• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

How bad does it look when you scale down the resolution on an LCD?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mason

Member
I really want to get an LCD because the bulkiness of the CRT just kills me everytime I look at it. I do play games, so I've been looking at ones with 16ms response times. I don't really care if it's 15 or 17" because of the extra space you get with an LCD vs a CRT, I won't be losing anything.

Here's what I'm worried about, though: I have a GeForceFX5600, so I generally have to turn down my resolution from 1024x768 to play games at 800x600 (not always, but probably 50% of the time). I know that scaling down on an LCD is a bad thing but I need to know exactly how bad it is. I turned down the resolution of my LCD at work today from 1024x768 (it's max) to 800x600 (the only other option) and while it was blurrier, it wasn't horrible. Granted, I was looking at websites and such, and I don't know how that would look when playing a game. I also view movie trailers and video clips occasionally and have never noticed any problems/ghosting/etc whatsoever.

My work LCD is a Dell and I looked up the specs just to see what they were, and I was very surprised. It's a bit older, so the specs are pretty unimpressive, but I have always been really impressed with how good it looks. It has (if memory serves me) 250cd brightness, 25ms response time, and a 300:1 contrast ratio. So basically what I'm wondering is if the scaling is really all that bad, or if it depends on the monitor, etc. I've found several LCDs right under $200 with specs much better than my work one.
 

Burger

Member
Just do it, you won't regret it, or at least I didn't.

Got a Viewsonic 19" with a native res of 1280x1024. It rocks. My computer is decent tho so I haven't really had a problem with any games. If I did I'd be all like 'hey fuck you game, deal with it'. Yeah.
 

Mason

Member
Also I guess I should ask if I should look for one with a native res of 1024x768 or 1280x1024. In terms of how good it will look when I scale down to about 800x600.
 

Diablos

Member
Mason said:
I really want to get an LCD because the bulkiness of the CRT just kills me everytime I look at it. I do play games, so I've been looking at ones with 16ms response times. I don't really care if it's 15 or 17" because of the extra space you get with an LCD vs a CRT, I won't be losing anything.

Here's what I'm worried about, though: I have a GeForceFX5600, so I generally have to turn down my resolution from 1024x768 to play games at 800x600 (not always, but probably 50% of the time). I know that scaling down on an LCD is a bad thing but I need to know exactly how bad it is. I turned down the resolution of my LCD at work today from 1024x768 (it's max) to 800x600 (the only other option) and while it was blurrier, it wasn't horrible. Granted, I was looking at websites and such, and I don't know how that would look when playing a game. I also view movie trailers and video clips occasionally and have never noticed any problems/ghosting/etc whatsoever.

My work LCD is a Dell and I looked up the specs just to see what they were, and I was very surprised. It's a bit older, so the specs are pretty unimpressive, but I have always been really impressed with how good it looks. It has (if memory serves me) 250cd brightness, 25ms response time, and a 300:1 contrast ratio. So basically what I'm wondering is if the scaling is really all that bad, or if it depends on the monitor, etc. I've found several LCDs right under $200 with specs much better than my work one.

Lower resolutions look really, really bad on LCD. Not as bad if you are using DVI, but still pretty crappy. I have a 9800 Pro, so going from 1024x768 to 1280x1024 only takes off 5-7 frames per second... I can deal with it. 1280x1024 seems really small at first, but I've been using it for the past two weeks on this NEC CRT and I'm used to it; I could never go any lower, honestly.

When I get my LCD, I'll be sure to give you more details. However, you might be stuck at the moment because of your graphics card.

Also I guess I should ask if I should look for one with a native res of 1024x768 or 1280x1024. In terms of how good it will look when I scale down to about 800x600.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that only half of the native resolution will look as good. 512x380 for a 1024x768 native res, 640x512 for 1280x1024. :|

Oh yeah, important info for people interested in LCD monitors: Buy Samsung. They just announced that any LCD of theirs bought that have one dead pixel or more can be exchanged for the exact same model, brand new. Every other manufacturer is usually 7-8 dead pixels or more. And believe me, dead pixels are very common on LCD's and you don't want them.
 

Mason

Member
Manabanana said:
Shit, where? I'm looking for one, too.

$179.99
15", 1024x768, 450 cd/m2, 500:1, 16 ms
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=24-024-001&depa=1

$179.99
15", 1024x768, 250 cd/m2, 450:1, 16 ms
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=24-001-174&depa=1

$179.99
17", 1280 x 1024, 260 cd/m2, 400:1, ??ms
http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=316328&pfp=hpf3

$199.99
17", 1280x1024, 300 cd/m2, 450:1, 16 ms
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...0550-3934422?v=glance&s=electronics&n=1067712

Then there are a shitload on onsale.com
 

Diablos

Member
You probably can't afford to get a 17" LCD and a graphics card to play games at its native res. You would probably be better off getting a 15"... I was almost going to do it until I realized games didn't run too bad for me at 1280x1024.
I had my eye on this one - http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=24-001-174&depa=1
$200, $179 after the rebate.

SyncMasters are great for gaming. I've heard nothing but good things about them. And the reported dead pixels in consumer reviews is very low. Other brands have complaints of dead pixels all over the page.
 

tedtropy

$50/hour, but no kissing on the lips and colors must be pre-separated
Diablos said:
Lower resolutions look really, really bad on LCD. Not as bad if you are using DVI, but still pretty crappy. I have a 9800 Pro, so going from 1024x768 to 1280x1024 only takes off 5-7 frames per second... I can deal with it. 1280x1024 seems really small at first, but I've been using it for the past two weeks on this NEC CRT and I'm used to it; I could never go any lower, honestly.

When I get my LCD, I'll be sure to give you more details. However, you might be stuck at the moment because of your graphics card.



Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that only half of the native resolution will look as good. 512x380 for a 1024x768 native res, 640x512 for 1280x1024. :|

Oh yeah, important info for people interested in LCD monitors: Buy Samsung. They just announced that any LCD of theirs bought that have one dead pixel or more can be exchanged for the exact same model, brand new. Every other manufacturer is usually 7-8 dead pixels or more. And believe me, dead pixels are very common on LCD's and you don't want them.

What kind of magical version of the 9800 Pro do you own that only causes a '7-8 fps' dip from going to 1024 X 768 to 1280 X 1024 in any modern game? I WISH that were the case with this card. As for LCD resampling lower resolutions. Yeah, it's noticeable and basically has a blurred effect. It's not too terribly noticeable in most games, but looks horrible in the actual Windows environment or any other spot where sharp text is a must. You generally want to make sure you can almost always run the LCD you're after at its native res.
 

Diablos

Member
Ditch the official ATI driver and go with REGENERATION 1.8.

It'll give you a couple more frames per second, if not that, then no precaching whatsoever. It also does the best it can to make a game as fluid as possible, even if it is ~30fps.
 

tedtropy

$50/hour, but no kissing on the lips and colors must be pre-separated
Diablos said:
Ditch the official ATI driver and go with REGENERATION 1.8.

It'll give you a couple more frames per second, if not that, then no precaching whatsoever. It also does the best it can to make a game as fluid as possible, even if it is ~30fps.

I'll be sure to check those out. I can't say I've had a ton of luck with hacked drivers. Mainly, I just think the 9800 Pro is starting to reach the end of its life. Was a good card at a good price for the time, but it can't really push newer games at a good clip. Odd, considering I don't recall owning it very long. Moments like these make me hug my consoles.
 

Diablos

Member
Yeah, welcome to the wonderful world of PC Gaming. Upgrading is a bitch. I honestly don't intend to until the next Unreal Tournament comes out (2006/2007). :lol

I never had any luck with the two most popular ATI drivers (Omega and DNA). Omega did absolutely nothing noticable for me, and DNA actually made things worse. The Regeneration drivers on the other hand finally show some progress...
 

Diablos

Member
Yeah, unless you feel like spending more money (a lot more money in your case.) I'd do the same thing if I was in your position.
 

jenov4

Member
Yeah don't do it, anything less than the native resolution is pure shit. It gets progressively worse the further down you change your resolution to.

BTW - Welcome back Diablos! I just noticed you started to post again. Heh.
 

AntoneM

Member
so why can't they just tell me that! anyway comming accross this thread was great, I found a 15' Samsung 515v for $199 with a $20 mail in rebate and free shipping (chiefvalue.com).

--edit--
so doesn't that mean I need some sort of adapter? or should that come with the monitor?
 

Diablos

Member
You won't need anything like that unless your card is weird and only had DVI, in which case you'd need a VGA to DVI adapter. But if you are using a VGA cable for your CRT monitor right now, then you won't need any adapter. D-Sub IS VGA. Same thing. The monitor should come with a VGA cable. The LCD you speak of is also at newegg and one other e-tailer for the same price.
 

AntoneM

Member
indeed it is, I've used chiefvalue before and though it doesn't beat newegg overall, free shipping is hard to beat.
 

Diablos

Member
Usually "free shipping" on those sites just combine the regular price and shipping. But if chiefvalue isn't, then get it from there... you could save yourself $10 or $12.
 

Dilbert

Member
If gaming isn't your primary application for the computer, then I'd say get a larger monitor which runs at 1280x1024 and deal with the blockiness at non-native resolution. If your PC is pretty much a game machine only and upgrading your video card isn't a possibility at the moment, then you might do OK with a bargain monitor running at 1024x768.

And yes, Samsung Syncmasters are excellent for gaming. I've owned two (currently a 191t+) and loved them both.
 

BlackMage

Banned
Diablos said:
Ditch the official ATI driver and go with REGENERATION 1.8.

It'll give you a couple more frames per second, if not that, then no precaching whatsoever. It also does the best it can to make a game as fluid as possible, even if it is ~30fps.

do these drivers support mobility radeons?
 

SickBoy

Member
I find that windows looks tolerable at 1024x768 (native on my monitor is 1280x1024), but 800x600 is pretty crap. Gaming, I haven't really had any issues with.
 
Same as Sickboy. 1024 doesn't look horrid for common Windows use, but I've scaled it down all the way to 800x600 for gaming before and not noticed any loss in the quality of the picture.
 
I havent noticed any problems with my tft monitor even if not using its native (1280 x 1024) resolution. I have used 1024 x 768 with few games.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom