The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    screen resolution...

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by hatcher, May 8, 2011.

  1. hatcher

    hatcher Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    24
    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    31
    ...specifically 1920x1080 vs 1600x900 as it applies to a 17.3" screen, i don't have the luxury of comparing the two side by side, is it solely just a matter of personal preference? is one more advantageous than the other given the 17.3" screen size? are the differences inconsequential? what are the pros/cons, if any, of the two? thanks.
     
    hatcher, May 8, 2011
    #1
  2. Lithus

    Lithus NBR Janitor

    Reputations:
    5,504
    Messages:
    9,788
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    205
    For anything larger than 17", it's hard to argue against 1080. More screen room, and text will still easily be readable.
     
    Lithus, May 8, 2011
    #2
  3. LaptopNut

    LaptopNut Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    1,610
    Messages:
    3,745
    Likes Received:
    92
    Trophy Points:
    116
    Some games perform much better at 1600 x 900 while others show no performance differences. That only matters if you really notice the lack of definition and blur that can be caused by not playing games at native resolution. I would always go for 1920x1080 paired with a powerful GPU with a 17'' screen though.
     
    LaptopNut, May 8, 2011
    #3
  4. edit1754

    edit1754 Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    1,475
    Messages:
    5,145
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    216
    1920x1080 lets you fit two near-full-width (1024 pixels) windows next to each other, but it's a bit harder to do that on 1600x900.

    It's not like 1600x900 is a bad resolution (it's great in 15.6"), but 1920x1080 gives you so much more screen space, and on a 17.3" display I personally find 1600x900 to be pushing the limits of how large I would tolerate the items on my screen to be.

    You can use this page to help figure out the difference: Display Preview
     
    edit1754, May 8, 2011
    #4
  5. ViciousXUSMC

    ViciousXUSMC Master Viking NBR Reviewer

    Reputations:
    11,461
    Messages:
    16,824
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    466
    Id find it hard to agree with the "much better" performance between those two choices.

    In most games I expect it to be very minor and probably not even noticeable. Even if it was to hold true you can always just set the game resolution lower and it will scale up to fit the panel and still look almost the same as if it was running 1600x900 native.

    I cant find any reason to settle for a lower resolution screen on a 17" also dont forget all the native 1080p content out there these days like movies and youtube videos.
     
    ViciousXUSMC, May 8, 2011
    #5
  6. LaptopNut

    LaptopNut Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    1,610
    Messages:
    3,745
    Likes Received:
    92
    Trophy Points:
    116
    That's why I mentioned how in some games there is no performance difference at all. I would also suggest going with the 1080p but some benchmarks did show quite an improvement in performance in some games so it is worth considering. With regards to the resolution, that also comes down to how much you notice and the quality of the panel. I barely notice it when I am playing at non native but some may.
     
    LaptopNut, May 8, 2011
    #6