Displays Advice needed with monitors, resolutions, linking to TV

Hey everyone, I've done a lot of researching on different models of monitors. However, I'm looking for some user experience here on a few things.

I'm currently looking at 1920x1080, but it appears EVERYONE out there has 1920x1200.

I know the size difference, but what actual real life difference is that going to make for me? I decided 1080 because of true 16:9 widescreen ratio for movies/blurays. However it seems 1200 is widely used for gaming. I also do a lot of web & graphic design, so I guess the extra pixels would help. But for these resolutions being so close, why is there these two options in the first place? Just makes me think there's a valid reason for either.

Also, I'm getting a GTX 295. I'm thinking of hooking my PC up to my 46" 1080p Bravia TV on occasion. However, does this mean my card would have to render the picture that big, meaning I couldn't do this? Or would my TV simply "blow up" the picture to fit on the screen, meaning my PC/GPU wouldn't even be phased by doing this? I assume that if I'm running the game on MAX and I link to a 46" tv, the quality would still be fantastic right? Consoles only render at around 720p HD, and obviously are played on big screen tv's, and look HD.. but still curious.

I don't think my TV has a DVI connection. Does using DVI-HDMI adapter lose picture quality?

Looking for some real user experience with this stuff, thanks in advance!

 

The Pixel size makes no difference, Resolution is everything.

a 24" 1920x1080 Screen is no harder to power than a 50" 1920x1080 Screen.

 

Alright, let's see what we can answer...

1920 x 1200 is the ORIGINAL computer widescreen monitor. The 1920 x 1080 panels are a recent development that many people speculate are nothing more than cheap TV panels turned monitors. The typical 1920 x 1080 monitor is made using a TN panel, which is the cheapest type of LCD panel made. This helps keep prices down, though the quality is typically terrible as TN panels have terrible color reproduction (bad for graphic design), and terrible viewing angles. The only real plus sides to a TN panel, are response time, and price.

The best panels you can buy, are based on IPS technology. The 30" monitors, for example, use S-IPS panels. The HP 24" Bit-Tech recently reviewed uses an H-IPS panel, and is a very good monitor choice (I may be picking up two of them myself).

As Digitalize- said, everything is based on resolution... Resolution is the total number of pixels wide by the number of pixels tall, also known as wide:tall, which can then be reduced into smaller fractions such as 16:10, 16:9, 4:3, etc.

A 100" TV with a 1920 x 1080 resolution will have the same number of pixels as a 24" monitor with a 1920 x 1080 resolution. The difference between the two, is pixel density. Pixel density refers to the number in a set area of space, such as an inch or cm. Basically, the smaller the screen, and the higher the screen resolution, the higher the pixel density. The larger the screen and the lower the resolution, the lower the pixel density. A higher pixel density will result in a clearer and smoother image.

As for how to transfer the image from your computer to your TV, most graphics cards (the 295 included) come with a DVI to HDMI adapter. You can also find DVI to HDMI cables if you manage to lose the adapter. From a quality standpoint, the signal is digital from the graphics card, into the TV, so there will be zero quality loss. The signal is exactly the same between the two sockets, so it's just a matter of changing the socket type... Think of it as a Molex to SATA power adapter... The power being supplied is the same, the only difference in the end connector.

As always, glad to help... BTW, rep is always appreciated! -- Figured I'd sneak that in.

 

In addition, don't look for HDMI inputs if only because HDMI is just DVI + Sound, and sadly sound on monitor speakers are....crappy.

You won't lose any picture quality with DVI-HDMI, but the picture will look a bit off since it's such a big screen(try comparing a 46" 1080p to a 1920x1200 24" monitor, it's a huge difference).

Finally, if you were to run @1920x1080, that's basically 1080i, you have an option to run 1080p under the Nvidia control Panel(IIRC), the only reason consoles "look" HD @ 720p is because the TV's native could be 1360x768, if not then it's that the Progressive scan helps it much more.

Of course 720p OR 1080p is still beans compared to the excellent resolution of 2560x1600 E/S/H-IPS 30" monitors of Dell, Apple and NEC.

 

You guys seem to really know your stuff, I'm glad a jumped into this thread I am also looking for a TV/PS3/PC hmdi monitor...

The DVI cable with separate audio cables do appear expensive and I thought adding the extra to my budget may get me a better TV (especially with 1080i's rumoured to be TVs)..

The sound issue wouldn't be too bad but the PS3 only has digital optical out.. My speaker set up is 2.1 via the PC.. (pc doesn't have digital optical).

Thanks for your posts above - If you want to read anything on my issue's/plans thread below.

http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?t=172564

 

You can always look for HDMI--DVI converters so you can use your PS3 to have HDMI vdieo output and then use the digital audio out via SPIDF..

 

I have no input for the SPIDF in the speakers or PC? (i think)..

 

SPIDF via from PS3 to Receiver.

This is assuming you have a receiver.

 

Isn't 1920x1080, 1080p.

I thought 1080p was true 1080 res, whereas 1080i was interlaced and so wasn't created at 1080 and is upscaled to 1080???

 

I thought i shuold throw in that if you DO go for a 1920x1200 make sure that the monitor has support for 1:1 mapping, so that if you plug it into say the Ps3 (which uses 1080p) you will get perfect rendering as well as get your blue ray, and HD dvd showing perfect.

Naturally you would get black bars at the top and bottom around an inch and half big, but that's a minor payoff for getting the extra real estate from the 1900x1200.

DVI, HDMI, they're all digital so adapters are fine. My monitor has 2 dvi ports, i'm going to use the hdmi port to connect to my GPU via a DVI adapter so i can get 2 free DVI ports on my monitor for other stuff talk about shhweeeet.

 

Hmm... yea now I'm debating on my 1080 monitor and going for a 1200.

Well here's a few other points:

I'm often going to have my 2nd PS3 hooked up to one of my dual monitors when I don't need both for PC. PS3 supports 1080p so wouldn't a 1920x1080 be better for perfect scale?

Also, do most/all games support 1920x1080 or is this a more niche resolution? Even with PC wallpapers from websites.. they usually skip 1080 and just list 1200's in the HD sizes. I just see ALL gamers using 1200, so it makes me feel like I'm buying something I shouldn't be.

Also that whole tech thing about 1080's using some cheap tv technology in the earlier post here worries me too, although I don't know anything about what was stated.. I'll research.

 

The i and the p refers to the way it refreshes. P stands for progressive and means the whole screen gets refreshed as one. Whereas the I stands for interlaced meaning half the screen refreshes then the other half.

Or at least thats what i remember

 

Find a monitor with 1:1 mapping. Simple as that.

 

Read my post (the ps3 and bluray and hddvd part)
Once the monitor has 1:1 mapping the scaling is perfect and identical to a 1920x1080 monitor, the only thing is that there will be black bars at top and bottom

The cheap LCD technology used for 1920x1080 displays is the TN panel. There's the VA and IPS which are the far superior panels, and they are usually in the 1920x1200.

 

Hey guys.. I decided 1200 then, I checked newegg and tigerdirect and I'm pretty bummed out about the selection. I don't see any mention about 1:1 mapping, and the ONLY monitor which has 2ms response and 50,000:1 contrast ratio is a bright orange Acer.. and I don't want bright orange.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009155

There's not a single other 1200px monitor at 2ms and 50,000:1 at either of these sites.. can any one please help!

I just finalized my PC list and now I feel helpless with the monitor, especially at my price range :-(

 

Not helping the OP Now - 1080i is technically 1366x768, or in my experience every TV Which supports 1080i (But not 1080p) is this resolution.

Ok - 50,000:1 is dynamic contrast, which means the panel is constantly changing which spectrum it looks at, it cannot produce 50,000 shades between black and white, it is a industry trick. Dont get so hung up on numbers, just read some professional reviews, group tests etc.

 

The advertised contrast ratios are always off, don't rely on them at all.

 

Check your facts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080i

Your experience is true, cheaper tv's do downscale it but that is not 1080i

 

Whitesky go here
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=31&threadid=2049206

First page, LCD recommendations. Enjoy

 

Well, after about 6 hours of research.. articles.. reviews and user comments, I'm heavily looking at the

HP LP2475w, as recently reviewed here at big-tech:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/monitors/2009/07/28/hp-lp2475w-24in-widescreen-tft-review/1

The price is a bit steep, but I've officially crossed any TN panels off the list and only considering H-IPS now, like this monitor.

The only problem now is 6ms response time, and some reports of input lag. While I'll be doing more graphic design than gaming, I'm still a little concerned. I just feel I need to make a decision as otherwise I'm gonna go on like this forever.. it seems getting a short response time, high ratio, no ghosting or input lag all on a non-TN panel is pretty much impossible. This so far seems like the best combo of these factors.

I also read in the review tht HP released a new H-IPS version of this, with much lower input lag, compared to the initial models (S-IPS) with high input lag. I'll need to do some asking around to ensure I'm getting the right model.