1600x900 pros:
256MB graphics card
bettery quality
cons:
less battery life(?)
price
Did I miss anything?
What's the difference between Duraview and Xbrite ECO technology? (the smaller res. screen seems to use the newer technology?)
A couple Questions:
For such a small screen size, wouldn't a 1600x900 resolution be too high to matter?
256MB VRAM won't help much for gaming. Is there any other advantage?
Which one would you go for?
-
-
In reference to the Video Ram. The amount of VRAM is insignificant as compared to the actual card architecture and memory bus. 256MB is adequate in quantity for that resolution, but the card certainly is NOT for modern gaming. -
It's the high resolution of the small Z that makes me want to buy it, without it I would buy something else. Do you guys think there will be another 13" with that resolution comming soon?
-
The Lenovo X300 is running 1440x900 on a 13"
-
Lenovo U330 might offer a high resolution option, Dell E4300 maybe?
-
Let me rephrase:
Won't the fonts / buttons be kind of tiny? I'm less worried about eye strain and more worried about how easy it'll be to navigate, etc.
And will 256MB vs. 128MB VRAM make a difference in any way? -
You'll have to see that for yourself. It's subjective. Have a look at the TZ if you can't find the Z, it has the same PPI. (pixels per inch)
> And will 256MB vs. 128MB VRAM make a difference in any way?
When running in the same resolution it will perform a bit better in 3d rendering and gaming. That's all. -
Also games like Assassins Creed will not run at all on cards with less than 256MB VRAM...
But otherwise you won't notice a major performance gain.... -
I saw that too, but I'm not convinced it's accurate... nVidia's site seems to have all 9300m's CUDA and PhysX ready...
Can anyone confirm or disprove? -
Fonts and icons can always enlarged by software. -
I have a TZ and I find the resolution a bit too high for the 11 inch screen.
I'm seriously thinking about getting the Z as I also find the TZ a bit too underpowered.
If I were to get the Z, I would def get the 1366x768 resolution.
I think for a 13 inch screen, 1366x768 would be perfect. -
Which resolution would you all recommend if I plan to use an external monitor/TV a lot when using the Z? Or does it not matter?
-
is there any performance difference between two when playing HD movies the 1080p ones..It can be either through an hd monitor or on the screen itself but i do not think that it would be so fun to watch a 1080p movie in a 13.1" screen
-
But this much is objective: stuff will appear smaller on the 1600x900 screen than on the 1366x768 (or whatever it is) screen. You can correct for this to some extent by adjusting the DPI... but some things might not look quite right when scaled, especially if they weren't designed with DPI scaling in mind. I haven't used DPI myself much, so I can't say how good/bad it will be in much more detail.
I was at my local Sony brick & mortar store, and they had one of the high-res Z's on display. If there's a Sony store near you, go see if you can see it in person. If you can't see a high-res Z in person, then look at a TZ -- the TZ's screen has a pixel density close to that of the higher-res Z screen. -
-
1600 will give you 140 pixels per inch. That is denser than AR that has 133 pixels per inch. And I already find it hard to read the font of AR. I can't imagine just how much harder it is for Z with 1600 but to give you an example, try to read the word Explorer in just a 9mm (0.35 inch) space.
1600x900 vs. 1366x768 Sony Z?
Discussion in 'VAIO / Sony' started by meteorstorm42, Aug 17, 2008.