1600x900 Res VS 1920x1080 Res

On a 16" laptop, is there a noticeable difference between 1600x900 and 1920x1080? If so, how big of a difference is it? Is it worth paying an extra $150 for the upgrade? thanks.

 

It really depends on your eyes, though even some people with 20/20 don't like 1920x1080 since things are too small and they don't like to use the zoom function.

 

are the video and picture quality noticeably better though?


and what about 310M GPU (512MB VRAM) vs 330M GPU (1GB VRAM). How big of a difference is that and what does it effect? video quality for movies or just game graphics quality?

 

"Better" is a very subjective term. For me, better means a sharper image, regardless of resolution. For others, better means fitting the most on the screen simultaneously, regardless of size (I used to be in this category). On a 900 vert screen, the best quality will be when 720p video is limited to 720p and not stretched to 900 pixels tall. I find stretching to fill distorts, so I go either as close to 720p as possible or 1080p, depending on the display, without going in between.

As far as the GPUs, it won't really affect your movie quality, just graphics-intensive programs, including games.

 

What size screen and resolution are you using now?

 

15.6" screen, 1366 x 768 resolution.

 

15.6" screen and 1920x1080, two windows sharing 50% of the screen is very nice. I thought that Windows 7 feature was lame. I was wrong.

The vertical resolution is rather meaningless for this example. So just a gross estimate of 2 browser windows. 2 800px websites or 2 960px websites. It makes a difference for me. If you don't mind seeing small text of course or using the zoom. I don't use the zoom and very happy with it.

 

thanks. for me better means sharper image. so 720p and 1080p videos will still look good with a 1600x900 resolution screen?

 

I'd go for the 1080p...hell, if I could, I'd get 2560x1600 on my 12" netbook.

 

He mentioned movies and games, not text. Of course for text, every last pixel is essential if you're trying to cram more on the screen at one time.

Regarding the sharper image, most people will say yes, it's perfect and crisp and looks great. But I'm a picky naysayer, and I like to see pixels 1:1 instead of expanded/shrunk to 900 from 720 or 1080.

 

I highly recommend the 1080p screen if feel your eyes can handle a bit smaller text. Windows 7 has very good built-in font scaling so the transition should be easy.

I find that a higher resolution screen greatly helps productivity. Less scrolling, you can see more stuff on the screen at the same time, and you can practically use two windows side-by-side (unlike 1366x768/1600x900).

 

For me, the limit on using two windows side-by-side is physical size, not resolution. I just zoom out the text til I'm comparing half-width to half-width. The toolbars are unfortunately rarely ever scaled, but the title bar, text, and buttons can be shrunk down.

 

I have 16.4" screen and I am very happy with 1600. 1920 gives you smaller fonts. Far too far too small for my eyes. Sure you can increase the DPI but that would defeat the purpose of having a higher resolution. Not to mention that all your games would run slower, since they have to crank more pixels. You can lower the resolution but LCD looks best at its native resolution.

So, I would recommend 1600. What good would a higher resolution be if you can't read it?

 

If your eyes can handle the increase in resolution I don't see why you wouldn't do it.

I set everything to 100% and have no problems and feel like I have a lot more space to manipulate windows around.

 

The best thing would be to see if a local store has laptops in the 15.6"-16" sizes with those resolutions so you can play with them and decide. Nobody can really tell you your preferences. If you feel more comfortable with one or the other pick that.

I'm assuming this is the Sony F we're talking about judging from the GPU selections. Might wanna maybe check the Sony subforum to see what panel Sony uses for each resolution in your area, because maybe that'd play a factor.

 

thanks for all the replies.

i could save $250 by buying the 900p laptop and then use that money to buy a larger 1080p monitor. would that work? or are $200 monitors not equipped with quality screens? or am i just better off buying the laptop with 1080p?

 

If you're mainly going to use your notebook on a desk, then I would always save the money and get a nice monitor.