|
antoniov
|
Jun 12 2012, 01:28 AM
|
Getting Started

|
Hello guys. I have a question. If like 20 - 22 inches monitor. The native resolution is full HD(1920x1080 reso). But some old lcd monitors dont have full HD. The second best after full HD is 1600x900 pixels right? wouldnt it look ugly to use 1600x900 gaming on a 22 inches monitor?
|
|
|
|
|
|
antoniov
|
Jun 12 2012, 04:24 PM
|
Getting Started

|
QUOTE(wildwestgoh @ Jun 12 2012, 08:43 AM) I'm not what's your definition of "ugly" but if you use the monitor native resolution then you shouldn't see any jagged pixels. Currently (what I know so far) the smallest screen with full HD (desktop monitor) is 21.5" (22") so 20" is 1600x900. Apple Macbook Pro just hit next tech (laptop) of which its 15" screen packs 2880x1800, retina display, phew~~  Erm. It's actually like this. I was asking about laptop monitors reso, 1366x768(HD+) would fit a 14 inches monitor nicely. While 1366x768 on a 15.6 inches monitor would look bad(the pixels are a bit too big tho, 1600x900 would look so much nicer on a 15.6 inches laptop monitor). If 1600x900 fit 15.6 inches monitor nice, i think a 20 inches monitor(which doesn't have full HD) would require a higher reso?
|
|
|
|
|
|
antoniov
|
Jul 9 2012, 10:12 PM
|
Getting Started

|
QUOTE(marc79 @ Jul 9 2012, 12:40 PM) Just got myself a U2412M. was aiming for 2312HM, but no stock >.< no regret for this model. colour is sharp and screen suddenly become so big.. upgraded from a dinosaur monitor (viewsonic VA702N- 17")... should i do any calibration to it? i use mostly for video only. Any sifu's advice ? Why U2412 only bigger than U2312HM by 1 inches, but price wise need to add about rm 300?
|
|
|
|
|