PDA

View Full Version : desktop resolution



ggs
01-28-2003, 05:48 PM
What desktop resolution do you use? Maybe multiple moniters too? It seems like 1024 x 768 is the new 640 x 480.

I just switched up to 1280 x 1100, and while it's strange at first, it's much better for dealing with more things (remarkable!~) Are you more comfortable with high resolutions or lower resolutions?

RoD
01-28-2003, 05:50 PM
My main monitor runs at 1280x1024x32 and my extended desktop, ie my second, runs at 1024x768x32. I run my dual monitor on a Radeon VE 32MB DDR card. Very nice.

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 05:52 PM
I run on 1024x840 while my monitor is capable of 1900x1600,
just because my eyes really hurt on high resolution because of
the high refresh rate and the smallness of text.
I'm not satisfied with anything lower then 100HZ.

RoD
01-28-2003, 05:56 PM
my pos 17inch monitor only goes up to 85hz so thats what i run. It only went to 75 with the voodoo in, now it does 80 *shrug*

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 05:58 PM
My monitor has 100HZ up to 1240x1024, but as i said its too small.

RoD
01-28-2003, 06:01 PM
alot of times i use it like this for daily, then i switch it to 800x600x16 for games, because for some reason they run faster and keep same detail (if not a lil better)

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 06:02 PM
For some games i use 640x480 in combination with FSAAx4.
640x480 feels soooo good to look at.

RoD
01-28-2003, 06:05 PM
lmao if your 50.

I always use AA at 4x (except for HL, i run it at 2 with a slight card overclock).

ggs
01-28-2003, 06:07 PM
640x480 looks better for games, I agree. I haven't decided whether to use this higher resolution for regular work or not yet..

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by RoD
I always use AA at 4x (except for HL, i run it at 2 with a slight card overclock).

You kidding? I always use x4 with Half Life because i get a huge
fps.

MethodMan
01-28-2003, 06:09 PM
Mine is set at 1024*768, 32bit.

I have had it like that for so long. It seems like the perfect setting, anything after that is just waaaaaaaay too small.

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 06:13 PM
Originally posted by MethodMan
It seems like the perfect setting, anything after that is just waaaaaaaay too small.

Me agreezor with yo'll

Hammer
01-28-2003, 06:14 PM
When I was running Win98, I had my monitor set to 1024*768 32bit, but since I upgraded to XP I've had it set to 1152*864. It seems to do well as this resolution :) (I'm talking general use here, btw, not gaming).

And yes, from what I've seen, most people have at least 1024*768. If they have less, it's only been because they didn't know they could change it. :rolleyes: (again, for general use, not gaming).

RoD
01-28-2003, 06:15 PM
Originally posted by Travis Dane
You kidding? I always use x4 with Half Life because i get a huge
fps.

i get the same fps on the DDR at x2 with a +10 clock speed as i do with normal clock at x4, but it runs faster than at x4. So i actually gain with 2 and a clock adjustment. With the voodoo i ran x4 with a max clock (i had big fans on it), and i swear i coulda done 120+ fps if HL supported it.

alpha
01-28-2003, 06:15 PM
1024x768 32bit. 96DPI, 60 Hz. I have had it this way for a while. 800x600 seems to big, others seem small.

Also, is it better to have a higher refresh rate? Could someone also give me a brief explanation of refresh rate? Thanks.

I have a Nvidia Vanta and it goes up to 85Hz.

edit: I also have a Sony Multiscan 200ES.

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 06:17 PM
Originally posted by RoD
and i swear i coulda done 120+ fps if HL supported it.

How'd you that you would've gotten 120 then?
Anyway i get +\- 500 FPS in half life

RoD
01-28-2003, 06:18 PM
i still remember my nvidia TNT2....i fried it haha.

Refresh rate is how quickly your screen updates (refreshes) itself. Thats a really general explanation, i'm sure trav will bring the book to you on it :P

RoD
01-28-2003, 06:19 PM
Half-life doens't go beyond 100FPS. 120 was a guess, the v5 kicked ass for its age.

Hammer
01-28-2003, 06:20 PM
>>Also, is it better to have a higher refresh rate?
Higher rates give less screen flicker. Some people can easily see the flicker on low rates.

Mines at 75hz, if I go lower I start to see flicker. I can't go higher, my system won't let me :rolleyes:

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 06:22 PM
Yes, Refresh Rate is the amount of times your monitor can
'refresh' the image on it. At 100 you won't even notice it does
however on lower refresh rates you'll start to notice it 'flickers'.
Your FPS can never exceed your refresh rate that is if you have
VSYNC (vertical synchronization) on. That is because the
monitor wont even be looking at draw buffer before it finished
drawing the current image to the screen. For example on 100
HZ it refreshes every 0,01 seconds, until the next 0,01 seconds
has eleapsed it won't look at the buffer at all. When its done
it will take the most recent input and draw that.

It gets more complicated but il save that from you;)

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 06:24 PM
Originally posted by RoD
Half-life doens't go beyond 100FPS

It does, the 'net_graph 1' command won't show any higher
then 100 though.

[edit]

As for the voodoo, every voodoo ruled the world for its time.

RoD
01-28-2003, 06:24 PM
is that why my fps increased when i disabled vsync? that option actually caused problems with my V5.

RoD
01-28-2003, 06:25 PM
Originally posted by Travis Dane
It does, the 'net_graph 1' command won't show any higher
then 100 though.

so how do you know what your hitting?

i use cl_showfps but net_graph 3 works

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 06:26 PM
Originally posted by RoD
is that why my fps increased when i disabled vsync? that option actually caused problems with my V5.

Turning off VSYNC results in 'tearing', that is if the monitor
start drawing the draw buffer while it isn't finished writing
the entire image to the buffer yet, resulting in little horizontal
distortions.

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 06:27 PM
Originally posted by RoD
so how do you know what your hitting?

Golden tip of the month:

Try typing 'timerefresh' in the console to get your FPS
even if it's higher than your Refresh Rate.

RoD
01-28-2003, 06:29 PM
interesting, considering i'm averaging 42-57 with the radeon i don't think i need too. When i first got the radeon (before i installed readeon tweaker) i was hitting 79 no sweat. I want to find some proven strong mods for it, i'm still on my crappy p3 machine tho.

Ordering my case tommorow afternoon :D

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 06:32 PM
Originally posted by RoD
I want to find some proven strong mods for it

Come again?

RoD
01-28-2003, 06:37 PM
mods like tweakers/programs/tricks to increase its gaming power/performance. I hate useing un-proven stuff that could damage my card though.

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 06:38 PM
'Preventing is better then solving' , Some One

Those program are for people that are lazy and are ****ing
up theyre register with garbage and let program (partially)
cleaning it up again.

I never touched any of those program, but then again i keep
my pc clean at all times.

RoD
01-28-2003, 06:40 PM
i'm using one now, runs nice and smooth, was a lil jerky before. I used a few with my V5, good results.

btw, do you ever check icq dude lol

Travis Dane
01-28-2003, 06:41 PM
Originally posted by RoD
btw, do you ever check icq dude lol

Done.

Shadow
01-28-2003, 06:44 PM
windows work = 17 inch pc monitor @ 1024x768
pc gaming = 19 inch video monitor @ highest reso
emulators = 19 inch video monitor @ 640x480 *

GeForce 4 with s-video out on XP

*
MK2 (http://www.mame.dk/gameinfo/mk2/)

screen type: raster
screen orientation: horizontal
screen aspect: 4 x 3
resolution x: 400 pixels
resolution y: 254 pixels
colors used: 32768
video frequency: 53.20 HzNot even 640, not even 60hz. You'll see plenty of that.

Dissata
01-28-2003, 08:19 PM
I keep my laptop at 1400 x 1050 x 16

seems to work fine for me

Waldo2k2
01-28-2003, 08:55 PM
1024x768

I tried multiple monitors for a while, but that was on win9x and that monitor burnt out...so it wasn't worthwhile and now i can't use it anyway...so i use the multiple virtual desktop manager from microsoft on my xp box.

TravisS
01-28-2003, 10:29 PM
1152x768x32 @ 75 Hz on two 17 inch monitors.

1152x768 seems to be the perfect res. on XP for me. With ME I had 1024x768, but that just seems to big on XP.

Panopticon
01-28-2003, 10:52 PM
Damn your 1337 machines makin me jealous:mad:
1024x768.. dunno about refresh rate. just left it as 'optimal' cos for some reason if i max it out it hurts my eyes. :confused: wtf lol.

Yoshi
01-28-2003, 10:53 PM
1280x1024 and 1024x768

Fredd
01-29-2003, 09:57 AM
I use 1024x768 would like to go higher though, alot higher, but after 1024x768 the refresh rates are really bad.
Have to get a new monitor sometime :(

ober
01-29-2003, 10:13 AM
work - 1280x1024x24 on 17 inch monitor...
home - 1280x1024x32 on 19 inch monitor
gaming... usually 1168x1024x32

Geforce 4 Ti4200 128mb card w/ digital out...