@chopin, 22-inch is incorrect since for 16:9 monitors are actually 21.5-inch only. Many still mentioned them as "22-inch" even though they are not.

well that makes them even shorter. what abt those 22" in 16:10? do they cheat us by 0.5" too?

Might be good for work, might not be good for gaming/movies as they are usually optimized at 1080p, if you were to watch a full 1080p movie on a 1200p monitor, it stretches the whole movie and makes the moving looks weird.

Most games nowadays that support widescreen formats have no problems with 16:10 monitors. That's because 16:10 is the original widescreen standard before 16:9 came along. As for your movies, very much depends on your player settings. If you had used "keep aspect ratio" then the movies will not be stretched...

@chopin, 22-inch is incorrect for 16:9 monitors as they are actually 21.5-inch only. Many still mentioned them as "22-inch" even though they are not.

Might be good for work, might not be good for gaming/movies as they are usually optimized at 1080p, if you were to watch a full 1080p movie on a 1200p monitor, it stretches the whole movie and makes the moving looks weird.

Been looking for 16:10 myself for the last couple of years but hell, those 16:10 is always so much expensive compare to the 16:9 counterparts.
Dell U2312HM and U2412M is the most obvious example, both using the very same panel, well maybe slightly different (DPI slightly different), the later cost so much more, nearly RM300 extra, I'm still holding my breath on this, or probably just wait till budget can get the 27", more space, darn... 27" is 16:9 only... oh well...

you spent 2,4k? I only spent 1,6 for this philips monitor and it is 16:9 as well

Why do you prefer 16:10? I think 16:9 is pretty much the standard, wouldnt call it awkward

How I was hoping laptop manufacturer release 16:10 ratio screen

How I was hoping laptop manufacturer release 16:10 ratio screen

I'd love to have a 4:3 laptop screen    better for word processing and web browsing

how bout 24" with 16:9  with 1920 x 1080 reso? any good?

i like big screen tho for gaming

It doesn't matter if it is 23", 24", 40", or even 96". 1080p (1920x1080) is not as suitable for work as a 1200p (1920x1200) display is.

It doesn't matter if it is 23", 24", 40", or even 96". 1080p (1920x1080) is not as suitable for work as a 1200p (1920x1200) display is.

either 4:3 5:4 or 16:10 are for professionals & enthusiasts
16:9 is for n00bs

No, cannot say like that, will hurt many people with low budget.

Well, a 2560x1440 16:9 display should be good enough.  

yes i agree. 16:10 should be the standard for computers. 

HDTV spoil the lcd standard for PC.  16:9 wasnt vesa standard for PC.

16:9 ratio give lcd manufacture more panels to cut in production line, so they can sell more.  That is why we see more 16:9 monitor than 16:10.

As for those who said 16:10 isnt suitable for gaming and movies, that is incorrect. As long as the pixel is 1:1, no streching involved. 

It's only that 16:10 monitor are more towards professional rather than entertainment.  Therefore the panels come with it is more on quality rather than speed.

Still waiting 24/27" 16:10 monitor with ips+120hz.  This is great for gaming. Now still don't have.

yeah u r right. the manufacturers were bought by the entertainment industries and produced all these 16:9 mons that are useless for work.

i have purchased "outdated" used 5:4 (the 1280x1024) monitors and found them to use so very suitable for work, that I practically put aside my 21.5" samsung 16:9 units, and do most of my productive work on it. can u imagine that?

now i own two 24" 16:10 (one at home, one at work), i can lay all these useless units at rest forever already...

but see, in the whole process, i have wasted so much $ on not ideal monitors, and finally save enough $ to buy the more costly 16:10, if i was given the choice in the beginning, much precious $$ would be saved. That's why i write all these so that ppl won't repeat my mistake.

i wish 16:10 ratio monitors were cheap

i wanted that ratio but due to budget constraints i had to get a 16:9 ratio

but so far 16:9 still okay for me

i been brought up with 16:10 environment ratio since 22inch till now i still have to prefer 16:10 ratio with my u2410 and u2414m...is kinda weird when i see those monitor with 16:9 although i am using it right now...and i do feel that the workplace is quite limited as in those height pixel is lesser by 120...

so? even if you force 16:10 in most games you will end up getting black bars. whats the point. better stick with 16:9 as its more universal.

16:9 is for n00bs

so? even if you force 16:10 in most games you will end up getting black bars. whats the point. better stick with 16:9 as its more universal.

While there is 1:1 pixel mapping on many 16:10 monitors, doing so would make games run in such a small window that it would detract the experience from a full screen play. This is because most PS3 games do not have 1080p upscaling support.

So IMO, 16:9 really isn't that bad to be quite honest. But yes, 16:10 monitors should make a come back into the mainstream market, no doubt about that.

Anyhow is there a way to calculate the aspect ratio based on the resolution?

I still prefer 5:4 for documents, movie should be 16:9, games 16:10

yes, agreed, but since i don't have the $ and the desk space for 3 monitors, i purchased a 24" 16:10 mon, which can handle all 3 functions and then some...

Are there other monitors than dell 24 inch ips 1920x1200?

Hehe..Me too..I used to own a 24" 1920*1200, the best resolution ever. Two documents side by side, good for movies, good for games.. But nowadays they launch the 23" with 1080 which abit shorter

Thoughts on the 2560x1600 monitors? What about their availability?

---

Added on November 14, 2012, 2:53 pm
wuh, this will only be found on 27" or above, at least dell has. sure want it if i can afford it 
but now 24" 16:10 is just nice for me.

Thoughts on the 2560x1600 monitors? What about their availability?

wuh, this will only be found on 27" or above, at least dell has. sure want it if i can afford it 

dell is selling their flagship rm3399...wanna buy  

that dell is 27" or 30"?

Guys guys! Can we look at these stuff instead of Dell for a moment?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6286/nixeus-...-for-the-masses

My intention: to alert other would be buyers on the option and advantages of 16:10 over 16:9. so that those ppl who share my similar profile & preferences, won't have to go through the buy-16:9-then-found-not-useful-then-sell-then-spend-more-$-buy-16:10-at-last cycle, in other words, don't repeat my mistake and burn $ in the process. those samsung etc marketing guys won't tell us these things.

originally posted: http://forum.lowyat.net/index.php?showtopi...&#entry54630054

-----------------------------

just bought Dell u2412m for 799 from garage sale, brand new! wow blows me away!!

guys u might regret taking 16:9 if in future if u plan to use it for more productive things like programming, graphics design, spreadsheets, or documents etc. for these kinds of tasks, 16:10 is clearly much better - the extra 120 pixels in height can let you open 2 pages of A4 in full side-by-side (in Word or in pdf) and you still can read all words clearly. the slightly more $$ paid for these extra pixels is completely worthy.

I have compared and found that: a 22" @16:10 will have a height of 11.66", and a 24" @16:9 is only at 11.77" - means that to me the usefulness of a 22" (16:10) is the same as a 24" (16:9).

if i still can't convince you, just consider this simple fact: if you start by taking 16:9, and then regret it, you can't do anything to increase it to 16:10, other than selling it. but if u take 16:10 first, u can view all 16:9 contents without any problem, just ignore the thin black bars on top and bottom la, what's the big deal?

honestly, i really hate those forces behind the industry (samsung maybe?) to push 16:9 to such prominence now. this ratio is only good for watching movies (that still not considering that a lot of big budget movies are made in 2.35:1, so even 16:9 will still give you black bars!), it is rubbish in all other kinds of usage. if 16:10 remains in mass production, their costs will be as low as those 16:9 now. what a waste!

---------------------------------
no i'm not a purist, neither am i a casual user - i use my computer daily for a living. I have been hunting hard to find monitors that are more for practical and productive use, other than those just good for watching movies. and what i can see in the market are loads of 16:9 in all sizes, with prices getting lower and lower, but just not a single one in 16:10 - well, except a few IPS models from Dell, and Asus, and due to the low production numbers, their prices are so high! I bought Dell u2412m at ~800 even though i don't really need an IPS, because of the limited choices out there. hence my frustation expressed above.

---------------------------------
below is my own research during the process of monitor hunting (H: monitor height):

16:10
====

20" - H = 10.56"
22" - H = 11.66"
24" - H = 12.72"
27" - H = 14.31"

1680 x 1050 : dell 2209, sam 226BW
1920 x 1200 : dell U2410, dell U2412m, Dell 2407WFP-HC
2560 x 1600

-----------------

16:9
===

21.5"- H = 10.56" (not 22" & 10.79" as previously stated)
23"  - H = 11.28"
24"  - H = 11.77"
27"  - H = 13.24"

1920 x 1080 : dell ST2420L, ST2410, s2408w, Viewsonic IPS VX2336S, sam B2230H
2048 x 1152 : sam 2343BWX,
2560 x 1440 : dell U2711,

Thanks for viewing, and welcome any discussion - no offense to anyone. These are just my personal opinion.

16:10 is dead soon after the cheaper 4k is going in the masses

yeah, isn't sad?!

personally i preferred 16:9 as mostly video are in that size, other than that will be a black bar on top and bottom, quite annoy actually~

yeah, isn't sad?!

Strictly speaking, those who complain about the black bars on 16:10 are pointless too, because if you are using your 16:9 monitors to view downloaded movies, quite many of them are made in 2:35:1 format, then you will have black bars too, so how? And seriously, I have been using my 16:10 monitors to watch all sorts of movies of various aspect ratios, and, those black bars have never bothered me at all, because after a few seconds, my eyes got used to them and just focus on the movie itself, never distracted by the bars at all.

so actually I'm using an dell p2213 if I'm not wrong ita using 1680x1050 RES. So no point upgrade to 22inch with 1920x1080 RES then?

16:10 is not coming back into the mainstream 1080 monitors because 16:9 shares the same aspect ratio as HD tvs and is cheaper due to economy of scale. 16:10 has a chance with 4k standards but I doubt I'm going to get a 4k monitor even if I could afford it, its going to be too big.

4K is now labelled as 3840x2160 (1080 x 2 = 2160) so it's still 16:9.
16:10 probably only available for professional IPS panel for the high-end, guess consumer who's looking for value monitor with 16:10 will just need to swallow their breath for now (holding for future possibility is not healthy ).
I was looking for 16:10 as well, but the price point still a deal breaker...  sigh~

A 16:9 22" (or 21.5") led monitor only has the vertical height of a 17" 4:3 crt monitor. So for someone who was used to the 21" crt monitor, its going to take a 24" 16:10 led monitor or 26" 16:9 led monitor to have the same vertical height.

To add my points of the strengths of 16:10, I will show the following photos. The conclusion is that 16:9 sucks at productivity, it is perhaps only best for entertainment like movies and games. Whereas 16:10 and older formats like 5:4 are better for doing serious work. When you are working on documents, you would enjoy more on any mon that is taller than shorter, trust me. In addition also, the 16:10 format is so close to 16:9 making it quite fine to watch movies, and with added height making document-viewing a joy too, it is a winner is I only have $ for just one mon.

I just hope that the industry will produce more monitors in the formats that are good for work, and, at the same time, continue to made monitors for play. They all have their own demands!

Photo 1: (16:10, 24")
See how the monitor can open two facing pages of document in FULL size!
Photo 2: (16:10, 24")
The same mon as in 1, see the height of it even longer than the actual A4 size paper!

Photo 3: (16:10, 22")
This size has the exact height of the A4 paper. Still quite acceptable.

Photo 4: (16:9, 22")
See how much the monitor is shorter than the height of the A4 paper. I have put this mon aside just as a spare for quite some time already. Almost useless.

Yes its more than likely that computer monitors will keep following hd tv standards at 4k/8k instead of 16:10 whxga.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_size
A 16:9 22" (or 21.5") led monitor only has the vertical height of a 17" 4:3 crt monitor. So for someone who was used to the 21" crt monitor, its going to take a 24" 16:10 led monitor or 26" 16:9 led monitor to have the same vertical height.

looks like i am going 2 hold on 2 my old samsung T240 4 another 8 years then possibly the last 16:10 ever by samsung

yeah, agreed. mons with 16:9 ratio will have to be at least 26" to match the height of a 16:10 24" mon, and the price would be too high for average users. 

Actually manufacturers can go ahead to make 29" or larger mons for all I care, but they would be useless for work if the vertical reso is only limited at 1080 - it is too short to be productive - what a waste! From two years ago, my minimum requirement for a new mon is that its height must be at least same or more than the height of an A4 paper - 11.66".

either 4:3 5:4 or 16:10 are for professionals & enthusiasts
16:9 is for n00bs

can you comment on your sammy T240?

Lol..
Are you serious?   

Actually bro, i have no objection to 16:9, just that I'm pissed off by the market situation where almost ALL new monitors now are availble in only the 16:9 format, but those of us who want other dimensions are so lacking of choices, and, if found, we are left with few models at much higher prices than it should have been.

Strictly speaking, those who complain about the black bars on 16:10 are pointless too, because if you are using your 16:9 monitors to view downloaded movies, quite many of them are made in 2:35:1 format, then you will have black bars too, so how? And seriously, I have been using my 16:10 monitors to watch all sorts of movies of various aspect ratios, and, those black bars have never bothered me at all, because after a few seconds, my eyes got used to them and just focus on the movie itself, never distracted by the bars at all.