LCD PC monitor size advice

[mikeyj92]

At a recent LAN party we compared a 19inch widscreen LCD (LG L194WTX-BF) to my 19inch CRT (Hansol 920D), and there was no comparison. If you want a squashed picture and pretty much no overhead viewing, go widescreen. That upper realestate is priceless for gaming. The 4:3 has more surface area then its equivilent in 16:9, this is a fact. The only time widescreen monitors are useful is when they are 20.1inches or larger.

SheepStar

Depending on the GAME, one may be better than the other, but in general, moving foroward, you want a widescreen monitor for gaming. Period. Gaming is going toward widescreen layouts. Half-Life 2 is a prime PC example.

Check this out: http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/half-life-2/567433p1.html

Now, that is on a HDTV, but the same applies to monitors. You can obviously see it is better in a WS layout. You get more to see on the WS layout and there is no distortion.

 

[Sheep]

Depending on the GAME, one may be better than the other, but in general, moving foroward, you want a widescreen monitor for gaming. Period. Gaming is going toward widescreen layouts. Half-Life 2 is a prime PC example.

Check this out: http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/half-life-2/567433p1.html

Now, that is on a HDTV, but the same applies to monitors. You can obviously see it is better in a WS layout. You get more to see on the WS layout and there is no distortion.

Thats playing a 4:3 on a 16:9 and 16:9 on a 16:9 monitor. Obviously it will do better with the 16:9 format. Play a 4:3 picture on a 4:3 screen, and 16:9 on a 16:9 screen.

Also, not many people have 42inch computer monitors.

SheepStar

 

[Sheep]

You're being a luddite. The gaming world is moving (in fact, has moved) to widescreen gaming. Look at the Wii, PS3, and XBox 360. I play COD2 and Supreme Commander all the time in widescreen and it really is way better.

Movies are widescreen. High def games are widescreen. Widescreen is better because humans operate more efficiently horizontally than vertically. It's better for movies, and it's better for games.

Games have been Hi Def on PC for YEARS! And I don't consider consoles the best for gaming. There is ALWAYS better PCs out there.

I can go through all available resolustions for F.E.A.R. and we can see which are 4:3 and which are 16:9 if you like?

SheepStar

 

[mikeyj92]

Thats playing a 4:3 on a 16:9 and 16:9 on a 16:9 monitor. Obviously it will do better with the 16:9 format. Play a 4:3 picture on a 4:3 screen, and 16:9 on a 16:9 screen.

Also, not many people have 42inch computer monitors.

SheepStar

Well, of course. Why would you play a 4:3 on a 16:9 unless you had to? What we are saying is gaming is already at 16:9 with many many games and will only be moreso in the future. Why would you get a 4:3 for some current gaming when alot of current and most all of the future games will have a seemless 16:9 option to play in?

Just my 2 cents.

 

[jonnythan]

I can go through all available resolustions for F.E.A.R. and we can see which are 4:3 and which are 16:9 if you like?

SheepStar

I went from 4:3 F.E.A.R. on a 19" CRT in 1280x960 to 16:10 F.E.A.R. on a 20" widescreen LCD in 1680x1050.

I got a larger horizontal field of view and a vertical field of view that did not change.

Life is better widescreen. Just like widescreen is better for movies, it is better for games.

Or... perhaps you prefer to buy the Full Screen editions of DVDs so that you don't have to have a smaller picture for a given diagonal measurement.

 

[Wafflesomd]

At a recent LAN party we compared a 19inch widscreen LCD (LG L194WTX-BF) to my 19inch CRT (Hansol 920D), and there was no comparison. If you want a squashed picture and pretty much no overhead viewing, go widescreen. That upper realestate is priceless for gaming. The 4:3 has more surface area then its equivilent in 16:9, this is a fact. The only time widescreen monitors are useful is when they are 20.1inches or larger.

SheepStar

Consoles are even including widescreen capabilites.

And I don't think you are getting what I'm saying about size, there is literally no size lost with widescreen, you just using the pixels in different places. Same amount.

Say, you have 1024x768, move it to widescreen. You take away some from the vertical size, and add it to the horizontal size. Nothing is lost. IDK what you were looking at that was squashed at a LAN, because pretty much every game has the 16:9 and 16:10 ratios available to the user.

 

[jonnythan]

Let's make it simple.

Here is the amount of screen that is rendered in *any* 4:3 resolution:

Here is the amount of screen that is rendered in *any* 16:9 resolution:

This is really a no-brainer. You get to *see more* with a widescreen monitor. Get one large enough to suit your tastes (20.1" seems to satisfy most people) and you're golden.

 

[jonnythan]

Consoles are even including widescreen capabilites.

And I don't think you are getting what I'm saying about size, there is literally no size lost with widescreen, you just using the pixels in different places. Same amount.

Say, you have 1024x768, move it to widescreen. You take away some from the vertical size, and add it to the horizontal size. Nothing is lost. IDK what you were looking at that was squashed at a LAN, because pretty much every game has the 16:9 and 16:10 ratios available to the user.

Going from a 19" CRT to a 19" widescreen typically means you go from 1280x1024 to 1440x900. The number of pixels *and* physical surface area on the screen is almost identical.

Bump up from a 19" (18" viewable) CRT to a 20" widescreen means you get about 34% more pixels, 16% more physical surface area, and maintain the same screen height while making it over 2 inches wider.

 

[j_garcia]

Yep, I just don't see why this is even a discussion... Almost all recent PS2 and for sure all PS3 games and 360 games are all have a 16:9 mode. Most PC games support it also.

 

[jonnythan]

I'm thinking of replacing my existing monitor with the Viewsonic VG2021M 20.1" NON-wide LCD.

when computing the viewable area, the non-wide version is indeed bigger by 11.84 square inches than the wide version.

it's also cheaper, am I missing something here?

It's physically larger, but there are fewer pixels on the screen.

Both the widescreen you have and this Viewsonic have vertical resolutions of 1050 rows of pixels. The widescreen one has 1680 columns of pixels whereas the 4:3 one has 1400 columns of pixels.

So, things will be *larger* on the 4:3 monitor, but you will be able to fit less stuff. Vertically, you will be able to fit the same amount of web page or document on either monitor.

 

[Wafflesomd]

Johhny, the picture post is the best idea yet.

 

[jonnythan]

Going from a widescreen resolution to a 4:3 resolution literally chops the sides off the picture. You may make the remaining image larger or smaller, you may render what's left in higher or lower resolutions, but you have already chopped the parts of the image off. Your field of view is smaller with a 4:3 monitor.

OK my ranting is done.

 

[Sheep]

You're being a luddite. The gaming world is moving (in fact, has moved) to widescreen gaming. Look at the Wii, PS3, and XBox 360. I play COD2 and Supreme Commander all the time in widescreen and it really is way better.

Movies are widescreen. High def games are widescreen. Widescreen is better because humans operate more efficiently horizontally than vertically. It's better for movies, and it's better for games.

Games have been Hi Def for PC for YEARS! And I don't consider consoles the best for gaming. There is ALWAYS better PCs out there.

I can go through all available resolustions for F.E.A.R. and we can see which are 4:3 and which are 16:9 if you like?

SheepStar

 

[jonnythan]

OK, I'm confused. This is a duplicate of your last post.

 

[mikeyj92]

Games have been Hi Def for PC for YEARS! And I don't consider consoles the best for gaming. There is ALWAYS better PCs out there.

I can go through all available resolustions for F.E.A.R. and we can see which are 4:3 and which are 16:9 if you like?

SheepStar

Sheep. I'm really not following you here at all. I've gone back and read your posts here and am convinced you arent' getting what we are saying.

You told the man to buy a 4:3 monitor for gaming...

Widescreen is for movies, period. At friend of mine bought a Widescreen LCD and it blows for gaming.

4:3 man, 4:3.

SheepStar

When that is utterly NOT true. If games have the WS feature to them (which we are saying most do and nearly all future games of relevance will), why on earth would you choose to go play in 4:3 and get substantial portions of the screen "chopped off"?

4:3 is old hat and will be effectively obsolete for gaming very very very soon (it is already IMO) and is for movies already.

I'm beginning to think you may be drinking at the moment...

 

[Sheep]

Going from a 19" CRT to a 19" widescreen typically means you go from 1280x1024 to 1440x900. The number of pixels *and* physical surface area on the screen is almost identical.

Bump up from a 19" (18" viewable) CRT to a 20" widescreen means you get about 34% more pixels, 16% more physical surface area, and maintain the same screen height while making it over 2 inches wider.

If you run 1280 by 1024. I run 1600 by 1200. The image is only chopped when displayed on a 16:9 monitor(on a 4:3 resolution).

CS:S resolutions.

640 x 480
720 x 576
800 x 600
1024 x 768
1152 x 864
1280 x 960
1360 x 1024
1600 x 1200

Here's the resolutions for F.E.A.R.

640 x 480
720 x 480
848 x 480
720 x 576
800 x 600
1280 x 720
1024 x 768
1280 x 768
1360 x 768
1152 x 864
1440 x 900
1280 x 960
1280 x 1024
1360 x 1024
1600 x 1200

In the end, the largest resolution is 1600 x 1200, a 4:3 ratio. This may be because thats my monitors highest supported resolution.

If you're talking about pixels, 1440 x 900 has: 1,296,000. 1280 x 1024 has: 1,310,720. Even the "smaller" 4:3 ratio has more pixels, meaning it has a larger surface area. The fact is, Full screen gives you more over all picture, and you're not sitting far enough away to require the extra space on the sides. In gaming, height and width have equal importance.

SheepStar

 

[mikeyj92]

The fact is, Full screen gives you more over all picture, and you're not sitting far enough away to require the extra space on the sides. In gaming, height and width have equal importance.

SheepStar

No. The Full screens give you LARGER sized overall picture, but the widescreen resolution in fact give you MORE PICTURE of what you are looking at in-game.

Personally, I would much rather have a slightly smaller picture but see more of the "playing view". Comprende?

 

[jonnythan]

In the end, the largest resolution is 1600 x 1200, a 4:3 ratio. This may be because thats my monitors highest supported resolution.

F.E.A.R. natively supports resolutions of up to 2560x1600 (a 16:10 resolution) by editing a .cfg file. It natively supports 16:10 and 16:9 formats. 16:9 provides the same vertical field of view as 4:3 but gives a 33% larger horizontal field of view

Details here

The fact is, Full screen gives you more over all picture

4:3 gives you a *narrower* horizontal field of view. That's the "fact."

It doesn't matter what you think anyway, because games have already moved to widescreen. The entire industry has. Virtually all 3D games natively support multiple widescreen formats. All console games for the Wii, XBox 360, and Playstation 3 are natively widescreen.

I say thank god for that. Running, for example, F.E.A.R. or Call of Duty 2 in 4:3 mode puts you at a disadvantage in multiplayer gaming, because the people running the game in widescreen mode have significantly greater peripheral vision. This is a significant statement.

I honestly don't think you understand that widescreen format gives you the same vertical field of view, but increases your horizontal field of view.

 

[jonnythan]

No. The Full screens give you LARGER sized overall picture

Not necessarily.

A 22" widescreen will give you a larger *and* wider image than a 19" CRT, for instance.

A 20.1" widescreen monitor gives you an image that is the exact same height as a 19" CRT but significantly wider.

 

[Sheep]

Hold the phone. I've been discussing this with a friend of mine who is much more in tune with gaming and computers then I, and he had this to say(this is a summary in my words):

"It depends on the developers of the game. If the game is intended for console use, it would likely by in 16:9. However, 16:10 is actually a more comon PC LCD ratio. If the game wasn't planned for console, it would be better for the developer to make it using 16:10." (this is an opinion, however)

Also, alot of "fullscreen" LCDs for computer use 5:4, not 4:3. Seems PC's use different resolutions then the Home theater world. Widescreen LCD and Fullscreen are not quite the same.

He summed up his points by saying this.

"it wouldn't really factor into my buying descision if i were to get a widescreen monitor... which means that i would go for a 20" 16:10 any day of the week over a 16:9 19" "

SheepStar