A higher resolution will produce smaller fonts and more on opened websites. You can use some software to enlarge text if you find the text too small to read comfortably. That also gives you the option to see far more information displayed at any given time than could fit on a lower screen resolution. In a situation like this, you might rightly wonder which is better suited for you or how big the resolution difference could be. However, there are still distinct disadvantages to opting for a higher resolution with lower power.
This is a significant factor and many do not weigh it carefully enough in their selection. Higher-resolution screens can be very hard on GPUs.
This may negatively impact how the game looks. Then comes the issue of frames per second, since many especially online games need a high FPS to play right. You might think, in theory, that the framerate would suffer by half. In some cases, you might not be able to run a game at all, since it becomes too much for your GPU to handle. If you have a game running at too high a resolution, you have the option to enable anti-aliasing for better performance.
You can safely get the highest resolution available to you without much worry about performance or image quality. Higher resolutions create less clutter so that players can see more of the game with a clearer user interface. Lower resolutions put less pressure on your graphics card, letting games run at higher frame rates in exchange for some image quality. Viewed k times. Improve this question. Community Bot 1. Certainly not nearly as much so as x's Random It's not like is that weird.
The integer ratio that you're fixated on isn't significant in any way. Expressed as a decimal, it's 1. I suppose you've never heard of x, with ratio or, approximately if you will? Add a comment. Active Oldest Votes. Improve this answer. It also makes it easy to pillarbox applications designed to run well at x How is this the closest they could get?
Kaiserludi Odd numbers are really flaky to deal with. Kaiserludi In this case, you would want to go slightly above , not slightly below. With pixels, you would have to cut off the left or right margin of a wide-screen movie, or you would have to scale it vertically to pixels.
MarcksThomas That's neglecting every single other aspect besides the frame buffer, which for a bit depth would round up anyway. Show 3 more comments. WXGA generally used 24 bits color stored in 32 bits so you'd need a 64 Mbit chip instead of a 32 bit chip, but the logic still applies.
I had the same question in the , because my computer doesn't supported my default tv resolution x and I found this: WHY does x exist? Thank you for the advice. Unfortunately, I can't go responsive since this is a graphing app that must retain its fixed size. But you make a good point about trying to avoid shrinking it down too much if I don't have to. I am losing a lot of real estate by going down to x I guess I could go for x and still be okay -- I should be able to cover most current laptops.
Thanks again! Just pointing out that screen resolution stats aren't directly related to preferred browser viewport sizes. Show 5 more comments. Oh that makes sense. As well as x but including x which are other variants of WXGA per that wikipedia article. Yes, but neither of those could be produced in existing fabs, short-term. Yeah, I suspected as such, these being older less commonly used resolutions. So WXGA resolutions are not being produced anymore?
I'd stick with "less common" over "not being produced. Show 1 more comment. I hear the economics, and the history. But how about the mathematical reason for x ? Microsoft on x The resolution that supports all the features of Windows 8, including multitasking with snap, is x The reason is Windows 8 - plus 'snap' From Scaling to different screens. Steven Steven 1 1 silver badge 5 5 bronze badges. Sign up or log in Sign up using Google. Sign up using Facebook.
Sign up using Email and Password. Post as a guest Name. Email Required, but never shown. The Overflow Blog. Does ES6 make JavaScript frameworks obsolete? Slow Pri Respectable. Feb 29, 0 2, So you'd have a huge different if your looking at pixels.
Obviously if your pushing video games on a smaller resolution you'll get higher FPS Usually , but knowing most computers and customers configurations P is more of a standard.
A little insight: I owned a HP W Monitor it had x, mind you was amazing at the time 7years ago I used to think it was the latest and greatest until full HD p came out. Regardless if your thinking about upgrading, I'd say without a doubt get your hands on at least a p really cheap nowadays.
Jan 7, 76 0 18, 9. Physical size of the monitor measured corner to corner, resolution is the amount of pixels on the screen. Depending on the task, performance will be affected. As you can see p is almost twice as many pixels as p, using your desktop at p won't impact your pc performance in a noticeable way. Games on the other side will require more processing power. You must log in or register to reply here. Tried multiple different troubleshoots on GPU driver. Not sure if GPU itself is the issue?
Graphics Cards 1 Sep 20, Question What is the difference between bit and bit and does the RTX have a bit version? What is the secret combination of the driver installs?
Graphics Cards 1 Sep 10, Question What is the difference between bit and bit and does the RTX have a bit version? Question Two different GPU's. Question Difference between factory overclocked GPUs and stock ones?
0コメント