What do you guys and girls think of this.

Pages: 1 2

Index »
Community »
Tech »
What do you guys and girls think of this.

2006-10-13 08:49:53

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7186|Salt Lake City

Stealth42o wrote:
Response Time : 5ms = Good
Resolution : 1440 x 900 = Bad

Why is that resolution bad? A standard 4:3 aspect ratio 19" LCD would have a native resolution of 1280x1024. Because of the widescreen aspect ratio 1440x900 is about right.

Last edited by Agent_Dung_Bomb (2006-10-13 08:50:12)

2006-10-13 08:52:59

Marlboroman82: Personal philosophy: Clothing optional.; +1,022|7073|Camp XRay

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Stealth42o wrote:
Response Time : 5ms = Good
Resolution : 1440 x 900 = Bad
Why is that resolution bad? A standard 4:3 aspect ratio 19" LCD would have a native resolution of 1280x1024. Because of the widescreen aspect ratio 1440x900 is about right.

that is what i run on my laptop, looks grrrrrrreat

https://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l250/marlboroman82/Untitled-8.png

2006-10-13 09:56:48

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7186|Salt Lake City

Marlboroman82 wrote:
Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Stealth42o wrote:
Response Time : 5ms = Good
Resolution : 1440 x 900 = Bad
Why is that resolution bad? A standard 4:3 aspect ratio 19" LCD would have a native resolution of 1280x1024. Because of the widescreen aspect ratio 1440x900 is about right.
that is what i run on my laptop, looks grrrrrrreat

Yes, but given the smaller screen size you have more pixels per square inch of screen, therebye making images sharper for the given resolution. In a 19" LCD, the difference in 1280x1024 Vs. 1440x900 is about 14,700 pixels lost to the wide screen resolution. However, that is the price you pay for widescreen, but one that most people seem willing to live with.

I myself am still a CRT man. Even though I have a 19" LCD, my 22" NEC CRT is still my primary monitor. The LCD is driven off my secondary system, and used for attending LAN parties.

2006-10-13 16:31:24

ShotYourSix: Boldly going nowhere...; +196|7169|Las Vegas

I force BF2 to 1920xx1200 through the command line. Looks just fine to me. So the mini map is slightly oval......hardly something I notice during the battle.

2006-10-13 16:44:03

EricTViking: Yes, I am Queeg; +48|7002|UK

I use an Acer gaming monitor 20" widescreen, crystalbrite (shiny screen not matt) and it runs at 1680x1050.

BF2 looks awesome on it

BTW. The acer gaming line of TFTs have some of the best colour reproduction and contrast I have seen on any monitor. You wouldn't go wrong buying one of them online.

2006-10-13 18:55:27

Mad Ad: Member; +178|6961|England, UK

The problem with hardcoding widescreen using the szx and szy switches is that it cuts a little off of the top and bottom of your screen to make it look like a good fit. Now that might not make much difference to the average ground pounder however as soon as you get in the air, that could mean the difference between just catching the end of the nme smoke trail, or just seeing the tip of a rotor blade, or missing it completely.

So instead I use 1600x1200 ingame and use the monitor settings to stretch that over the full 1920x1200 with almost no downside. The oval is barely any more oval, the text looks better this way and theres virtually no difference in the image quality.

2006-10-13 20:43:54

Reciprocity: Member; +721|7030|the dank(super) side of Oregon

hey, marlboro, if forcing widescreed doesn't stretch the image, why is the mini map and oval?

And I'm impressed with the Dell Monitors because they're very reliable, look good, are well priced, and dead pixels are not an issue. That is not to say any other company doesn't make a better, cheaper monitor. Dell just happens to be hastle free.

Pages: 1 2

Index »
Community »
Tech »
What do you guys and girls think of this.

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums What do you guys and girls think of this.

Stealth42o wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Stealth42o wrote:

Marlboroman82 wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Stealth42o wrote:

Board footer