Resolution on laptop vs external...

Maybe this is a dumb question, my understanding was that if a laptops maximum resolution is 1366 x 768, that was the maximum resolution it was capable of displaying. I see some comments like, "Oh just get an external monitor for when you need more screen real estate," and unless I am missing something... do monitors have some magical capacity to boost your maximum resolution?

 

The maximum resolution that your notebook can display is based on the weaker of 2 things; its graphics card, and the resolution of the display being driven. Most graphics cards are quite capable of displaying full HD or better (at least for relatively static 2D images), they're just limited by either the display they're trying to display it on, or possibly the connection between the card and the display (HDMI for example, will not pass through higher than 1920x1200 presently).

 

most of today's GPU on a noteook allows independent display(i.e. the LCD and external monitor) both at their maximum native resolution. Except of course when you need to do 'mirror' then the external is sync to the same as the notebook one.

I am using U2311H @ 1920 with my notebook LCD @ 1650 in extended desktop mode.

 

Good to know. I never even thought of the fact that it was the screen limiting the resolution, though I knew it was not the GPU by any means... I guess I just did not think much about it .

 

lol

reminds me of something I was reading recently... this doesnt have to do with GPUs...

Its the recent AMD RS785 mobile chipset

 

So it means for a laptop with screen resolution of 1366 x 768 and a good GPU, with an external monitor it's possible to have 1920x1080(If supported by external monitor)?

 

Yes, if the connection allows for it. HDMI will do it, DVI will do it, VGA sometimes will, sometimes won't, SVideo won't, etc.

 

That is correct. For example, I have a Dell Latitude E6400 with a display resolution of 1440x900. I have no problem connecting it to either of my external monitors- one is 1680x1050 and the other 1920x1200. And that's with Intel integrated graphics (Intel GMA 4500MHD) and connecting by DisplayPort. My monitors aren't DisplayPort compatible, so I use a 'DisplayPort to DVI' adapter because the external monitors both have DVI ports. Works perfectly, even at 1920x1200!

Dell offers the 15.6" Latitude E6510 with a 1920x1080 (1080p/Full HD) LED display even without a dedicated graphics card, just as another example. For routine use, even watching 1080p video, the current integrated graphics processors (from Intel and AMD) are sufficient.

The need for a dedicated graphics card occurs when the the video itself becomes more complex- 3D gaming, for example. Some laptops have 1920x1080 displays and lower-end graphic cards, so they're unable to support more demanding games at the higher (native) resolution. The games still have to be played at 1280x800 (on the 1920x1020 display) to achieve playable frame rates.

The only reason most current laptops (under 16.0") have 1366x768 resolution is because it's cheaper to manufacture. Most laptops with displays measuring 16.4" or larger have 1600x900 resolution standard for the same reason. I'll leave it at that, but I could rant all day about the lack of high-resolution displays (even as options) on most new laptops!!! Ugh...

Hope this helped clear things up for you....rather than confuse the issue further, which is often what I do best!

 

You don't even need a "good GPU" for that. I have a laptop with an Intel GMA 950 and a display of 1280x800 pixels and I can run an additional external monitor with 1920x1080 without any problems. In fact the limit for the 4? years old GMA950 is 2048x2048 pixels for all monitors together and I'm pretty sure no recent graphics chip supports less.

 

I can connect to my external 1680x1050 monitor using VGA, which was a surprise to me. My cat (demon) destroyed the first 'DisplayPort to DVI' adapter that I bought, but I didn't realize it until I needed to use it! I was unable to connect to my 1920x1200 display with VGA, but it works fine with the 1680x1050 monitor. And, as I mentioned in my previous posting, I have previous-generation Intel graphics (Intel GMA 4500MHD).

I haven't tried connecting to my HD television because I'd need to buy a 'DisplayPort to HDMI' adapter. Despite the alleged 'advantages' of DisplayPort, I think it sucks....just my two cents.....

 

That's odd that VGA didn't work for you.

 

res on screen by far

 

My ASUS G60 (native resolution 1366 x 768) is connected to a 23" ASUS 1920 x 1080 monitor. The settings should look like these.




In my case, this shows nVIDIA control panel.

 

Yea, you can even get graphics adapters that are USB and can do HD 1920x1080p

 

Yep, the actual transmission of display signal to the screen is NOT demanding, it's the smooth production of those signals (especially when gaming) which is limited by the system's muscles.

 

But these come with significant drawbacks in image quality (artifacts) and/or refresh rate.

 

very well explained.
thanks for such a simple and lucid info.