M570: Choosing a screen resolution

Hi, I was going to get the M570 with the WUXGA resolution, given all the hype around it being HD specs...but after seeing one in person, I wondered if maybe this is way too small and if I'll ever adapt! But it also got me wondering about who buys such a high resolution? I'm hoping to get feedback from people who purchased the M570 and which resolution they picked, why (what do they use the computer for), and if they are happy or regret their screen resolution decision.

As for me, I have perfect vision and am used to working with 1680x1050 on a 15". I would connect this to a 22" of same resolution when using adobe stuff like photoshop, premiere, flash, coding, or for laying music tracks in Cubase. The salesperson said I would get used to smaller fonts etc but I'm concerned I may develop bad eyesight, curved back, weird setup using external monitor of different resolution, or tiny looking web sites.

I m buying a M570 and need to decide what resolution will be the best buy , and if WUXGA would be worth the $100 more than the WSXGA+ screen.

All feedback will surely help...

 

If you game you should really stick to 1680x1050 probably. If you watch movies/play around with graphics more, probably go for the higher resolution. Font sizes can be changed easily - while your graphics card is going to have issues at very high resolution at medium settings. I have 1680x1050 and would have probably taken 1400ish if that had been a choice.

 

Bigger is better... for gaming as well... and if you bring external monitors into the picture... you'll definitly want a larger resolution. As for gaming... yes, your GPU will struggle with higher resolutions but you can easily turn down the resolution... Your laptop wont blow up just cause you play on a non-native resolution.
I got WUXGA and I couldnt be happier.. playing games in ridiculous resolution on a HD monitor looks fabulous.
Getting a monitor at 1440x900 would just be awful for gaming, you can run modern games at WUXGA resolutions easily. (on very high settings) Also, one could make the argument that higher resolution grants one MORE performance in games.. because theres less need for AA... which drops performance far more than a bump up in resolution.

Edit - The GPU in the M570 is enough to handle high res gaming with ease.. if you were getting a mid range laptop with a 9600 or something.. than I'd recommend going with a lower resolution. But why spend all that money on such a good GPU.. if you plan on using lower resolutions.. seems like a waste.

 

I wont really be gaming. I'll be mostly doing creative work in graphics, web design, music workstation, and lots of text writing and other business use. Would increasing font size really help? But then would that not cause an increase on the external monitor as well? That would probably not look nice...

So it seems the WUXGA is geared for gamers and people who use their laptops to watch movies?

 

This thread is null point. Vendors no longer offer the M570TU with the 1680x1050 screen.

 

Oh snaps.. looks like you gotta get WUXGA
No, a higher resolution is for everyone... espeically if your doing graphical work. The text is verrrry easy to read, Im typing this on my WUXGA screen from a couple feet away (lying down) and I can easily see whats goin on... and I'm blind as a bat.

 

What's your lens grade, DivisionByZero? Both my eyes are -4.50, and I think I need another exam as I haven't had one in three years.

 

Which is a shame, because it's the ideal resolution for gaming on a 17" screen on a single GPU. Just because you can (choose WUXGA), doesn't mean you should. I'd only recommend it for those who work with multiple windows or images.

 

I prefer using 1440x900 on a native 1920x1200 for games. My gaming habits have been slowly transitioning to this in all my games. I'm not doing this for performance reasons, rather I just can't handle 1920x1200, especially in FPS. I get my *ss kicked faster at native. Call me crazy, but I guess that's just me coming from playing CS:S at 960x600 for how many years. I just simply play better at downscaled resolutions, haha. But for everything else, I'd stay with 1920x1200. The amount of desktop real estate is just so versatile for me compared to 1680x1050.

 

Probably the effect resolution has on mouse sensitivity and DPI. Get a gaming mouse, like the 4000 DPI (I think) Razer Lachesis, hah..

 

No, it's not my mouse sensitivity. I properly adjusted my sensitivity for all my games to match the new resolution. I can't put my finger on it. I guess I'm just used to owning 12 year olds halfway across the country at lower resolutions.

My Logitech MX 1100 and SteelSeries QcK mini is good enough for me. I can still clean up pubs with my old Dell ball mouse if I wanted to.

 

untrue. If I wasn't offered both options by the vendor I would not have started a thread. ;-)

 

Im debating whether or not I should get a WUXGA screen if I buy a 17"...seems most people who go for this resolution are gamers.

I won't be using it for gaming but instead for creative business work (web design, music studio workstation, video editing, Word, etc). I love WSXGA+ on a 15" but on a 17"...I'm unsure. Looks awefully small...I'm guessing alot of web sites must look tiny on this resolution?

Advice?

 

I'm not sure there is every anything wrong with having "too much resolution"... you can always scale it down.

 

it's not recommended to scale down a native resolution....

 

I got a 15.4" with a WUXGA, its intense, definetly not for the weak eye individual, however, i believe its excessive at this size, my thoughts are 12.1-13.3 is WXGA, 14.1 to be WXGA+ 15.4" WSXGA+ and 17" WUXGA. To be lugging around a 17", it would be nice that it could do native 1080p, that being said, WSXGA+ is not "weak" its just... a little less then what you can get. Another great thing about 1920, is that you can fit 2 word documents at 110% on a screen at once!

 

What's the advantage of being able to have 1080p native? What would be some uses?

 

The 16:9 screens are better for watching movies

I feel that WSXGA+ is a good resolution for 15" notebooks and WUXGA is better for 17", but that's entirely personal preference

 

That sounds weird. Why would they have options for lower resolutions if you shouldn't use them?

 

Who is selling you the machine?

 

It's not recommended to run at non native res. However, there are other settings like DPI settings that can up the size of text and icons without being at non native res. If your resolution is too high, you can always adjust to compensate, but if it is too low, you are SOL.

 

It's not about blowing up (although things do start lagging), it's about lower resolutions being the solution here, and non-native res on LCD screens looks fuzzy, distorted and horrible. Sure, if you use an external monitor that's another issue, but that wasn't the question, right?

 

I'm still debating whether to get the WSXGA+ or WUXGA resolution for the M570 (good god, I cant decide!). Would the battery last longer if I bought the WSXGA+ resolution?

 

I've decided to buy a Clevo/Sager M570 17" laptop. But I cant decide which screen to get. The WSXGA+ or the WUXGA. I will be using this laptop most of the time in conjunction with an external 22" that is WSXGA+ and my work involves web design, photoshop, flash, video, coding, as well as music/audio production. Although I have perfect eyesight, I'm afraid WUXGA is too small for a 17"... its also far from being a typical resolution in terms of browsing the internet. Websites probably look really small...Any thoughts?

(Note: WUXGA is 100$ extra)

 

For Photoshop (providing your graphics card is good enough, I suppose it will be though) the higher the resolution the better.

My SZ has only 1280*800 so I have no personal experience with larger resolutions.
I can tell you though that more "real estate" (thanks to whoever once said this on NBR) would be nice in Photoshop.

The Size of text - you can change the dpi setting - the scaling is said to work quite well in Vista (while not perfect) and you could always set your browser to zoom in on websites.

The best way of deciding is going into a shop and looking at the two different screens.

 

My friend has a WUXGA M570TU and basically, imo, it just makes you have to squint harder to read the tiny text and I do believe 17" is probably too small real estate for that high of a resolution. When he plays games (which is the main function) he has to turn down the resolution a notch (to 1680x1050) since his 9800M GTX isn't powerful enough to support maxed out graphics settings at the 1920x1200 resolution for games like Fallout 3, Crysis, and other similar FPS.

And so basically from my perspective: get the WSXGA+ unless of course if one can utilize the 1920x1200 alot then it may be worth the money (high res images, HD movies, etc.)

 

I second the above that you should try and go see computers with these different resolutions.

...Although, if youre working with large resolution photos, the higher resolution the better.

Personally i find WUXGA too small. But everyone will have a different opinion.

 

Same screen size so I don't know why they wouldn't last the same or so close it doesn't matter.
Of course I don't mfr them so just an opinion without testing them.
If it didn't you could do some things like lowering the brightness to compensate.

 

screen resolution has nothing to do with battery life. brightness on the other hand has a whole lot to do with it.

 

The two resolutions will have such a minimal effect on battery life that you would be lucky to see even a minute in difference. Which reseller is selling the M570TU with the WSXGA screen, metrosuperstar?

 

In the brochure for the M570, it says

Turn your HDTV into a brilliant high resolution computer display with our HDMI port that supports full 1080P HD output allowing you to connect to any 1080P HDTV at full 1920x1080 16:9 HD resolutions. Your TV will become a first-rate PC monitor or allow you to enjoy movies saved on your computer in full HD on a Larger screen.

My questions are....

1. If I buy the M570 with the WSXGA+ resolution, can I still connect to an external display and get 1920x1080 (or 1920x1200) resolution?

2. Why do they say you can output to 1080p at full 1920x1080 16:9 HD resolution when this laptop actually comes with 16:10 ratio?

 

I've read all the reviews I could find about the Sager 5797 (Clevo M570) and I'm confused as to whether or not the WSXGA+ and WUXGA screens are of equal quality? I'm on the fence about which resolution to get...

The trend is obviously growing toward WUXGA, so does that mean I'm buying something that's "outdated" if I get the WSXGA+ screen?

 

When you have the option to configure your 17" to WUXGA OR WSXGA+, is the WSXGA+ an "outdated" choice? Is it "second best"?

I say this because I am on the fence about which one to get, and the model I am looking at can be customized with either. (the WSXGA+ being $100 cheaper). I want to keep up with the times but get something that will work well with my external 22" WSXGA+ monitor.

Also, I wont really be doing much gaming...but I will be doing video renders...would a WSXGA+ panel be less taxing on my GPU, and therefore render more quickly? (I hate waiting for renders!)

 

Hi, I'm quite confused about what 1080p actually means. Does it have anything to do with the various screen resolutions, ie. WUXGA, WSXGA+, etc, or is it independent? Or does it just have to do with whether or not the laptop has an HDMI port? As you can see I am quite confused about this...

The laptop I am considering for purchase boasts true HD 1080p but comes in the following resolutions: WSXGA+ or WUXGA. How is that possible when none of these resolutions contain a dimension spec of 1080 pixels?

 

1- Yes, With the HDMI cable you can conect to an external display with support of 1080p.
2- The Output is for an external display, not for the internal display of the laptop , so you can put it on a TV with support of 1080p.

 

WSXGA+ is not "outdated", it will look good.

But if you have the option to take WUXGA you should consider it highly and maybe take less ram or a smaller HDD to begin with.

You would enjoy WSXGA+ though.

I have a WXGA+ 19" monitor and it's sharp.

What kind of GPU? I don't think it will be noticable.

 

So...if I understand correctly, HDMI allows you to send your laptop display to an external display for true HD viewing, REGARDLESS of what resolution is shown or used on the laptop? And I'm guessing people do this for better resolution. But what if someone is looking for a laptop that displays true HD 1080p internally (on its own screen). How does one find this? What specs are required? And is it worth it?

 

I do have the option to get WUXGA - its just $100 more but I do find it a bit shocking to my vision (although I have perfect vision)... although Id probably get used to it.

GPU is GeForce GTX 280M 1 Gig. My hunch is that screen refresh and renders will be quicker if done on a WSXGA+....

 

Yes, HDMI allows you to send a full 1080p resolution to an external display, if it supports the 1080p. I found some notebooks of ASUS with 1080p in a 15.6" . Asus G51VX Series

 

1080p refers to a resolution. it's the resolution at which a movie plays or a picture is (1920X1080) in perfect quality. this is also the resolution on a WUXGA screen. when it says WUXGA, it means the resolution of the monitor is 1920X1080 (or 1920X1200)

The SXGA+ screen has a resolution of 1650X1050. not quite 1080p. you will notice this if you don't full screen. the movie will go off the edge. if you full screen the movie, then it'll show the entire widescreen from edge to edge.

of course you won't notice a difference between 1080p and 720p. most eyes cannot see any more detail in 1080p than 720p when watching movies. it's just how small you want the taskbar and icons to be, and how much desktop space you want. a uxga screen will offer much more desktop space.

it also depends on the screen size. i wouldn't get anything more than an sxga+ on a 15/16 inch laptop, but on a 17 inch, i would settle for no less than a uxga. but that's just me. i like higher resolution because it looks a little bit sharper to me. uxga on a 15/16 inch would make the taskbar and icons so tiny that you would need a magnifying glass (not really, but you get the point right? )

no it has nothing to do with whether or not the laptop has an hdmi port. the hdmi port is simply the replacement for the vga cable (the big blue one). it's the port that you use to connect the computer to the tv. it's better than vga because it gives a digital input instead of the vga's analog input. hdmi supports a higher max resolution. any laptop can have the hdmi port, whether it's own screen can support 1080p or not.

 

Do you know if the Sager 5797 is true HD 1080p "internal" display? Or just the HDMI output?

 

OK now I understand that 1080p requires a MINIMUM of 1080 pixels to be true HD. And thats why WUXGA panels, whether they are 1080 or 1200 are all considered HD. On the other hand, I also see that WSXGA+ is only missing a few pixels to be HD and that the human eye may not be able to detect this so its not a huge deal.

What are you using for screen?

 

What are you trying to ask? Do you want to go with the trend? Do you want large desktop real estate? Do you want easy to read text? Do you want decent performance at native resolution? No two model screens are equal. It's solely up to your preference. However, I don't think you have this choice anymore since Sager no longer offers the WSXGA screen as an option..

 

Yes I can still get the WSXGA+ panel from Eurocom, although they are pushing me to get WUXGA (less complicated for them).

I want real estate but I want decent font size and website viewing. I just felt that WSXGA+ was the best of both worlds. In terms of performance, not really into gaming but if Im doing video or animation rendering, I'd like for quicker renders.

 

If you get the 1920x1200 WUXGA, of course you can output 1920x1080 internally. Take a moment to think about this subject.

 

Ah, that's right. Eurocom still offers the WSXGA screen.

A larger resolution isn't going to hinder video rendering too much; those are mostly CPU dependant apps. And the ones that do utilize the GPU to an extent won't slow it down. So I'd say go for the WUXGA screen.

 

Screens are never "outdated", my man. If you felt that way, you'd need to be shopping for something with at least LED backlighting, something neither given option can have.

My personal choice on a 17" monitor would be WUXGA.

 

I you're eyes are comfortable with WSXGA+, you won't be gaming (which is why a lot of people take WUXGA) and your hunch is that the screen refresh and renders will be faster at native resolution then go for it.

 

He's asking not about the resolution, but if the quality would be in full 1080p HD

 

I'm sure there would be small black bars, but picture quality wouldn't be an issue.