Buying an Area 51 m9750 but...

Hey everyone, i am buying an area 51 9750 notebook, but because of my budget i am not getting the 1920x1200 screen, i opting for the lower one, do yo uthink this is a mistake or that i will be displeased? Is there any drawback to the higher resolution? afreind of mine said the $200 increase for that upgrade is not worth it plus ill go blind haha. I was going to get a 120GB harddirve but i was thinkign if i must get the higher res screen i can get the 80 gig and have financial room for hte screen and just up the space later, but then others said just to go for the 1440x900 res.

 

I would say the only benefit a 1920x1200 screen would give you is if you had an HDDVD or BluRay drive. There come s apoint when you have to ask yourself, does this game really look better at a higher resolution? Or am I just using it for the sake of using it.

Anyways, go with the larger HD. You will thank yourself in the future.

 

personally, in this case...i would suggest taking it, i know its a lot more but the hdd you can always change later or third party.. the display not so much...ive used the clearview high-res and was thoroughly impressed, i used the reg and was impressed as well, but not to the same extent. if i were to buy the m9750 i would take it...personally, you will seldom nitice it, but if u download hd movies and stuff youll see, adn stuff like that. i personally preferred that screen, and on such a high end machine it would bother in me in the long run...
hope i helped somewhat.

 

Don't know where you are exactly but in the UK, adding the hi-res screen adds 28 days delay to the order! :S

 

What graphics card are you getting with it? Personally I'd say that if you're doing any graphical work (besides gaming), or watching a lot of HD video content, then 1440x900 is too low a res for a 17" screen. 1680x1050 sounds like it would be perfect for you, but since that's not an option I'd say go for the 1920x1200, and update your HDD later (or just get an external).

 

Well, im not going to be watching movies, definitely not blu-ray. Ive never seen any of these resolutions, so no doubt ill be impressed with the lower. Im getting the Geforce 7950 single card, not the dual. Idont know if games fall into the HD video content range, but i really dont know what gmaes ill be playing. Maybe i could get an external monitor later, i dont know. The delivery is delayed by 1 week with the screen.

 

What kind of resolution and screen size are you used to currently?

 

if you are going to buy such a notebook then you might want a greater than 1680 x 1200 res...especially if you are going to get the 7950gtx sli and are going to be playing a lot of games. However, overall i don't even think you should buy the 9750 or any high end notebook right now as the 8800m gpu is due this holiday season.

 

Well, im not used ot any screen since i never had a laptop. I plan to upgrade the gpu in the future since the laptop is fully upgradeable. Does anyone suggest that i lower the specs in any other region without sacrificing gameplay in order to loosen up my budget?

 

What's your budget?

 

Well, my previously priced laptop came to just under 2300, but after downgrading the hdd and adding the high res its 2400, if i can lower the price somehow thatd be cool if not ill se ewhat happends, also ijust found out DX10 cant run on XP, so should i get vista now or when i get DX10? Also, will the res of the screen and/or OS affect games i have now like Doom 3 or Bioshock?

 

If you don't have a DX10 card, then XP should be fine for your games. As for screen res, it only impacts gaming in as much as it's more demanding to play in a higher res. If you don't mind playing at non-native resolutions, then it doesn't impact gaming at all.

 

"it only impacts gaming in as much as it's more demanding to play in a higher res. If you don't mind playing at non-native resolutions, then it doesn't impact gaming at all."-could yo uplease clarify haha, i didnt get that. I also was looking at my setup and along with reducing the hdd from 120 to 80 and removing the bluetooth mouse from my order list, i can also remove alienrespawn, because it really seems useless, system restore has always been enough for me at home, and worse comes to worst i think i can just pick up a copy of it. So do yo usuggest upgrading to vista once i get a DX10 card?

 

The resolution of your screen doesn't affect your games at all, all that matters is what resolution you play your games in, which can be any resolution up to and including your screen's max resolution.

And yes, for a gamer I'd say upgrading to Vista is pointless until you get a DX10 card.

 

So if i wanted to max out my game it would be smart to have the 1920x1200? I tihkn in terms of vista im going to go with XP without the respawn DVD and the nupgrade wit hthe DX10. By taking the respawn out and adding the high res, my total comes to 2325, which i dont think is horrible. Does the hdd have any effect on gaming or is it just space? By this time im sure yo ucan guess im a below-novice in computers haha. I also havent taken any cons of the high res into consideration, if yo ucould shed some light on that please.

 

This is a screen running at 1400x900:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v646/johnmcl7/1400.jpg

This is the same one running at 1920x1200:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v646/johnmcl7/1920.jpg

To me, aside fomr things looking slightly smaller, i think the background at least looks sharper. I think maybe i should hop over to like best buy or something and check it out myslef?

I also found someone saying this on another forum:

"WXGA+ (WSXGA) > WUXGA for gaming with visual quality. 1920x1200 is a huge resolution for games, even with 7800 GTX you can't get decent playable framerates at native resolution with recent games. Decreasing resolution is possible but that makes it get out of native resolution, so graphics looks blurry and crappy quality.
I always play games at 1440x900, native resolution sharpness is better than high resolution. Also, glossy screen isn't attractive for me.

After having my WUXGA for over a year now, I'm forced to agree... Beware people pushing their screens just for the sake of reinforcing their own decisions. Really think it through. For starters, having 1920x1200 is nice. I DO enjoy the screen real estate when I'm using various applications that can take advantage of it, but for the most part it's difficult to take advantage of all that extra space. Web browsing is not designed for this high of a resolution so all your websites will have large chunks of white together with all the tiny text. Trust me, any way you look at it, the text at this res is TINY. I've got 20/20 vision and have grown accustomed to the resolution, but it does become an eye strain after awhile anyway you look at it. The glossy finish is great and I believe it makes the screen more vibrant in appearance. You can also see the screen better from certain angles, but I'll have to admit I absolutely HATE the glare. The glare is bad, period. If you have any sort of light source in any proximity behind you, it's going to be like a mirror. In the mornings when I have the sun starting to peak in my window, I could shave off this thing... Finally, if you game alot, you're going to want to game at your screens native res to avoid any of the blurriness that is associated with non-screen resolutions. At 1920x1200, you can pretty much give up AA on all the latest games. Not only that, but you can't play them silky smooth. WoW is smooth for me, and I can get by with 2xAA, but FEAR? Oblivion? HL2 with HDR turned on? Forget about it... I find myself constantly wishing that I had a lower res screen that I could play 4xAA on. I've done a lot of comparing. I have a friend with a 9200 with the 1400x900 screen with matte finish and I have to admit that I'd trade screens with him anyday. The matte finish is not that big of a deal AT ALL, and I think his colors are very vibrant just as they are. The biggest difference I've noticed is that his angle of viewing is a little less than mine, but it's not enough to be a big deal to me.

Honestly, I think the perfect res would be 1680x1050. 1400x900 is a bit on the low side, and 1920x1200 is definitely on the high side.

Both screens are great, but weigh out the pros and cons before jumping for the WUXGA."

I dont know waht to take fomr that, but it seems like 1440x900 is what this person is advising.

After looking at the two pictures, it seems like 1440x900 eats up a lot of desktop, but i guess the games get fitted tot he screen.

 

Will games in the future not play well on the 1440x900? After these reviews and some other opinions, im about ot go for the 1440x900, because most poeple tell em ot ge the high res only for the sake of having it, which is not a smart move, duh. But the others tell me that the improvement is not enough to compensate for the gloss plus the tiny print. On top of that, framerate could be hurt, and no game will run nicely on it. Im just worried that ill sacrifice future gameplay.

 

I've got a 1920x1200 screen, and I LOVE it.

In my opinion, the screen is beautiful. The images are sharper, brighter, and have higher contrast. According to the Dell site, the WUXGA screen even has a faster response time.

Gaming at "native" resolution is overrated (IMO) and you'll only notice a difference if you are VERY fussy about it. Web surfing is easy, just use internet explorer to magnify the webpage to 150%. Or you could adjust the windows text DPI. Ultrasharp screens are also better at scaling to reduced resolutions for killer games like Crysis.

Personally, I think it's a waste to have a 7950gtx and to NOT have a WUXGA screen. Think about it, a higher quality screen, will give a higher quality image.

 

Can someone tell me what "native" and "non native" are? And also, after all of this helpful info, whch i definitely thank all you guys, for a newbie its a lot, so can we come up with a pro and con list? Id like ot know how ill be affected by having or not having the screen in the fuutre, talking the next 3 to 4 years max.

 

"Native" resolution refers to the highest resolution a monitor can display in its aspect ratio---the one at which everything looks sharpest.

 

1920x1200
Pros:
-More screen real estate (for pictures, text, vidoes, etc.)
-Able to play full 1080p content (better HD video experience)
-Will allow you to scale to virtually any resolution for games

Cons:
-Can cause small, possibly unreadable text without tweaking
-Can be hard to play games at the full resolution, forcing you to scale it down, which some people claim causes the image to become noticeably blurry.
-Cost

And then the pros and cons for the 1440x900 screen are essentially the opposite of what I've listed above.

 

So if i get the 1920x1200 but put it down to 1440x900 for the games i have now and then when newer games come out i up the res when i need ot would that make sense? I also hear major complains about the gloss. Would my card be overworked? It seems liek higher res means slower speeds, smaller font, and an unnatural ratio. Man this sucks, making a decision o nyour own with no knowledge is killer haha.

Pictures and movies are completely out, not even concerned wit that. Text isnt an issue, i can reduce or increase that if i want. Its the gameplay that im concerned with. Many poepel say its useless for todays games such as what i mentioned, doom3 and bioshock and such.

 

The screen is one of the most important parts of any computer.

There's no point having really powerful hardware, if your screen can't even display it. The screen is the bottleneck in this situation.

Computers only output images and sound. Out of those two, visuals are more important since the human ear is not that sensitive. So the end result of all the calculation and processing done by your computer; is the image on your screen, and the sound coming out of your speakers.

The 7950gtx is the most powerful laptop graphics card available, and I personally think it would be a waste if you didn't get the WUXGA screen. Also, remember that it is very difficult to change/upgrade the laptop screen.

But to be fair, the 1440x900 screen is also very beautiful, and you might get slightly sharper visuals when gaming at "native" resolution. Glossy screens are a good thing by the way, because while they can be a nightmare when you take them outside, the brightness/contrast is better. Glossy screens are for multimedia usage (i.e. movies, images, games).


Final thought,

Better screen = better image quality.

 

Actually, if anything you'd be able to play at high res now, and then lower the res for newer games (as they're more demanding). However yes, that's perfectly possible and makes sense.

You either love them or hate them. I highly recommend you go look at some glossy screens in a store. However, it's slightly a moot point as very few gaming notebooks have non-glossy (matte) screens.

If your card is getting overworked, then you can always lower the resolution, eliminating the problem. As for the ratio, all widescreen laptops right now have "unnatural" ratios, either 16:10 or 15:9.

I'd say if you're not a hardcore gamer who absolutely has to have the very clearest picture and fastest framerates possible, then go for the 1920x1200 screen. It will look better for modern and older games, and you may even be able to play some newer games at that res. IMO 1440x900 is really too low for a Go7950GTX, it seems a waste.

 

So 1920x1200 will give less clarity? I am not a hardcore gamer, but i dont see how spending more to get less clarity would make snese. I was thinking i would rather get the 1920x1200 and never use rather than get lower and wish i had higher.

If i set the resolution on my 1920x1200 to 1440x900, would it be as if i have a 1440x900 screen? If thats the case then the only possible drawback i see is the gloss.

 

We are far more able to give you our thoughts and recommendations if you say exactly why you think you want a 1920x1200 screen, rather than just ask 'which is better and why?'. For example I wanted a laptop that wasn't too much of a burden to carry around in size or weight, yet that gave me a great gaming experience with the top-of-the-line hardware for that time. I got a 15" 1680x1050 screen which I think is a decent complement to the 8600 M GT graphics cards in my Asus G1S with the games I play - with that size screen the pixels are small enough that I don't even think I see a difference if I enable AA (why bother smoothing 2 things together if they are too small to distinguish anyway?). If I can play a game at the native resolution, then I do and it is great, but I have found many games look equally good at lower resolution (eg 1280x1024), only they play more smoothly and I can enable more of the other eye-candy that is the attraction of those games.

My screen is glossy, which I didn't want because of the issue of reflections from the screen, but it has been less annoying than I thought, mostly because my laptop has not often been used anywhere where light shining onto the screen is an issue, and the gloss DOES make images look very purty.

 

Good idea.

Okay, i want a screen that can play the games i have now and also i nthe future, for the next 3 years. I want my graphics card that i will have now to be used properly and effeciently, and also the graphics cards i use in the future, wheni upgrade, and any other upgrades i make. Since i will be in study halls part of the time, i dont want the gloss to be a drawback, becuase many poeple say they become mirrors in the light. But i dont think i will have direct light on it. I dont want to get the hig hres scree nand then find out that some games dont work at certain resolutions so i have to lower it and then sacrifice quality, at the same time i dont want to play at high res and slow the game down evne a little. Many people tell me the high res on this notebook is meant to handle a lot so it wont slow down since its in the HD realm. This is why i want to know if its possible to get the 1920x1200 and then set it to 1440x900 and have it play as if i never got the high res at all, the nwhen the time comes for me to use high res, ill set it to that. I dont understand the difference between selectign 1440x900 and getting the high res but manually setting the res to 1440x900. Keep in mind i am gettign the single graphics card, but upgrading later. At the end of the day, i will use it for bacis word documents and such. No movies, no multimedia. I hope ive made it clear.

 

The thing is, technically speaking if you have a 1920x1200 screen and set the resolution down to 1440x900, your picture will be less sharp then if it was on a native 1440x900 screen. However, for gaming, I maintain that the difference is not noticeable, and so it's best to get the 1920x1200 screen (so that on your current games you can enjoy the best picture quality possible).

 

What would make the games on this screen better for current games? Do you mean when i lower the res or keep it at that high? I definitely need to find out about the glare, b/c that is a very legitimate concern for anyone. I read a macbook review which said while being compared to the HP the mac is a lot better than HP gloss in terms of visibilty, so im wondering if this gloss is closer to mac or HP. Also, i may be confused, if the screen is still 17" either way, why would 1440x900 be non-native? Its so frustraing that i cant ask alienware since theyll just sell the product.

Odin, i was rereading your pro/con list, and i realized what yo usaid about being allowed to play at pretty much any resolution, super plus! In the con list, when you mention that you might have to scale down a bit for some games, you mean the laptop right? not the game? I think ill take your word that it wont be a major deal. I was tihnking that id rather get the high res and scale down the laptop rather than not have it and wish i did. i also want to make sure my graphics card will support the screen.

PS-Thank you all very much for your patience, i know im asking a lot but you guys really help a lot, im very grateful. Keep it coming!!!

 

Im noticing right now on my flat glass desktop monitor as i watch things that contain black i can see myself and the light is not even in an area that can hit the screen. This glare thing is major, i think the only way to determine is to see it, but im hoping the glare doesnt bother me. Im going ot try to point light at the screen somehow in the store so simulate "bad" lighting.

 

Current games aren't as demanding, so you'll be able to play them fine at the high resolution (which will of course be sharper then if you were playing them at 1440x900).

Unlike a CRT monitor, an LCD monitor has a fixed number of pixels built into the screen. That pixel resolution is called "native resolution". In you're case, you're looking at a screen that has a native resolution of 1920x1200, so if you display an image that's in any resolution other than 1920x1200, you'll be in a "non-native" resolution. The potential downside to that is that the screen has to use multiple physical pixels to display one pixel on your image, and sometimes they don't match up exactly right. This can cause apparent blurriness. However, in most games, it's not really noticeable.

I mean you'll have to scale down the resolution of the game if you want to keep high settings.

That's my preference as well.

The card does indeed support that resolution fine, however it will have trouble playing upcoming games at high settings if you keep that high of a resolution.

 

So in the future, if i am upgrading my card, will still ned to scale down the res or will i be able to play at high res? When i hear that i have t oplay with the games resolution, i get worried b/c the only experiences i have with playing with the resolution is choppy frames with clarity or smooth frames with such blurriness that i lost all enjoyment for playing the game, so im hoping you all are right about the lack of noticeability unless im whiny about it.

If i am planning ot upgrade my gpu, will there ever be a time i will actually use 1920x1200 for games and the game will be able ot be played at full?

For the games now, will the potential that the game has be capped or can i play the game "as it was meant to be played?"

I went to best buy and i couldnt talk to anyone about it since they have no clue, would it be wise ot go to a video games store to ask questions and maybe get some visual?

 

I don't think you understand exactly how resolutions work... a few points:

- Games don't have native resolutions. Only monitors do.

- You can set your screen to its native resolution and go into any game's visual options and change the resolution that the game itself runs at. You don't have to lower your screen's resolution to run a game at that resolution, and any 3D-accelerated game is capable of running at various resolutions.

- There's no such thing as the way a game is "meant to be played." Different screens have different native resolutions, and a game will look best at each screen's native resolution. It's not like there's some magical resolution at which you can play the game as it was meant to be played---this is such a non-issue that you really shouldn't even worry about it.

 

Yes, Nunka is absolutely right. And to add to that, no one knows what GPU will be available for you to upgrade to, or exactly what it's specs will be, but my best guess is that you'll be able to upgrade to a GPU that will allow you to play the games of that time at 1920x1200, yes.

 

Thank you for the clarification, i really know nothing about computers. I definitely am grateful that oyu guys understand my concern though. The only experience i ever had wit hPC games was when i got Doom 3 and it didnt even run at all on my desktop so you can imagine the ignorance on this side of the screen.

Okay, so i went to Best Buy today and spoke to one of the geek squad for literally an hour and a half. Basicaly he told me to solve the glossy issue, either play in an area without direct light or you can purchase a little sheet that can reduce the glare without reducing your clarity.

With regard to the resolution, he said when yo uplay the game just max your comp and the game out and the game will cal for adjustments on its own to play at its best. On top of that, the clarity by reducing any resolution will not be too noticeable he claimed. Also, he said that with the gpu im using currently, the games i have will play without the comp breaking a sweat. He said it is a clear yes on the high res because it will not hinder any gaming now and will be standard in a few years anyway so its not smart to go lower. He was saying the comp that this is is something 90% of people dont know exist yet (probably exaggerating but i got the point).

Bottom line he said, and he is an avid gamer, was get the high res screen because it will not cause any holdback now and the games in the future will be using that as standard most probably. So i think im going to hold my breath and take the high res screen.

 

I personally, on principle, wouldn't trust anything that comes from a GeekSquad employee's mouth, but this particular one seems to know a thing or two.

Also, most games don't "call for adjustments on their own," but rather configure optimal settings for your system the first time you play them. More often than not, you'll be changing settings on your own.

 

Okay, i just visited a friend, and he laid it out for me.

Pros of 1440x900 matte finish:
1. Native resolution
2. visible fonts/wont go blind
3. Beautiful visual when it comes to gaming
4. Decreased power consumption (as opposed to glossy)
5. It turns out screens are absolutely upgradeable and easy to install
6. No glare

Pros of 1920x1200 gloss finish:
1. More real estate for movies and pictures, as odin stated
2. i think thats about it

I realized that sure i could get the 1920x1200, but if im going to magnify the font and make the text blurry in order to save my vision, and the game has nothing to do with the resloution, so long as it is native the game will run wonderfully, and the screen can be replaced later safely, and on top of all this i have absolutely no pictures or video to use with the resolution, why spend the extra money? There are no HD games, and if there are, 1440x900 is still 720p. I could eliminate glare wit the antiglare sheets, but that would make it close to if not identical to matte, so wher exactly is the benefit of this high end?

 

You're putting way too much thought into this. If you want a sharper, smoother image (as contradictory as that sounds) and smaller text, go with 1920x1200. If you want a slightly more "blocky" image and easier-to-read text, go with 1440x900.

Regardless of which option you choose, you'll become accustomed to the native resolution over time. End of story.