URGENT!!! (1920x1200) vs. (1680x1050)

How's your eye sight? If it is very good, the WUXGA provides for smaller; however, much crisper text images.

What are you going to use the machine for? If it is mainly for Office/text type of "stuff", then the WSXGA is the better choice. If you are using it for graphics and/or playing a variety of games, the WUXGA may be better.

Also if you need to display "more" on you screen at the same time (multiple applications and open windows), the WUXGA is the better sort.

After saying all that, it depends on your eyesight and if you can actually "see" stuff at the WUXGA resolution. Best way to check it out is to drop by your local computer store and just "take a look" and see which will work for you. The $50 difference is not too much, if you like it or need the additional desktop space.

i would recommend the wuxga, expecially for such a small price difference.

also, i dont think youll find many displays at stores with this resolution. it seems people are blind these days and cant use anything more than wxga.

Won't 1920x1200 be sort of too tiny on a 15.4"? A friend of mine has a an HP laptop, i dont remember the model, with a 15.4" WSXGA screen and the icons and stuff are so tiny i can barely use it at that resolution. Imagine if it was WUXGA!
Of course you get used to it after a while i guess as i have on my 9860 with a WSXGA but still i think 1680x1050 is more than enough. Even for gaming. That was the main reason i chose the 9860 in the first place.
Besides i dont think he is going to be able to play the new games in a year or so with that resolution and decent framerates.

You also might want to consider that in the future HDTV is going to the 1900x1200 resolution, so you may want it for that reason as well.

Just a note it appears your overlooking, the 1900xwhatever is the MAXIMUM resolution, its worth the 50$... and if its too small, just put it on a lower res.

You can find the answer to your own question by determining what will be the primary use of your computer.

I do a lot of CAD and 3D rendering on my 2 year old Dell Inspiron 8500. So I opted for the 1900x1200 resolution since I need to see a lot of screen real estate. In addition to seeing more on the screen, the graphics and intensity is great. It doesn't look so good if you change the settings in order to have larger icons, text, etc. since that is not native to the screen.

On the downside, I have noticed a distinct change in my eyesight after 2 years of use. When viewing the screen over my shoulder, people can't see the details because they are too far away and, often, I find myself with my nose to the screen in order to see small text and objects.

I would recommend viewing the 1680x1050 screens at your local computer store and see if you can accept that resolution. Unless you have had a WUXGA, they will look very familiar and comfortable. If you view the two side by side, the WUXGA will 'WOW' you. But be careful, as we all want the biggest, the baddest, the most...and we want it all. Sometimes we get what we want, and we later pay the price for our ignorance.

After having said all this, I am waiting for the new D900K dual cores to hit the scene in November and I will ponder which screen to order because I have grown accustomed to the WUXGA and 'DAMN THE EYESIGHT'!

Hope this helps...biggest isn't always the best and right solution for everyone.

I have the 1920x1200 but have it set to 1600x1200 it looks great (though the rest of the non 1200 resolutions don't look as good)

I like high resolution monitors. The 21" CRT I am currently using is set to 1792 x 1344 pixels. I am planning to buy a 17" WUXGA notebook. HOWEVER, I foudn that the 15.4 WUXGA was too small to be useful.

http://www.notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=43922

Here they are side by side on a 15.4" 3790.

Its like any resolution change, you'll get used to it. I used to think 1024 x 768 was small when it came out, for a minute or two...then when you go back to 800 x 600 you shudder and weep at the loss of desktop space.

I have WUXGA and I doubt many people work more office hours on their WUXGA screens than I do. I wear glasses and even so my visions blurs a bit when I'm tired...and I can still read fine on this screen (with my glasses on, obviously.) I love the space I have to work, I can have 14 windows open and still be able to read them all on the taskbar at the bottom. I have two pages on my screen in Word, no squishing involved. Best thing you could do is check one out yourself. If not, 50$ is well worth it and as someone mentioned, you can always use a lower resolution on your screen (I never do, I can read fine.)

All this and it boots so fast I don't bother ever using standby mode...

NON-GLOSSY 15.4" TFT WSXGA+ (1680x1050) Active Matrix Display

I just went through this, less than a month ago when I purchased a Sager 3880, deciding on which screen to purchase.

I decided on the middle of the road, which was the "NON-GLOSSY 15.4" TFT WSXGA+ (1680x1050) Active Matrix Display".

I can’t tell you how much I love this screen and machine!!!! At first I thought DAMN that’s small, compared from my 19" monitor, but after a day or two of using the laptop, I took the desktop down and junked it!!!! I hate it if I ever have to look at a different screen; yes I love it that much!

From what I was told, if you want your eyes to bleed then get the high resolution screen, if not get the WSXGA+ (1680x1050).

Below is a screen shot of my desktop, showing Notebookforums.com at its most narrow width, before the horizontal scroll bar appears at the bottom. The text and icon size is normal; I've done nothing to change the font point size.

Also the image has been run through Photoshop, saved as a jpeg at 70% image quality to help reduce file size.

Hope this helps!!!!!

All the best!

Jeff

Hi I am also in the same boat I need to decide between the WSXGA or WUXGA

for the 17 inch Sager 9890, I am a developer, I will still use it for gaming/TV

but mostly developing, will the text be toooo small?

what about what "thelastone" he said is this actually true? I mean If I get the WUXGA 1920 X 1200 and can drop it to 1600x1200 or 1680 X 1050 and not loose quality or be blury that would be great.

but I have also read the following statment from this link

http://www.notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=43922



can someone confirm this please.

Thanks

thats just from what you have been " told ".
WUXGA is great!
But still it depends on people perference.
Your comment is just too negative.

I've never owned a notebook but am looking to purchase one and I'm finding that I have the same misgivings about resolutions on higher end notebooks.

For some benchmarks, I read a review in Maximum PC on a bunch of 19 inch flat panels that got great reviews overall and they ALL use 1280X1024 as the native resolution. My current ViewSonic VG175 is 17.5 inches and also uses 1280X1024 and it's a very sharp screen with lot's of information on screen and available. Further, my work laptop, a Toshiba, Tecra 8100 has a 14.1" screen and is set for 1024X768 and, while not a great screen, seems fine to me in terms of resolution.

Currently I've been eyeing up the new Poynote MXM based 915 and 914 machines. The former use a 15" screen with a 1400X1050 resolution and the later uses a 15.4" screen with a 1680X1050 resolution. Both of which "seem" very high to me based on the comparitive references I mentioned. Of course the I can always buy a machine and return it for a paltry 15% restocking fee if I start getting dizzy using it.

Of interest and of a more direct notebook to notebook comparison, the Falcon Northwest TL Notebook also uses a 15.4" screen but they've opted for a standard 1280X800. As you guys know, their machines are very expensive relative to a Sager or a Polynote, so I wonder if they did this because of the eyestrain issue of simply to put more money in their pockets. Of interest, Falcon jumps on the UXGA bandwagon with it's DR6800 line wich has a 17 inch screen.

So what's driving these super high-res screens in notebookd? It seems that plain old XGA is fine and that most of this may fall under the umbrella of marketing hype. Is more resolution really that much better? I'm sure many of you guys out there probably have a decent desktop/flat panel set-up at home as well as a high-end, high-res notebook and I'm wondering which do you prefer, your super-res notebooks screen or your stand alone flat-panel screen?

Any input is appreciated.

Tom

I just have one question.

does the WUXGA consume more power than the WSXGA?
so the battery life will be shorter?

Thx.

just to let you guys know, i got the 1920 X 1200 9880, NON-glossy.... i love it.


however.... i have it set at 1920 X 1200, BUT i have enlarged DPI. i have it set to 140%.

right click on the desktop backround... properties... settings. here you control the screen resolution, click on the advanced button and you can set DPI

Actually, just like in your first paragraph...you get used to it very fast.

I posted screenpics in my review (check my sig) comparing WXGA, WSXGA and WUXGA. You get a LOT more desktop space on WUXGA than on a WXGA screen. Images are crisper in games and you have a lot more space to work with. I always read two pages side by side in Word now and use the a web browser on half of my screen and word on another half of screen while working with no squishing of the word document at all.

I no longer have a desktop, the beauty of a high-end, high res notebook is that you no longer really need one. All you need is a mouse..