22 inch widescreen monitor question

[degeneration]

I'm toying with getting myself a 22 inch lcd monitor to replace my crt one.

The one I'm looking at is full hd resolution, but looking at the resolution settings on my graphics card, the only one that is in a similar ratio to 1920x1080 is 1600x900. As this I'm guessing is not the optimal resolution for the monitor and I've read that if you use lcd monitors at a resolution other than their optimal one, they can give some very disappointing results - jagged text etc.

So basically what I want to know is, will 1600x900 be ok as it is the same ratio?
Am I wasting my time getting a monitor with this resolution since my graphics card currently does not support it?


edit in: are the resolution settings available ones that the card knows my monitor can display, so if I get this new monitor and install its drivers, I will get different settings available?

[bradavon]

edit in: are the resolution settings available ones that the card knows my monitor can display, so if I get this new monitor and install its drivers, I will get different settings available?

Yes. You always want to display an LCD/TFT monitor at it's native resolution. Try and find out the maximum resolution of your graphics card. Does it support HD?

I know some prefer them but personally I cannot stand anything CRT. I'd never go back now.

It's often much higher than the monitor can support. My laptop's display goes up to 1280x800 but I've got it plugged into a monitor that goes up to 1440x900 and my graphics card supports it fine. I don't know what the maximum resolution is but the graphics card support higher than the laptop's display. It's a laptop graphics card too.

If Windows is configured correctly (and it usually is), you can only see what resolutions/refresh rates both your monitor and graphics card supports.

[degeneration]

Cheers. Been reading up a bit more and think I'm beginning to understand it all!!

I've got a GeForce 7300 LE graphics card, and I think it can support 1920x1080.

Opting for the LG e2240t LED monitor. Costing me £20 more than the non LED 22" one I was going to get, but figure, the amount I use my computer it should save me that £20 in electricity bills over the next few years.

[bradavon]

Isn't LED supposed to be better too? Definitely £20 is nothing really. It says it supports 1080 here:

http://www.nvidia.co.uk/page/7300_features.html

It doesn't say it does outright but the wording must mean it supports 1080p. You definitely only want to be using the native resolution of the monitor (except in games obviously). It always looks a mess displaying an LCD monitor in a non-native resolution. Loads of people do it but it always looks wrong.

[degeneration]

My concern over whether it supports 1920x1080 is in these paragraphs:

Dual-Link DVI Support
Able to drive the industry's largest and highest resolution flat-panel displays up to 2560x1600. Feature on GeForce 7300 GT GPUs only.

Single-Link DVI Support
Able to drive the industry’s largest and highest resolution flat-panel displays up to and including 1900x1200. May vary by model.

I've got the LE model, so the first statement doesn't apply as it is for the GT models. The 2nd one doesn't specify which models it actually applies to!!

The DVI-I socket on the card appears to be dual link, as all the pin holes are there.

I've also read other people apparently stating they've got an LE and they are running at HD resolutions.

Guess I'll find out tomorrow assuming the monitor arrives!

[bradavon]

1900x1200 is very close to 1920x1080. 1900x1200 is an odd resolution.

[IronMonkey]

1920x1200 isn't an odd resolution, its the 16:10 version of 1920x1080. Its a standard these days.

[bradavon]

That's exactly what I thought at first but that says 1900 not 1920. Typo I guess. When it comes to monitors I prefer 16:10. Dell laptops are all 16:9 now and they look too wide. The extra space at the top/bottom really helps for computer use.

[degeneration]

Well worry over... partially.

I'v got the LOVELY monitor set up now over the standard analogue d-sub connection, and it is displaying 1920x1080 no with problems.

I have a dvi-d cable on order, but I have read somewhere that the card may have a different max analogue and digital resolutions, with digital being the lower.

So hopefully once that cable is in, it will still work at full res. It is a nice monitor. LG e2240t. The LG w2250v (i think it is) is the one I actually saw at novatech and it looked even nicer.

But so far, I'm well pleased.

[bradavon]

Was it too expensive? So you got the other model.

[degeneration]

Yeah, the one I've got cost £120, but the one up that I saw in novatech was something like £150. Couldn't justify the extra £30 to get the nicer surround to the display and an hdmi socket on the back that I won't use!

Am really liking it so far, but in some ways I'm wishing I'd gone bigger!!! Couldn't afford bigger, but doesn't stop me wishing!

Got the dvi-d connection in now and it displays 1920x1080 absolutely fine. In all honesty I can't see a bit of difference between the analogue and digital connection. Maybe if I was a gamer the difference would be more obvious...

[IronMonkey]

You must have had a damn good VGA cable then! I can tell the difference instantly. DVI images are a lot sharper, and don't suffer from ghosting & colour bleed.

[romerojpg]

Just use your TV, its the best way well as long as you dont use a 22 inch tube screen

[degeneration]

My VGA cable was the out of the monitor's box one. Didn't notice any colour bleed, lack of sharpness or ghosting with it.

Can't use my TV. It's in a different room!!!

[bradavon]

My TV is about 1.5m from my laptop. I've still got a monitor plugged in it. I'd like a 22" monitor but 32" is way to big for me.

[degeneration]

I thought 22" was going to be quite big going from a 16" not widescreen crt... but it isn't! Doesn't seem too big at all! For my current desk space, about 26" would have been the max that would have worked for me. But the less depth that this thing takes up is a big bonus too, as I've freed up a lot of desk space to work at now.

[oldeschool17]

I hate researching on electronics because it always seems to be a mixed bag, skewed ratings, and people reviewing immediately after purchase(not further down the road where problems can arise).

With that said, I have my eye out for the Samsung HD line that have HDMI inputs and built in TV tuner(+PIP). Gonna wait till the holidays for the price drop and for more product reviews.

For those that have widescreen monitors, what brand do you have and how is it working out for you?

[IronMonkey]

I've had a Samsung 22" 16:10 (1680x1050) for the past 3 years and haven't had a single problem with it. At work we sell LG monitors (both LCD & LED) and they are excellent. When I upgrade (probably to a 24"), I think I'll go 16:9 and 1920x1080. I'm getting a GTX 460 1GB graphics card in the next few days so that will be able to handle games at high resolution perfectly...

[bradavon]

Is LED much better to LCD?

[IronMonkey]

The image quality is better but not by a massive amount. Blacks are better and images don't seem as washed out. LED monitors are only LCD screens with LED backlights though, so they're not the great leap forward in technology that the marketing folks would like you to believe.

[gasteropod]

Yeah it's mainly about improved contrast.

[bradavon]

Thanks. Aren't they much more expensive?

[IronMonkey]

Na, not a lot more. I work for a major UK distributer of LG monitors, and the price difference between LCD & LED is becoming negligable.