Hey guys!
I've had the M11X R2 for a week now, and was running games at 1366x786. I thought that was the resolution to go. Then as I was playing Far Cry 2 and tried 1360x786, and then I was able to run it on high/very high with 30fps. With 1366x786 I would get 15-20 fps here. Then I tried about 5 other games: Was able to play bulletstorm with all on high, before I had to put all on low. Man I was happy when I found out about that resolution change. Just wondering why this is the case?
I love my M11x even more now. I bet every other M11X owner knew about this, I am still learning hehe.![]()
-
I have seen this effect too and I really don't know the answer accept the fact that its 6 pixels less...I'd like to know more to the answer if there is more as well
-
It could be because it's 1360 and 768 are cleanly divisible by 16 (or was it 8), but no proof and no idea.
Like this: http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=3896143&postcount=10 -
I tested this in Dirt 2 and I got the exact same amount of fps in the game
-
-
Bulletstorm with 1366x786 on the left and 1360x786 on the right. All settings are high. Can anyone with bulletstorm also try compare this?
Attached Files:
-
-
wow didnt realise it has that much effect :O
any1 have any idea why this difference is so big? -
though lowering the res to 720p should do better than 1360x768.
-
Maybe with 1366 you were just above a bottleneck point or something. That's really the only thing I could think of that would show such a ridiculous difference.
What was bottlenecking? Well I haven't a clue. Your pagefile, perhaps, maybe it was just at the point where Windows decided to dump a few things to your HDD, and fetching those back cost you those frames. Again, purely guesswork. -
zero diff in DoWII and metro2033 after testing. Must be something peculiar with bulletstorm.
-
After restarting the machine I no longer see any difference in Far Cry 2, only see difference in Bulletstorm. Maybe it's only like a handfull of games that benefit from 1360x786 or something.
-
I'm guessing here, as I haven't looked into it, but it could be the best alignment to a 16:9 screen.
WXGA (1280×768) Wide eXtended Graphics Array
1280×720 Monitors, older LCD TVs 16:9
1280×768 Monitors 15:9 (5:3)
1280×800 Monitors 16:10 (8:5)
1360×768 LCD TVs 16:9 (approx.)
1366×768 LCD and PDP TVs and monitors 16:9 (approx.)
[extract from WiKi]
1280×720 provides perfectly square pixels at an aspect ratio of 16:9, while the additional pixels in 1280×768 and 1280×800 must be ignored to give the 16:9 ratio without vertical stretching of the image. 1360×768 and 1366×768 come very close to 16:9, displaying exactly square pixels if 1360×765 pixels of the display are used.
[/extract]
Some HD and Full-HD TVs have over-scan which need to be turned off to give a good PC -> HDTV match. -
-
Interesting. I can't completely test it, but this small fix seemed to make the keyboard respond faster in IE9 when I have both FFXI and IE9 open. It used to take several additional seconds to respond to a forum like this one.
-
Is there any reason why alienware went with the 1366 by 768 res instead of the usual 1360 by 768?
-
1366x768 is the usual...
-
idk if that makes sense at all... -
Never heard about this before? Games pre-load resolutions?
-
i use 1280×720 since it's a small screen anyway, wont notice much change unless i plug it on external. Plus it gives a huge boost in performance and i can turn on higher quality.
Why does it run so much better on 1360x768?
Discussion in 'Alienware M11x' started by kidio007, Mar 24, 2011.