m15x 1920x1200 or 1440x900 Which one? X.x

Yesh, I know this is another thread about this subject, but from the ones I've read I just can't get a solid answer on what to choose.

I will be gaming mostly on my m15x, I'm planning to order it in a month or two when i rake up enough money for it, the specs I want to get are:

2.5 ghz 6MB Cache CPU
512 Nvidia 8800M GTX
XP Professional
4GB RAM
250 GB HardDrive
Normal Burner/Reader
Illuminated Keyboard

I'm debating the screen size for 3 reasons:

1: The games I mostly play atm are older like Oblivion, All CODs (including 4), Half Life 2, CSS, Americas Army, Serious Sam (all 3) Medal Of Honor Series. ALOT of fps's. And from what I've read on the 1920x1200 they'll all run great on high preformance, and if I got the lower res I would be losing some graphics detail (I think, please confirm)

2: I most likely will want to get some new (new for me) games like Bioshock, Assasins Creed, and Crysis and I've heard that especially Crysis might have problems running on on the higher resolution, so I would have to lower the resolution resulting in loss of quality due to the fact that it's not the native resolution?

3: At the moment getting the 1440x900 would delay shipping by 2 weeks, I'm not a very patient person and want this laptop asap. So would it be worth the 2 week wait and saving $160?

So I would like to hear your opinions and experiences on these reasons,

Thanks a bunch. =]

 

i went for the 1440x900
if your using photoshop or such like then the 1920x1200 would be better but for gaming and general use then the 900 is the one to go for.

 

Hi jamroxorz,
Keep in mind that most games are going to run better at a lower resolution. Although you're going to see less graphical detail by getting a lower resolution screen, you may have not been able to run it higher in the first place. I, for one, have never been able to run anything in 1920 x 1200 decently. The reason I went the the 1920 x 1200 screen is because I like to see the bigger picture when it comes to media applications and DVD movies. However, if gaming is a bigger concern than media, you'll probably be perfectly happy with the 1440 x 900.

But, this is an Alienware we're talking about here. What's another $160 lol

Gabe

 

If they're older games then there might not BE graphic detail to lose at the lower resolution.

It's lowER, it's not LOW

 

Get the 1440, Crysis will struggle even at that res depending on detail settings.

Just to give you an idea:

my computer with GTX280 OC, QX9650 4.0GHZ with 8GB DDR3 can only play crysis at 1920x1200 at around 20-25fps at very high settings

 

I have the m9750 at 1920X1200 and love it, but I really can't see that resolution being very good on a 15" because I think it is already small enough on a 17"....

Just my $0.02.

 

the key word being "only"

on my m15x, i can run all high with 2xAA just below playable (like 20-24fps), with the CCC mod, i can run level 4 with no AA barely playable (22-28fps).

 

1920x1200 is just tiny, period. It's a relative preference with every individual, but personally I've always found it too small on my 17" notebooks and wouldn't even consider it for my m15x. I went with 1440x900 for the simple fact that it's a more comfortable resolution for the screen, and it also gives longer gaming life since the gpu doesn't have to work as hard in those resolutions. If you are concerned with real estate, just buy an external LCD with 1920x1200. Then you have the best of both worlds. That's actually my current setup. I use my m15x and have the display spread over my 24" 1920x1200. I move apps and windows to either monitor depending on what I'm doing. I generally surf the web and do excel stuff on the external and do all my desktop management, minor apps, gaming on my m15x display.

 

Hmm, from what it looks like, the best option for gamign would be to get the 1440x900 I guess...

I have a question though, lets say I did get the 1920 and was playing a game like crysis, or COD4 and lowered the Resolution to 1440x900, is the difference noticable? Does it look bad?

 

Yes, interpolation and pixel scaling decreases image clarity and sharpness. This bugs some people more than others. I personally can't stand it which is why I always game in native resolution. It always looks best at native res, but if you don't care as much about image quality, you can certainly game at lower resolutions.

 

okays =] Thanks a lot everyone for answering my question, I'll be taking the 1440x900, looks like it's worth the wait on my m15x when I get around to buying it, can't wait =P

BTW this thread is still open to anyone that has comments or opinions, I'll still look at them, thanks again!

 

You're welcome. Have fun with your m15x whenever you actually get it.

 

the 1440 x 900 screen is brighter, lighter, consumes less energy, has a better contrast ratio. it is also glossy which makes the colors more vibrant. you will also get better fps since the native resolution is lower.

the 1920 x 1200 is matte. the only reason you would go for this is because you like matte over glossy and you need the extra space for photoshop. since this screen is WUXGA i dont think alot of games support that type of resolution yet.

 

correct me if i am wrong, but by your own statement when you utilize two screens, or even one external at the 1920x1200 rez, are you not asking the GPU to work hard to provide the resolution then?

 

he said he games with the m15x screen so the gpu isnt working as hard. he only uses the 1920 x 1200 to surf web and media. that basically means the gpu is idle. when the gpu is idle the temps are pretty ok. mine is around 55 idle with stealth mode on.

 

assuming he is utilizing the intigrated GPU vice the nVidia one.
but i can see from your additional posting where he may distinguish the uses from one another.
always good to get other viewpoints.

 

1440X900 is perfect on the m15x. way better for battery life, i bet. go with the higher resolution though if you decide on the m17x

 

my $.02:

I'd only recommend the 1920x1200 screen for two reasons:

First - If you have a specific application that will benefit from the added resolution (eg. photoshop)

Second - If you're really concerned about getting the most out of your 1080p blu-ray movies.

if neither of these apply to you, get the 1440x900. there's NO REASON to get the higher res other than this. Games run smoother with fewer pixels, and sure 1920x1200 looks fantastic in games, but unless the game is at least a year old, you can't run antialiasing and high details without lowering your frames... but this is based off my 8700 M GT

Crysis is a great example of future games. Though, not properly optimized (yet), it boasts the newest technologies, including DX10. If crysis chokes on 1440x900 at ultra details in crysis.... you're gonna have problems with 1920x1200, when doing heavy gaming in the near future.

there is added detail, but probably nothing you'd ever notice. (personally, I'd rather have a well AA'd screen than an extremely HIGH RES non AA'd screen)

again, just my $.02

Edit:

FYI, the screen res makes no difference on battery life. the back lighting would (if we had the option of LED-LCD screens)... but since we don't have those options, the screen res will make no difference on that front. just fyi.

 

actually the 1440 x 900 screen does take less energy to run than the 1920 x 1200 screen.

 

where'd you get that information?

 

Specifications of the Area-51 m15x 15.4" 1920x1200 WUXGA display:

Manufacturer: LG Philips
Model Name: LP154WU1
Surface Treatment: Hard coating(3H) Anti-glare treatment of the front polarizer
Outline Dimension [mm]: 344.0 (H) × 222.0 (V) × 6.5(D, max) mm
Resolution: 1920 horiz. by 1200 vert. Pixels RGB strip arrangement
Contrast Ratio: 500:1
Clearview Technology: No
Pixel Pitch[mm]: 0.1725 mm × 0. 1725 mm
Number of Colors: 6-bit, 262,144 colors
Luminance[cd/m2]: 210 cd/m2(Typ.), 5 point
Weight[g]: 705 g (Max.) without inverter & bracket
Power Consumption: Total 6.27 Watt(Typ.) @ LCM circuit 1.85 Watt(Typ.), B/L input 4.42 Watt(Typ.)
Viewing Angle
Up: 40°
Down: 50°
Left: 60°
Right: 60°
Response Time[ms]: 30 (Max.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Specifications of the Area-51 m15x 15.4" 1440x900 WXGA display:

Manufacturer: LG Philips
Model Name: LP154WP1
Surface Treatment: Hard coating(2H) Anti-glare treatment of the front polarizer,
Outline Dimension [mm]: 344.0 (H) × 222.0 (V) × 6.4(D, max) mm
Resolution: 1440 horiz. by 900 vert. Pixels RGB strip arrangement
Contrast Ratio: 600:1
Clearview Technology: Yes
Pixel Pitch[mm]: 0.2301 mm × 0.2301 mm
Number of Colors: 6-bit, 262,144 colors
Luminance[cd/m2]: 250 cd/m2(Typ.), 5 point
Weight[g]: 515 g (Max.) without inverter & bracket
Power Consumption: Total 5.77 Watt(Typ.) @ LCM circuit 1.35 Watt(Typ.), B/L input 4.42 Watt(Typ.)
Viewing Angle
Up: 60°
Down: 60°
Left: 80°
Right: 80°
Response Time[ms]: 25 (Max.)

here are the specs. you can see that the 1440 x 900 screen takes less energy to run.

 

The viewing angels seem to better too, so its easier for you and a buddy to watch a movie together.... but you mostly likely wouldn't want to on such small comp, but it's still there for ya.

 

the screen isnt too bad. i watch things on it all the time. the screen is brighter than my tv and the colors are more vibrant so i watch it for the better quality that this little 15.4 in screen can produce. it is also great for watching things in class and playing games in class.

 

Everyoe will knwo you're gaming in class when those fans start up lol... or will they?

 

they will. although frantic mouse-clicking and uttering curses under your breath are dead giveaways as well...

 

Ya that would be funny.

 

i doubt i would play fps while in class. if i were i would most likely play tf2 and play sniper. ill click maybe once in a while . most of the time in class ill most likely be playing Grid with the arrow keys. Then i have to wait until street fighter IV comes out on pc. i know i wont listen to the teacher once that game is out

 

I actually looked at that after I posted. should done so before. heh.

good catch

 

off post but what is this refering to...for the life of me i can not figure it out - and i bet i will just be beside myself when i am told....

 

Team Fortress 2 =]

 

Let us know.

 

lol..... you might just not have known

 

lol
i had heard it before and saw it - never played it and that is prob why i could not reference it immediately....

call me noob

 

okay.

noob.

 

lol

i deserved it.... +1 for just doing it anyway....

 

thanks man.

props for asking and making a noob of yourself... haha. takes some courage to be wrong (or "stupid") sometimes.

 

On a small screen you will not notice the differnce.

 

If you get a resolution lower than 1920x1200 don't even think about a blu-ray drive. 1440x900 cannot support 1080p.

 

and if you get the higher rez from what i believe you are future proofed for 1200p as well no?
being current blueray is only 1080p....
and the new drives are supposed to be driver updateable from what i understand....yes/no?

thought i read that BR2.1 (?) was due our soon making the current BR slightly outdated.

 

1200p is just a stupid marketing term AW uses. If you watch 1080p vids and 720p vids on a 15 in screen you wont even notice a difference anyways.

 

Hell, i can't tell 720p vs 1080p on a 37", much less a 15".

 

bah you can certaintly watch your bluray in 720p no? (i suppose your bluray player have an option for that like home theater player...). And anyway if you take the bluray player its mainly to copy them on your hard drive and/or watch them on your tv/projector I suppose you can output 1080p on hdmi out even if you have the 1440x900 screen?