New SZ 660 on 24? LCD at 1920 x 1200, slows down system?

I searched other posts and saw that the SZ can handle 1920 x 1200 via DVI on the dock. I am running 1920 x 1200 on my Acer 24” LCD and I’ve noticed that my computer slows down considerably at that resolution. I’m running 60 hrz at 32 bit color. At least I think its from the high resolution. I don’t notice the slowdown as much when I’m undocked.

I noticed the slowdown in Outlook 2003, when I move through emails; it takes 1-2 sec for the message to appear. Undocked, it is nearly instant. Also, the whole system is sluggish. Any thoughts? I updated to the latest Nvidia driver via Windows Update. Obviously I’m running Speed mode.

Finally, I’m thinking about installing Win XP, because I’m having some many other issues. Could this help?


Anyone out there running 1920 x 1200 via DVI without any slowdown?

Thanks!

 

yes - there is a performance hit with the large video output - I can see it as cursor lag in cad programs.
xp will not help - it's just the limits of the vid card

 

whats the max via the RGB output?

 

Obviously it takes more resources to render 1920x1200 pixels than it does to render, say, 1280x800. But with modern graphics cards and CPU components, even the lower end ones, the difference should be minuscule and not very noticeable to the naked eye.

What sort of CPU & videocard does your SZ660 have? Because if it has the Nvidia 8400M or the Intel X3100 integrated graphics that the SZ660 I just looked up has, and a C2D T7xxx CPU, it *shouldn't* be significantly slower. I run 1920x1200 on all of my primary PC's, including my new AR670, and in fact my 2.5 year old Dell Inspiron with a P4 and crummy ATI graphics drives not only the laptop's 1920x1200 LCD but also a secondary monitor at 1600x1200 -- for a total desktop resolution of 3520x1200. I detect no desktop performance problems at all.

Desktop performance should not be hindered much with even mediocre graphics cards. Even with the i950 Intel IGP graphics, my Toshiba Satellite rendered Aero at 1280x1024 without a hitch. Now gaming at the highest resolution, yes of course it will be considerably slower without a high-end graphics card, but not on the desktop.

One thing you may be noticing is that, at higher resolution, you have more visible area to be rendered at once. The way the Windows API renders windows and images, it's optimized to draw only what is visible on the screen or within the bounding window -- when you scroll or resize windows, the rest is drawn then. So it stands to reason if you're viewing an image that is, for example, 1280x1024 on a 1920x1200 display, you'll probably see the entire imagine rendered at one time, while on a 1280x800 display you'll only get part of it rendered at a time. Which could give the illusion of faster rendering on the lower resolution, but it's because fewer pixels are actually being drawn at a time. To test that theory, resize your e-mail or image window down to the same size you would have it at the lower resolution, and compare rendering times.