Should I get a WXGA or WUXGA p-7805u?

Hey everyone, in the near future I am going to buy this laptop. The only thing that really gets me frustrated is that there are FOUR types of screens, the LG 1920x1200 and 1440x900 and the AOU's. I personally wont accept any AOU because if I am going to pay 1230 for a laptop, I demand the best screen. Now here comes the next problem, resolution.

I get really picky when it comes to FPS, and I can feel a difference from 30-35, 40-50, 55-60 FPS. I am a gamer and I want the best performance from my card, and I understand that the 1920x1200 resolution will lower my frame rate considerably. Also, everything will be smaller. I am kind of leaning towards the 1440 because of this. But then I always have that regret that I could have gotten almost twice the pixels for the same price. And I also heard that 1440x900 screens are garbage on this model, with a lot of grain. And that 1440 resolution is too low for a 17 inch...

So I have a question for you, NBRers, if you had the choice between the two, which would you pick? I am really looking for someone who has had experience with both. Also, input about the AOU and LG are welcome. Thanks

 

I have a beautiful AOU 1920x1200 screen and to be honest, the AUO and LG looked the same at Best Buy. They even had the same tiny dark spots in both lower corners of the screen.
When I first booted my laptop, my eyes hurt from how bright this laptop is, I turned down the brightness to about 35% so that I wouldn't go blind.

Bri

 

I had the 1440, I didn't like it at all... I searched and did everything I could to get the 1920X1200... It's like comparing a ferrari to a honda civic.

 

I had the higher res version first and promptly returned it for the 1440x900 version. That resolution is just perfect for the 17" screen.

Game performance needlessly suffers at 1920x1200. If you turn the res down to get better performance, then you suffer from non-native ugliness. Of course, this is just my opinion.

If I want higher resolutions, I just hook it up to a monitor or my HDTV via HDMI. For a laptop screen, 1920x1200 on 17" is just too small and a waste, imo.

 

I play on med/high settings for some current titles like COD:WaW and Left 4 Dead @ 1920x1200. I prefer the higher resolution for extra screen real estate as well. After working with the high resolution I find it hard to go to a lower res screen.

 

It's all personal preference somewhat, ajdude101, as you can probably tell.

I like the 1920 and some games can be run at that level more than acceptably while some may require lower resolutions.

I also enjoy the extra "real estate" for non-gaming, too.

My previous notebook had the WXGA 1440 and I'll agree somewhat with tonester that it is acceptable also.

I'd say if you can, look at both, make the call, and don't look back.

Enjoy.

 

Many new games that you'll need to turn down resolution for also have features like film grain effects or motion blur. That pretty much kills the non-native resolution blur issue. (Fear 2, Mass Effect, L4D, to name a few).

I would get the 1920x1200 (if you can find it). I'd rather have more real estate when browsing or working and worry about turning down the gaming res than the reverse.

You're a lucky man if you can find the 1920x1200. It's gone in my area. Very regrettable.

 

WoW looks beautiful in 1920x1200

 

definitely get 1920x1200. why pay more for lower quality screen?
it's true 1920x1200 resolution isn't a must for only 17 inch screen and 9800m gts isn't strong enough to pull out that resolution on many recent games but who cares? you can always lower your resolution.
think about it. 1920x1200 screen let you go 1920x1200, 1680x1050 etc screen and then 1440x900.. but what can 1440x900 screen can do? max it can do is 1440x900. there simply is no reason to get 1440x900 screen if you can get higher one. get 1440x900, only if you can't find 1920x1200 one. =)

 

Im 1280x800 in mine with a 1920x1200 screen. I wanted to pay more to get the better screen, but there's a stuck pixel after 1 day of use anyways... at least you don't see it unless the pc is booting

 

i have the WUXGA screen and i love it

 

If you will play all your games at native 1440x900 then get that. If not then you are playing non native so it doesn't matter if you are 1920 or 1440, although 1920 has more, and smaller, pixles to interpolate so it may appear more native.

I have the WUXGA AUO screen and love it. You have to get used to the smaller type and icons but it is great. if you are coming from a 15" 1200x800 text will seem small but if coming from a 12" 1200x800 it is about the same.

As mentioned earier, go to the store and check them out, nothing can substitue for personal experience......................

 

I've been a WuXGA user for the past 4 years nearly and I decided on the 1440 x 900 for my latest laptop (fx 6860).

1920 x 1200 is great for certain things as mentioned above but it is a bit on the "small side" for many text applications and it's not really suited to a 17" screen.

As mentioned above you have more chance of playing games at native resolution with 1440 x 900 than 1920 x 1200.

If it was possible I'd try for a 16xx x 10xx screen as it would be the best of both worlds in my opinion.

But the best thing is to actually see the difference for yourself and make up YOUR OWN mind and not rely on our opinions as it's YOU that has to live with the relative plus and minus points of the screen resolution

 

I think 1680x1050 would have been even more choice, but 1920x1200 is great for what I wanted to be able to do (CAD work etc). For gaming only 1440x900 is probably the better choice. I realllly do like the 1920x1200 now that I have it though, makes my desktop 22" monitor at 1680x1050 feel blocky.