Originally posted by Dukenukemx
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
25-Way Open-Source Linux Graphics Card Comparison
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by macemoneta View PostDo you have a smartphone?
4K TVs are starting to be used as monitors, and with 39" 4K TVs available as low as $400, they are relevant.
http://dissociatedpress.net/brief-re...-39-tvmonitor/
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dukenukemx View PostAm I the only one who doesn't see value of resolutions past 720P, let alone 1080P? What I really don't understand is 1600P, which is just barely above 1080P.
Comment
-
Originally posted by zanny View PostHigher pixel density actually has an added bonus not many people consider - once the pixels are small enough, you don't have to perform expensive font antialiasing or alignment to subpixels, and your games don't need AA either. Having to output to much larger screens has more performance overhead than AA on its own, but you get all the benefits of higher clarity and resolution and also get to reduce your AA effects. I think it is almost always a win - 4k is probably the first time you could use no AA in most games given good pixel density (25 - 30" panels) and not see any jagged edges.
Comment
-
Originally posted by macemoneta View PostAt this point, I'd like to see 4K performance comparisons and sound level dBm measurements added to the benchmarks for video cards.
Now multimonitor scaling would be more interesting. If purely gaming this is a much better setup then a 16x9 monitor, even if it's 4k. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyQoFPO8RyA
Comment
-
Originally posted by Calinou View PostThis is wrong. You always need AA.
resolutions (that is, lower resolutions that they are not multiples of), but there is much more to anti-aliasing than compensating for pixel alignment issues. (Icidentally, it's not that pixel alignment issues don't actually exist with high pixel density displays, it's just that if the densities are high enough the alignment issues are not noticeable.)Last edited by CFWhitman; 27 January 2014, 12:23 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dukenukemx View PostAm I the only one who doesn't see value of resolutions past 720P, let alone 1080P? What I really don't understand is 1600P, which is just barely above 1080P. Graphic cards have gotten so powerful that the only way to stress them is to just turn up the resolutions. My monitor maxes out at 1680X1050 resolution, but most games I run at 1368X768. My 5-6 year old monitor that still works just fine today.
For a 13" laptop screen, 1366x768 is acceptable. Anything larger than that should be higher resolution if you want to get work done.
For games, it's a different story... depending on the game, and also depending on whether you're using AA.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Veerappan View PostI think that you're one of the few who at least sees it that way for desktop usage. I've got dual 23" 1080p screens at work, and a 1920x1200 24" at home. In both cases, I wish I had more vertical resolution to put code on. Dual 1600p screens might finally get me into a situation that I am happy with at work.
For a 13" laptop screen, 1366x768 is acceptable. Anything larger than that should be higher resolution if you want to get work done.
For games, it's a different story... depending on the game, and also depending on whether you're using AA.
You can now get a 5.5" cellphone screen with a 2560x1440 534.04 DPI res screen. If regular screens kept pace with cellphones then anything less then a 15" 301.89 DPI 3840x2400 WQUXGA would be considered old garbage.
Why you can't get a screen with a DPI anywhere even close to that on a desktop or laptop is an incomprehensible mystery to me.
Comment
Comment