2560x1440 vs 1920x1080 in a 17.3"?

I am in the market for a new P775DM-2 and I was waiting for the 120Hz 1920x180 screen to be available but now my dealer has said that the new 2560x1440 120Hz screen will be available at the same time and I am a bit undecided. I am concerned that the resolution is going to be too high for a 17.3" screen and if I select a lower resolution ie 1920x1080 then the image quality is going to be poor. Can anyone provide some insight?

 

Anything above 1080P on a laptop (1920x1080) is going to be super tiny due to the small screens of laptops. Thus, in order to see things, you will have to do some DPI scaling which we all know how crappy it is in Windows. Some programs/apps/games will work great with it, and others will ignore the scaling and have weirdly placed buttons, blurry text, etc.

I would advice against anything other than 1080P on a laptop. I see people with 4K screens everyday on their laptops and the inconsistency is horrible makes me feel sorry for them how they can live with that mess

 

Hey Phoenix, this is the exact problem I was worried about and I appreciate you confirming it for me. It seems I need to share some love around though before I can give you anymore rep Thanks again.

 

here is my detailed view on this:

How does anyone in his right mind buy a 4K screen laptop?

 

I totally agree about 4K sucking, and @Phoenix and I are in agreement there. I would want not 4K on any laptop. Been there/done that, and it has always sucked as far as I am concerned.

Actually, 2560 x 1440 with 100% scaling is really sweet on a 17-inch laptop display. It's an excellent compromise that scales the same as 1080p and text is not so tiny that words are uncomfortable to read. Below is an example using NVIDIA Control Panel to set my 1080p screen (15-inch even) at 1440p and it's totally comfortable. The only reason I don't leave it that way is because quality of 1080p forced to render 1440p is too fuzzy. It looks perfect in games, but text isn't good with that as a custom (non-native) resolution. You can actually see the fuzziness in the screen shot, but the scaling (as you can see) is excellent. That absolutely does not work with 4K on a small screen.

 

Mr Fox thanks for the input and your post got me wondering if I could 'force' my current 1080 screen into 1440 and I found I could but at 1440 I found the text to be uncomfortably small, at least for me, so I have decided that I will go for the 1080 120Hz screen with my new P775.

 

Does 1440p look better than 1080p in games even though it's non-native?

 

Since you guys are well informed and experienced, what are your thoughts on a 15" screen with 1080p vs one with 1440p res? Especially if it was powered by a 1070 running 120hz?

 

I'm running 1080 on a 17" and the text is fine for me but in my opinion on a 15" would be too small for me and 1440 would be almost microscopic . I keep using the words 'for me' because it really is a personal opinion.

You can use a non-native resolution but a non-native resolution on a laptop causes the text to go fuzzy and is more difficult to read.

 

Since you are not gaining any pixel density, it would not say it looks better. I think it looks just about as good in games. You have a larger map and can see more stuff at once, just as you can on a desktop. To me, more screen real estate is the main benefit of higher resolution.

I think overall you would be much better off with 1080p on a 15 inch screen and with 1070 you're gaming experience would likely be better as well.

 

Agree with Phoenix and Mr. Fox. 1080P all the way. 4K on a tiny screen is ultra pointless...
Sad part is no 120Hz FHD Panels with TN in Clevo right now, Maybe they can source some of those Chi Mei's soon which are offered with MSI's GT series...
All the IPS NB Panels regardless of resolution are at 25ms which is not even suitable for 60hz. Period. Such a waste of $$$ and power of the machine. False Marketing at it's best.

I chose QHD 120Hz AUO TN over any panel right now with Clevo and If they source that FHD 120Hz then that'd be my choice (These two have better response times than *ANY* panel in the notebook market, Still no numbers on the QHD's g2g reponse time until they ship we are dark. <8ms is needed for 120Hz)

 

Its been 10 years since I used a 15" screen so I can't comment. But I would personally not like more than 1600x900 on such a small screen

 

I have a 2 desktop monitors at 24inch - 1200p and 2160p , I love the 4K monitor and how everything looks so smooth and crisp and I going to replace the 1200p one with 1440p at 120Hz. Scaling has never been an issue for me under Windows 10. Multi-monitor support on the other hand is horrid on Windows 10, but I can deal with it.

 

Scaling on Windows 10 is the worst scaling ever!

It scales *some* items and forgets about others.

Example, app A or B or whatever might scale perfectly fine, then you launch App X (ie. Services.msc, or Computer Management, etc) and you notice how they're all blurry as if you were looking at a screen running in a non-native resolution. sorry if you can't see that but it's just plain horrible. This is why this tool exists, it brings back the old Windows 8 Scaling Method back to Windows 10, the way it was supposed to be = Windows 10 DPI / Scaling Fix

With Windows 10, *nothing* is better, neither performance nor a simple scaling feature that should be standard nowadays with taptops coming with 4K screens on tiny 15 inch laptops. But Hey, it's Micro$h4ft, they gotta do it their way just to make it not work

@Mr. Fox @Papusan @hmscott @bloodhawk

Oh, and if you didn't get what I mean exactly by the above, here is a better demonstration:

Windows 10 DPI Fix

The problem in Windows 10:
When you have a widescreen, with a resolution of 1920x1080 or higher or a bit lower, in Windows Vista, 7, 8 and 8.1 you would put your DPI scaling to 125% or higher to make text and images appear larger and more easy to read.
But when you put the DPI scaling to 125% in Windows 10, you see in a lot of dialogs and windows the font gets very blurry.
It does not matter if you are using the regular or custom Windows DPI scaling functions at your 'Screen properties'. Text will get blurry on 125%.
You can test if you have this bug also if you put your DPI scaling to 125% at your 'Screen properties', then reboot Windows (or sign in again when it asks you).
Then goto 'Control panel > Administrative tools > Services'.
If you have this issue also you would see the titlebar of the Services window has a font scaled good. But the services list itself is very blurry/unsharp to read.

The SIMPLE fix:
Right-click on the shortcut to your application that has blurry fonts, then select 'Properties'. Then tab 'Compatibility'. Then enable 'Disable display scaling on high DPI settings' and hit 'Apply'. then restart your application, and you see it will look good.

The DPI fix:
Windows 10 is using another scaling method for DPI as in Windows Vista, 7, 8 and 8.1.
At some point we can understand Windows why they changed the DPI scaling in Windows 10. It is probably meant to support mobile devices more easy.
But if you like to use your Desktop as a Desktop, and you demand high quality only. Then you can use this fix until Microsoft has addressed this issue.
This fix simple tells Windows 10 to use the original DPI scaling as it was in Windows Vista, 7, 8 and 8.1.

Why this is a small software program, and not some 'Registry Tweak' is because when you manually adjust the DPI settings at your 'Windows Registry'. Windows will reset your dpi settings every 2 reboots. Which means you would have to adjust the registry again (Microsoft forces you almost to use its new DPI scaling method).
You could use a batch file for it that starts when you start Windows(r) to change the registry DPI settings, but then a ugly CMD box would show if you turn on your computer.
This method we created simple works, does what you want. And will not show a ugly CMD box because its using pure API.

Side effects:
- It needs to start when Windows starts, but only for a couple milliseconds (you will not see it of course). Then it will adjust the DPI scaling to use the Windows 8 way. And then it will close itself.
- In Microsoft Edge (its new browser) some Adobe Flash objects will appear smaller, but you can simple overcome that by using Internet Explorer 11, or Chrome, or FireFox.

See before and after.

Windows 10 scaling forgot to scale the device manager window, now it looks blurry, oops



How it should look using the Windows 7 / 8 scaling, or just any scaling is actually applied on the window...

 

1080p is just about perfect for 17.3 inches. I can accept 1440p, but nothing more. And my vision/eyes will never be as before. Only worse

 

Ditto

 

Yeah, I love 1080p and it is definitely the best all-around resolution. And, 1440p is really awesome for benchmark screen shots with all of the CPU-Z and GPU-Z windows arranged on the desktop.

 

1440p is the perfect resolution for a 17" gaming laptop. Even the 1060 can push it at native res with high details, and good framerates.

This resolution should've become the standard, before we followed the fad and prematurely leapt to 4K.

 

Higher resolution screens is Nvidia and Amd's best friends. Same time push game developers to make more demanding games. And you need to upgrade before time, HaHa
A never ending game Maybe time for 8K panels for 15 inches laptops? I think Nvidia would love that

 

If you are getting a 1080 then 1440p all the way.

 

Just got home to my 24 inch 4K... and yes the scaling of certain things is not very good. But I haven't noticed until it was pointed out by the above post. On the other hand, I love how smooth all the text is everywhere in documents, web and so on.
So yes, definitely would get a 4K or 3K display if I can.

 

I understand that on a 24" screen 1440 is wonderfully smooth and detailed but on a 17" screen it is tiny and much too small for me and I am not happy with the 'fuzzy' text that I get when I use a non-native resolution so I have decided to stick with the resolution I am currently using, 1920x1080.

 

It's a personal choice at the end of the day and will depend on your eye sight, the content you use and how far you tend to be from the screen

 

I would say go for the 1440p res. for the more real estate in the game itself. After all its the main purpose of getting a gaming laptop. I wouldn't go for anything less than 1440p resolution in 2016 to be honest.

Thats just my personal opinion..

 

An important factor for those that think having G-Sync is important is the fact that the 120Hz 1080p IPS panel will not be certified by NVIDIA. If you want G-Sync in 1080p you'd have to go with the 75Hz screen offered in the pre-Pascal Clevos. Otherwise 1440p or 4K are the only options NVIDIA is approving.

 

And and what is the rationale from nGreedia?

 

1440p is the perfect resolution for a 17..3" machine. Even the 1060 can run games at high settings and framerate at that res.

With GPUs this powerful, 1440 is the new 1080.

Too many questions about this....

Did Clevo not send them Nvidia a sample screen, to have it certified? How do we know it will never happen? How did MSI get their 1080p/120Hz screen approved? Yadda yadda yadda.

 

I am not privy to the details, only the outcome. My understanding is that it was submitted and rejected. My guess would be the response time was too slow for the 120Hz refresh rate, so they are not willing to give it their certification. That being the case, if the 75Hz 1080p screens like what came on the P870DM-G are still readily available Clevo should just bring those back as a configuration option for people that want G-Sync on FHD. Those are really excellent panels. G-Sync lovers have been, and should continue to be, very pleased with them. They overclock to 100Hz with no problems as well, so it should not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.

It seems that sourcing good TN and IPS panels is becoming difficult for some of the ODMs. It looks like the ETA on 1440p 120Hz screen availability may have been pushed out a couple more weeks.

 

If I lower the resolution on the 1440, will it be the same as having a 1080p monitor?

 

That makes sense, and Notebook Check will probably confirm that when they get one in and test the response times. I imagine it has to be particularly bad, to not pass cert, when the 1080/60 IPS of the GT72VR tested 26ms Black to White and 34.4ms Grey to Grey, yet still passed for G-Sync. For comparison, the 120Hz TN panel in the GT73 tested 6.8ms B-toW and 26ms G-to-G.

The IPS being used in gaming laptops won't measure up to the low response time panels going into the top tier desktop IPS monitor, for a years.

Framerate wise, yes, but it will look really ugly below native res. But you wouldn't need to lower it, so the point is moot.

 

So it is gonna be like ugly but good frame rate or looks good but lower frame rate. Was hoping for a 1080 120hz iIPS Gsync one.

Might not be a moot point considering how fast games get developed especially those AAA games which requires heavy graphics. When I buy my laptop, I will probably not buy/upgrade again in like 4-5 years which will make the 1440 a bit useless for me.

 

Don't get too hung up on G-Sync and it opens up plenty of options. It's really not a big deal, so no need to stress out about it.

 

Why is that? From what I know, doesn't Gsync helps at lower frame rates?

 

The 1070 and especially 1080 will be pushing 60fps and higher at 1440p, you aren't going to need to be worried about how it looks below native resolution.

 

At 1440p is can be nice when you go from 140FPS to 80FPS and back again, it will feel smoother with G-sync.

 

Whom could we ask whether the new QHD 120Hz panels (Auo is available only, right? If not what are the others?) would be compatible with Clevo 670XX series? Or are 670XX doomed to FHD only?

Is there any review of this panel, if that panel is only available for 775DM2/3, I might consider 775 series as well...

Thanks masters!

 

P870DM2/3 also. Maybe Eurocom or Prostar can answer that question about your 670XX series. What's wrong with FHD as long as the panel is of excellent quality?

 

There's a fair chance it will work as long as the connector is compatible, and as long as its placement is so that the cable can reach without much pull. Can't speak for it with any certainty without having it tested.

 

The cable length is what would put me off the most, I don't know what they ship the screens with but since there's no guarantee that the screen-side connector is in the same place it could be a toss up whether it would reach.

 

But, it shouldn't be too difficult to find out, should it? It would not be surprising if a fair number of people will want to upgrade their screens to 120Hz. Might be worth investigating for that reason.

 

I don't know how to say this without sounding offensive, but I feel like people that need those resolutions are blind as a bat. 1080p on a 13" screen 3 feet away is fine for me. IMO 4k in a 15" screen is too small without scaling, but a little closer to 1620p would be my ideal.

Just my $.01 (inflation and taxes ate the other cent), but in a screen as large as 17.3", definitely don't go smaller than 1440p. Not to mention people are running into issues with g-sync and games rendering too fast at 1080p.

 

Like I said brah, "personally"

To each their own