i am wondering something about the resolution...
currently using M860ETU with GTX260M and P8700...
is there any least resolution so that playing games will be smooth..but not bottlenecking the CPU?
-
ViciousXUSMC Master Viking NBR Reviewer
Will be a different situation for each and every game and according to the other settings you have selected for that game.
The cpu load will actually become higher at a lower resolution, as the video card will be processing the frames faster, thus the cpu must work faster to keep up. -
You have to pay attention you dont get the interpolation issue. So i always recomment do choose the displayresolution wisely.
im not sure about the resoultion of your screen since i dont know your specs.
as said above, to avoid interpolation you should use your native displayresolution. -
-
With those specs I would say 1680x1050 for very demanding games like Crysis/GTA IV and 1920x1200 for games like COD/Bioshock/Assassins Creed
UNLESS you are a big fan of AA, in which case I'd bump those resolutions down a notch -
Yeah, but AA probably isn't necissary at resolution that high. Remember that AA is basically just rendering at some multiple of the display res for some or all parts of each frame and then downscaling, so if you have a really high display res, you are basically rendering at the resolution that a lower res would use behind the scenes with AA enabled.
-
oh..so...playing at near maximum resolution is the best?
mine got WSXGA screen which is 1650x1050 -
Playing at native res is always best. But ig you can't play at native, you will probably still be fine. Most people don't really notice. But yeah, native is best.
-
I think the whole "native is best" isn't as true as it was in the past. LCDs are getting better and for some people, the difference between native and non-native isn't apparent depending on the task/game.
However, theoretically, native resolution is supposed to be the "best" one so go with that seeing as you've already bought the laptop lol -
As always, keep same aspect, and it will scale well. I usually game at 1280x800 on 1920x1200 or 1680x1050 screen, turn on 4xAA and so far it's been hard to really tell the difference.
-
Yeah, most people barely notice or don't notice at all. But technically, native will be superior.
-
No idea why the post you quoted mentioned interpolation in this context though.
On topic though, I can spot an LCD running non native resolution from a mile away, I miss CRT sometimes. -
-
I couldn't help but notice since interlacing is the devil.
-
Good question. I have been asking this myself. My ideal resolution would be the resolution that will maintain 60 fps, all details maxed out with FSAA. Anybody knows what resolution would that be? I play Microsoft Flight Simulator (2004 and may be X), 1st and 3rd person shooter (Tomb Raider and Unreal Style).
-
My ideal resolution is 1680 X 1050, I have been able to play native resolution on all games with either maxed out or high settings. Even GTA IV and Fsx. I only tested FSX for a little though. I find this resolution a great balance between performance and quality, gaming looks crisp and detailed without slow downs or being too small (older games like Tiberian Sun).
-
Lethal Lottery Notebook Betrayer
Just from my personal experience in crysis (and this one the only game I tried not in native res) it looked MUCH worse. It was very obvious. It might be specific to crysis, but I think pretty much any gamer would see a visual change in that game. AA did not seem to help quality as much as changing back to the native res did.
-
-
-
Some monitors have better interpolation algorithms than others at non-native resolutions. Native resolution has the best quality on an LCD screen. If your monitor has a 16:9 native resolution, try to keep the same aspect ratio (16:9) at a non-native resolution.
It really just depends upon how it looks on your specific monitor. -
Lethal Lottery Notebook Betrayer
-
200x6250 thats true HD
-
I miss CRT screens sometimes, there was no issue with "non native" and such lol
-
I couldn't be happier with my 1680 x 1050 screen. For a large majority of games, I can run vsync buffered 60 FPS at native res, and perhaps add some AA. I can easily "max out" games like L4D, COD4, Bioshock, etc.
1920 x 1200 is only for crossfire/sli systems, IMO. You have much more memory bandwith so it's almost as if the 1920 x 1200 comes free. But with one card, I wouldn't be able to play crysis at 1920 x 1200 on high, but 1680 x 1050 is perfect. Course it's not all about Crysis, and I'm sure I could run other games at 1920 x 1200 just fine, but performance could still be better sometimes when I'm running 16x AF, 4x AA, and maxing a game out. You won't always have a perfect 60 FPS...
I'm can't say how much better quality the image is at 1920 x 100, but games are still beautiful at 1680 x 1050... -
I think the best ideal resolution for gaming is infinite. The bigger the best, unless it is over your cone of vision(approximately 55-60angle).
But higher resolution mean more GPU demand. T.T -
From my experience playing a game at your desktop resolution seem to always run the game smoother than going lower or higher.
Ideal Resolution for Gaming
Discussion in 'Gaming (Software and Graphics Cards)' started by devilcm3, Jul 24, 2009.