Dell 6300 -questions about Res/GPU for gaming

Hi people.

I have exhausted the search option/archieves for all the info I can obtain on the subject. Its now a case of needing specific feedback; so I hope you guys can help me with that.

Basically I'm pretty set on this

Dell M6300 17"
Intel Core 2 Duo T7700 (2.40GHz 4MB L2 cache 800MHz FSB)
Win XP 32 bit
2GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM Memory (2*1024)
160GB SATA (7,200 rpm)
NVIDIA Quadro FX1600M (256MB ded)

17' UltraSharp Widescreen WUXGA TFT with TrueLife (1920 x 1200)

OR

17" UltraSharpTM Widescreen WUXGA TFT (1680 x 1050)

------------------
I am wanting this notebook for ALIAS/SOLIDWORKS/PHOTOSHOP, a bit of online gaming CALL OF DUTY 4/BATTLEFIELD, and general web browsing/word processing.

From what I have read it is near impossible to run games on WUXGA (1920 x 1200) with even the best GPUs. This kinda excludes the WUXGA from my choice as the notebook simply would not have the power to run games in such a high res.

I do believe though from what I have read that the Quadro fx1600 (same power as the 8600 GT) will happily run games on a WSXGA (1680 x 1050).

If this is the case I will get 17'' WSXGA for the best of both worlds. My confusion is on the table below (under 'compare side by side'). Dells table is saying you can have 17" WUXGA at a resolution of 1680 x 1050????? Is this a typo whereby the WUXGA should have said WSXGA instead.


http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/learnmore/learnmore.aspx/hmc_screen_precn?c=uk&cs=ukbsdt1&l=en&s=bsd&~lt=popup


Also does anyone know if the 17" 1680 x 1050 has a 'True Life' display? If not is there a noticeable difference?

Any opinions on how you think this might fair in the games environment? Does going for the 1680 x 1050 mean im loosing a lot in terms of display just so that I can play games?

You dont know how much I'll appreciate the feedback.

nice to meet you all

craig

 

Personally I'd get the 1680x 1050 screen especially if its a fair bit cheaper as I find the higher res on a 17in monitor too much on my eyes but to be honest you probably won't notice the difference. That graphics is a 8700m gt eqv i believe and so it probably won't be able to handle the latest games at 1900x1200 but maybe older games. It's still damn fast though. The problem is playing games at non-native res can sometimes look worse or upset the fonts/images and so if you got the higher res you always be scaling down for playability and losing any advantage you have.

I suppose what i'm saying is that if you want the real estate and screen space for photoshop/working etc and you can stand the high dot pitch then go for 1920x1200 but 1680x1050 should be plenty and possibly an improved gaming experience with the native res....and it will be cheaper(?)

Dave

 

Again, this notebook doesn't have a WSXGA+ (1680x1050 ) option...

And one thread is enough...
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=188023