1920x1200
Poll
What's your resolution?
| 800x600 | 0% | 0% - 0 | ||||
| 1024x768 | 2% | 2% - 3 | ||||
| 1152x864 | 0% | 0% - 1 | ||||
| 1280x800 | 1% | 1% - 2 | ||||
| 1280x960 | 1% | 1% - 2 | ||||
| 1280x1024 | 9% | 9% - 10 | ||||
| 1680x1050 | 35% | 35% - 38 | ||||
| 1920x1080 | 9% | 9% - 10 | ||||
| 1920x1200 | 23% | 23% - 25 | ||||
| Other (Please specify) | 14% | 14% - 16 | ||||
| Total: 107 | ||||||
1920x1200 on main display
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
I seem to got what most ppl have, 1680x1050.
Last edited by GC_PaNzerFIN (2009-08-17 11:38:41)
3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8
Contraz wrote:
1920x1200
I know fucking karate
1366x768
Oh lol. since when is 5:4 visual fidelity. The most pointless mainstream resolution tbh.Ioan92 wrote:
1280x1024
The sweet spot of performance and visual fidelity,
main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg
1920x1200 17" LED LCD on my primary laptop.
1920x1080 24" on my primary desktop.
1920x1080 24" on my primary desktop.
Last edited by Ilocano (2009-08-17 12:07:39)
1600x900
1680x1050, I also have 2 @ 1280x1024 but they're not connected ATM.
1920 x 1200. I need more pixels than the average man for titty viewings.
1920x1200
On my primary LCD, 1680x1050.
On my primary CRT, 2046x1536@80Hz - non-interlaced. Awesome quality image.
On my primary CRT, 2046x1536@80Hz - non-interlaced. Awesome quality image.
Most websites aren't exactly designed for big huge resolutions anyway. I find it awkward when I'm browsing and there's massive bars on either side of the page and shitloads of empty space. That's why I'm happy with 1024x768, everything seems fine and well fit.
Once websites start abandoning 1024 and start designing themselves solely for higher resolution, then I might consider upgrading my monitor.
Even if I was to get a PC for gaming, I'd probably keep my current 1024 monitor, as it'll mean I can buy a cheaper GPU, yet still run on good settings.
My monitor is probably about.... only 50cm away from my face.
Once websites start abandoning 1024 and start designing themselves solely for higher resolution, then I might consider upgrading my monitor.
Even if I was to get a PC for gaming, I'd probably keep my current 1024 monitor, as it'll mean I can buy a cheaper GPU, yet still run on good settings.
My monitor is probably about.... only 50cm away from my face.
Last edited by Mekstizzle (2009-08-17 12:56:12)
1920x1200 + 1280x1024x2.
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
I don't browse full-screen on my 19SS, 22WS or 24WS. It's about screen real estate. Having multiple apps open and visible at the same time.Mekstizzle wrote:
Most websites aren't exactly designed for big huge resolutions anyway. I find it awkward when I'm browsing and there's massive bars on either side of the page and shitloads of empty space. That's why I'm happy with 1024x768, everything seems fine and well fit.
Once websites start abandoning 1024 and start designing themselves solely for higher resolution, then I might consider upgrading my monitor.
Even if I was to get a PC for gaming, I'd probably keep my current 1024 monitor, as it'll mean I can buy a cheaper GPU, yet still run on good settings.
My monitor is probably about.... only 50cm away from my face.
This. I usually have my browser about 1000px wide. It works great with most sites.Ilocano wrote:
I don't browse full-screen on my 19SS, 22WS or 24WS. It's about screen real estate. Having multiple apps open and visible at the same time.Mekstizzle wrote:
Most websites aren't exactly designed for big huge resolutions anyway. I find it awkward when I'm browsing and there's massive bars on either side of the page and shitloads of empty space. That's why I'm happy with 1024x768, everything seems fine and well fit.
Once websites start abandoning 1024 and start designing themselves solely for higher resolution, then I might consider upgrading my monitor.
Even if I was to get a PC for gaming, I'd probably keep my current 1024 monitor, as it'll mean I can buy a cheaper GPU, yet still run on good settings.
My monitor is probably about.... only 50cm away from my face.
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
2048x1152
1152x864, I can support 1280x1024 now but my shitty CRT monitor is too small and makes the letters small.
my lavatory rig has the same res_j5689_ wrote:
1152x864, I can support 1280x1024 now but my shitty CRT monitor is too small and makes the letters small.
1680x1050
Waiting til I can afford a monitor that displays 2560 x 1600. Then maybe run two of AMD's DX11 cards
Waiting til I can afford a monitor that displays 2560 x 1600. Then maybe run two of AMD's DX11 cards
1920x1200, Love it and I look forward to upgrading to 2560x1600 + a video card capable of supporting it when I have the money
although my 8800gt isnt even good enough for 1920x1200, sucks tbh
although my 8800gt isnt even good enough for 1920x1200, sucks tbh
1440x900 desktop
1336x768 laptop
1336x768 laptop
1920x1200 - primary
1920x1080 - lappy
1680x1050 - secondary
1920x1080 - lappy
1680x1050 - secondary
1920x1080 + 1440x900
1024x768. Fucking CRT piece of shit!
Gonna upgrade very soon, but running into problems.
Gonna upgrade very soon, but running into problems.