Would a 1920x1080 26.8cm x 47.6cm monitor be aqny good for gaming?

Forums › Gaming › Would a 1920x1080 26.8cm x 47.6cm monitor be aqny good for gaming?

G4m3r

77 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4

#32508 18-Apr-2009 18:00

Hi
I saw this LCD widescreen monitor for sale and want to know why the price is so low for this resolution (1920x1080).
Could anyone tell me if if would be good for gaming?
BenQ T2200HD 21.5" full HD

Thanks

xpd

Geek of Coastguard
14193 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4659

Retired Mod

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#207885 19-Apr-2009 09:02

According to this mini-review( http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies-archive.cfm/1067469.html) theyre fine... long as a monitor can support the resolutions your video card outputs and has a low refresh (8ms or less) then youre generally safe for gaming.

XPD / Gavin

LinkTree

Ragnor

8287 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 591

Trusted

#207945 19-Apr-2009 16:22

One thing to remember is that it takes a more powerful video card to play modern games smoothly at 1920x1080 than at lower resolutions like 1680x1050, 1280x1024.

Also you need to bear in mind that 1920x1080 is a 16:9 ratio, conventional widescreen monitors are 16:10. Not all games (especially olders ones) support widescreen that well.

What games do you play? What are the spec's of your machine (cpu, video card)?

Check out these two sites, they have reviews of games and monitors with regard to widescreen gaming:
http://www.widescreengaming.net/
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com

For example here's fallout 3's breakdown on both sites:
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php/Fallout_3
http://www.widescreengaming.net/wiki/Fallout_3

Adamal

544 posts

Ultimate Geek

#207951 19-Apr-2009 16:42

By 2010, most makers are looking to move away from 16:10 to 16:9 instead. Reason being that from a 'sheet' of LCD (Think CPU waffer), they can yeild more monitors if they cut it to 16:9.

Also, 1920x1080 on a 22" is quite small by conventional standards. Most 22" Monitors that are 16:10 are 1680x1050.

Comparitivly speaking, if you put the two monitors next to each other, you'd find the pixels a LOT smaller on the 1920x1080 monitor.

Ragnor

8287 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 591

Trusted

#207957 19-Apr-2009 16:49

Yes I agree my personal preference is that if you want 1920 pixels wide you should really go for a 24" not a 22", text will be very small (relatively) on a 22". Some people don't mind 1920 wide on a 22" though, it's personal preference. I would advise you go check out the monitor at a local computer store where they have it setup and running.

G4m3r

77 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4

#207985 19-Apr-2009 19:20

Hi
My computer specs are:
CPU= Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 3GHz
Graphics card= ATI 4870 1gb

As for the games I play mostly FPS but also some flying and racing games
I will try to get to a shop to have a look at the monitor but I don't think any of the local computer shops will have one but I will see.

Adamal

544 posts

Ultimate Geek

#208016 19-Apr-2009 20:56

I've got the same CPU and vid as you. I found that when I tested some stuff out on my mates 24" 1920x1080 monitor, the FPS was pretty much the same as my 22" 1680x1050.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

JimmyLizar

321 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 1

#208034 19-Apr-2009 22:17

Adamal: I've got the same CPU and vid as you. I found that when I tested some stuff out on my mates 24" 1920x1080 monitor, the FPS was pretty much the same as my 22" 1680x1050.

Sorry, just semantics but wouldnt the 24" be 1920x1200?

.....c'mon sucker lick my battery........
binary solo...0000110000110000111...

Ragnor

8287 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 591

Trusted

#208040 19-Apr-2009 22:52

JimmyLizar:
Adamal: I've got the same CPU and vid as you. I found that when I tested some stuff out on my mates 24" 1920x1080 monitor, the FPS was pretty much the same as my 22" 1680x1050.

Sorry, just semantics but wouldnt the 24" be 1920x1200?

24" LCD's that are 16:9 instead of 16:10 are becoming more and more common.

richms

29251 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10359

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#208260 20-Apr-2009 23:44

I would like 1920 on something smaller like a 19 - quite usable on a laptop with a 17, and the casual use I had of a laptop with a 15 at that res was also very usable. Just on my desk I have to have a massive thing just to fit in all that I want on screen.

Richard rich.ms

Adamal

544 posts

Ultimate Geek

#208267 21-Apr-2009 00:56

JimmyLizar:
Adamal: I've got the same CPU and vid as you. I found that when I tested some stuff out on my mates 24" 1920x1080 monitor, the FPS was pretty much the same as my 22" 1680x1050.

Sorry, just semantics but wouldnt the 24" be 1920x1200?

Sorry, you're right. Thats what his res is.

Ragnor is also right. Thats what the standard will probably be next year

garvani

1873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 83

Trusted

#208283 21-Apr-2009 09:06

I own a 22" 1920x1080 viewsonic so i can comment on this with some authority, not maybes. Its great for gaming! Text is fine unless you have borked eyes, its fine for me when browsing websites etc. I considered going for a 24" but couldnt justify the extra $150 for 2" of screen real estate, especially when i can drag any window to my extended desktop (aka 42" samsung). Gaming is great, i dont have the worlds best graphics card but can play every game ive tried at 1920x1080, and i haven't come across a game yet that hasn't supported that resolution.
I was thinking about the same benq screen but couldnt find one locally (and we arn't a benq dealer) so i went with the viewsonic, its awesome and i dont beleive it costed much more than the benq.