Is 1366 x 768 OK for a Non-Gamer?

Hello everyone,

Wow, this is a fantastic site and forum. Everyone seems so helpful! So, I thought I'd post my question.

First of all, I love IBM ThinkPads. After several years of heavy use, my current one is experiencing some outlet socket problems. So, I decided to purchase another Thinkpad instead of trying to fix the socket problem.

One thing I could use your advice on, though. I'm looking at a ThinkPad 510 with a 15.6" WXGA HD screen. However, this model comes in a variety of resolutions, and I'm not very knowledgable about this aspect of computer buying.

I'm a freelance writer, so I spend quite a bit of my day looking at my computer screen. Eye strain and the ability to read text easily without squinting are primary concerns to me. I don't play any sort of games online.

Considering this, would a 1366 X 768 resolution be good for me? Would a 1600 x 900 resolution be better?

Any guidance anyone would give me would be appreciated, as the more I read about resolutions, the more confused I get. Thanks in advance for your help!

Regards,

Kevin

 

On a 15", 1366x768 is pretty low. I would go with 1600x900 minimum. Also if you're writing a lot, it allows you to have two side by side windows or view in book mode and see more text.

 

more pixels is better for just about anybody but people who have bad eyesight. allows you to fit much more stuff onto the screen, very useful for text heavy stuff.

768x1366 on a 15 inch screen is really low. Go for the 1600x900 if at all possible, there shouldn't be any squinting at 15 inches.

 

On a 15", you should have 1600x900. 1366x768 for writing means you can see far less of your document on the screen at once.

You can always turn up the font DPI if you need to. I'm running 1600x900 on a 14" screen this way, and very happy; my eyesight isn't perfect, either.

 

actually 1366x768 could be good for gamers too since they can use native res without as much of a performance drop

 

what was your last laptops resolution?

looking for advice here gives very biased answers because 90% of the users here think the higher resolution the better.

imo 1366 X 768 is perfectly fine for you. but if you want to be safe just order a 1600*900 and if you think the lettering is too small you can always make them bigger.

 

I don't think it's better every time, but I honestly wouldn't get a 15" laptop with less than a 1440x900 resolution. That resolution has largely been replaced by 1600x900 with the lone exception of the Macbook Pro.

Best resolution is dependent on screen size. I can't say I was happy with my 15" 1600x1200 Dell Latitude C840 when I had it, the resolution was just too high for the screen size. However, I think 1024x768 was too low of a resolution for that time period, and that 1280x1024 would have been the sweet spot.

 

1366x768 is worse than 1280x800. The DPI is the same but you lose 32 pixels of vertical space, and the extra width doesn't really do anything until you get into the 1600+ range where it starts helping with side-by-side windows.

Get 1600x900 at least. It's the ideal resolution for a 15.6" laptop at 118 pixels per inch. It makes things exactly the same size as on a 13.3" 1366x768 screen. You won't have eyestrain unless your vision is really bad.

Image quality will also be better on the 1600x900 display.

EDIT: and I assume you're looking at the T520? The T510 is the previous generation.

 

Right now I am on 1366x768 (x220) and I'm happy, two years ago I was on 2048x1156, two months ago I was on 1440x900. The truth is that most of the high resolution screen space is usually wasted. 1366x768 is plenty space if you use it to its max potential. Put taskbar on the side, use modern browser which minimizes unneeded vertical space waste (hiding the address bar in FF and Chrome is also good) etc. On the plus side, it will be easy for your eyes.

 

except 1366x768 is ideal for a 12.5" screen, not a 15.6" screen, because of the size of things.

With 1366x768 you have to do a lot more scrolling than with 1600x900, and no amount of taskbar hiding will give you as much space as you get with 1600x900.


The screen actually makes the biggest difference out of any upgrade. And being a writer, you won't need any performance upgrades, so the only upgrade that really matters (aside from add-ons such as the Webcam and the battery) would be the screen.

 

In my opinion, if you use tend to use one window at a time “single task”, 1366x768 is plenty enough and the text is naturally larger too.

If you use multiple apps simultaneously with windows side by side “multi task”, 1600x900 may be the better option. Remember that windows will allow you to scale up text if you find them to be too small.

In the workplace I tend to multi task with various apps and windows side by side on a 1920x1080 desktop screen. I find this crucial to work efficiently otherwise I find myself being slowed down too much. Time is money, this may matter to you too!

At home I tend to single task, using office or web or media, but mainly one dominant actively/window at a time, not like in workplace. My current main machine at home is a X220 with a 1366x768 resolution. I selected the ips screen to help reduce eye strain.

 

No, for a 15.6" screen 1366x768 is not enough, because of how big it makes things look. Even with one window, you still have to scroll, and 1600x900 makes a big difference when it comes to scrolling.

Your comment about eye strain is also wrong. 1366x768 in a 12.5" screen will actually cause more eye strain than 1600x900 in a 15.6" screen, because the density is still higher in a 12.5" 1366x768 screen (125 pixels per inch versus 118)

Like I said, 1366x768 is meant for screens 13.3" and under, not 15.6"

 

For real work and productively, I agree with you 1600x900 would be better.

For light office work and leisure I find that 1366x768 works for me. Sorry that I wasn’t clear, it’s the ips screen that helps to reduce eye strain and if for some reason the text is too small, I use the zoom function.

 

Well, for some people it's an advantage that everything is big. My girlfriend used to have 15.4" with 1280x800 and it was perfect for her. Everything was easily readable from longer distance which is quite useful if you primarily do something else (like studying, writing etc.) and use notebook as a secondary tool so it's a little bit more distant. This is not really so comfortable with my X220 and it's quite high PPI.

BTW, 1600x900 has 132 pixels more vertical space than 1366x768 which is 20% and not that much. If you have to scroll (probably web or other document) on this lower resolution you probably have to scroll on the higher too.

On the other hand, I'm not saying that higher resolution is useless, I'd certainly take 1600x900 in 15" laptop, I just think that it's not really "must have" for everybody.

 

But unless you have specific vision problems that make low-res better for you, there's no reason not to get the upgraded screen.

The upgraded screen still makes far more of a difference than any performance upgrade could.

And 132 pixels is a lot. It's more than the difference between 1920x1080 and the now-non-existent 1920x1200. And this ended up being a very big difference.

 

This. I run 1280x800 on my Dell Latitude and it's just fine for single tasking. However, for side by side windows (which is one of Windows 7's huge advantages), it's a major pain, and I definitely wish I had gone for 1440x900.

 

My W520's screen (HD+) is easily readable from 2.5 feet away, the distance that I usually keep my laptop at. I have pretty poor eyesight, too, and haven't gotten new glasses in 2 years. I would say that the 1600x900 screen can't hurt no matter what you intend to use it for (I opted out of the FHD screen because I find 141 DPI to be far too high).

 

I just wanted to thank every single one of you for taking the time to reply to my original post!

Your contributions have given me a lot to consider, and I appreciate the honest, direct answers. And thanks for explaining your thoughts in a manner that someone who's not very technically adept (like myself) could understand.

To the poster who asked about my current resolution, I can't recall exactly what it is. But, I do know it's fairly low for a 14" screen, and I can read the type on my screen just fine. However, the reason I made my post was because I was upgrading to a larger screen, and was confused about how a bigger screen would impact the resolution.

Again, thanks to each person who made a comment. This site is a great resource!