Turn Your D810 into a Gaming Monster - Page 2

I've got the 17", so I can't speak for those with 15.4"s, but at first it was the same way for me. I was worried when I first got it because of all the horror stories I had read about on here about sparkles and everything, but I ended up loving it. At first it seemed just way too small, but after a day or so I got used to it and loved it. Too bad I sold my 9300 on ebay last week and am now without a notebook.

On the other hand, I got almost what I paid for it, and the warranty is almost up on it. I plan to buy another one the next time the EPP deals are here for less than I got for this one. Then with the extra cash...pinmod and 7800 gtx.

I know I wouldn't raise the DPI.

1. I would love the high res and wouldn't want anything taking that away.
2. It screws up screen elements.
3. I've got good (young) eyes

x

I'd love to be able to pinmod my 710m. No Sonoma though

It is! I tried it once and couldn't stand the text size. Not because I have problems seeing it, but because it is ridiculously small.

WSXGA+ is roughly the same as a 17 WUXGA on text size. I would say WXGA+ would be better suited to 15.4; a perfect balance between real state and text size.

I have found WUXGA just beautiful on a 15.4", just as it was for 3 years on an old 15" UXGA. It isn't the text size that is the problem (any half decent program allows you to set the text to the size one wants!...not IE of course!), but web sites that require IE to display properly. After a minute of adjustment, Firefox/Mozilla are just fantastic in a 15.4" WUXGA. As there is much more screen density, the images and text of course are much clearer than on a low density screen. The pros and cons of high density screens have been discussed on these forms a hundred times. The only folk who are in a position to argue for or against are those who have tried a specific HD level on a specific screen size. Of them, some love HD, some don't. Just like some love and hate XGA. But it not a question of text size. Software determines text size, not hardware. Software also is the determinant of how each program uses screen real estate. Some software are not been designed to utilize HD screens; the smaller the screen the worse the problem. 15.4" HD screens are a particular hardware point where some software chokes on. The worst situation is where the software does not allow sufficient end-user adjustment to make them usable for specific screen hardware. If you use HD the only choice is to avoid such poorly designed software - or restrict oneself to using inferior screen hardware that it is targetted at. Fortunately, more and more programs and operating systems are (or are becoming) HD-compliant. For those of us who can mostly avoid HD-uncompliant programs (IE is still essential for some web sites. Even Windows XP is only roughly compliant: it takes not a little experimentation, and the settings do not carry over to each program that runs on top of it. Vista promises to improve), there is (and there has been for many years) little reason to suffer the pixilation level inherent in LD screens

WUXGA All the way!

It is primarily the shock of seeing how much smaller everything is on your brand new huge screen
compared to your old small screen.

I first went from a SVGA 12" Latitude LM to a Sony VAIO 15" XGA, I took one look at the VAIO 16"
SXGA and could not understand why everything was so much smaller.

Within less than a year, I was ready for a WUXGA and dumped that VAIO.

It was delivered with 120dpi but this causes distortion in some applications, so it has always been set at 96dpi.

The 'tiny' text is just something to get used to, my eyes are far older than the first electronic computer
and I do need decent variable specs.

I find the WUXGA screen far easier to read than a newspaper for a comparison,
the high resolution of 148 pixels per inch puts the clarity way above what the XGA Sony VAIO had been.

Another thing I like about this crystal clear presentation is that I can reduce the resolution 'on the fly'
(unlike dpi change, no re-booting) and not see any of the pixelation or 'scale error'
that was seen on every other LCD Screen.

For over 90% of my use, WUXGA is a must, however, when in a Hotel between flights,
I will often select a 'custom' 960x600 'WSVGA' resolution (ideal for web surfing) and set it on
the dresser and enjoy the huge icons and text from across the room with my Bluetooth Mouse.

It was the same when I got my WSXGA+ i8600 after the XGA i5100. Heaps better

Any opinions on what would be the best for gaming? A compromise between nice high res and a res that could run games decently? Especially since a default d810 only has a x600 in it. I tend to think I'd rather have the wxga res for gaming.

1920x1200 on a 15.4 inch screen is beautiful, it's the main feature I miss from my 8600. You really have to run at 96dpi otherwise it looks rather nasty, Windows can't really upscale properly.

John

Yeah, I suppose thats a consideration.

hye, mr.k6
nice job there... hope u can put some pics of the d810 running with 6800.
a screenie from the device manager would be nice!

Yeah, a photo of the screen with the device manager showing the 6800 would be

Actually, whatever you set as the dpi for the windows OS itself, you still have the various settings for each program you run on top of the OS. Many programs look great in WUXGA with a little bit of tweaking from the defaults, whatever the OS dpi setting - including Microsoft Office! IE is a so often noted exception - apparently that is going to be fixed with Vista. I have been running an OS dpi setting of around 120 to 125 in (W)UXGA for 5 years then varied the settings (when needed - and possible) for each program. The final restraint on software-constrained dpi (more properly "ppi") is the native dpi/ppi, which on a 15.4" WUXGA screen is 147.

fantastic... would be waiting for the screenie!

Gaming can be the big problem with the highres screens

There is a registry edit for IE to solve the issue and other browsers such as opera work fine.

I found the main problem was with the shell itself, not the programs (which could usually be tweaked), the system tray icons in particular looked messy.

John