers for 1920x1080 trust me thats the resolution i use. most good wallpapers sites have options of 1080p Tvs (which is obviously the same resolution)

Well personally my 1GB 4870 is great at the resolution with highest settings/AA.

85-100fps on COD: WAW (Highest settings/full AA)

30-40fps on Crysis warhead (Highest settings/full AA)

50-80fps on Far Cry 2 (Highest settings/full AA)

So if the GTX260 is roughly the same in performance you shouldnt have to many problems

2009-01-25 16:12:23

Microwave: _; +515|6919|Loughborough Uni / Leeds, UK

Thanks guys.

I've already ordered the 24" monitor now btw.

2009-01-25 16:13:20

ReDevilJR: Member; +106|6615

james@alienware wrote:
Thanks guys.

I've already ordered the 24" monitor now btw.

You'll love it.. I stepped up from the 22".. Can't complain with HD.. (Mine supports 1080P - slightly distorted, but can fill out screen)

Pages: 1

Index »
Community »
Tech »
GTX 260 + 22/24" Monitor

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums GTX 260 + 22/24" Monitor

.Sup wrote:

james@alienware wrote:

.Sup wrote:

.Sup wrote:

james@alienware wrote:

.Sup wrote:

.Sup wrote:

james@alienware wrote:

.Sup wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

.Sup wrote:

james@alienware wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Stimey wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

.Sup wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

.Sup wrote:

ReDevilJR wrote:

james@alienware wrote:

ReDevilJR wrote:

james@alienware wrote:

Board footer