New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WSXGA+ or WUXGA????????? - Page 2

post #21 of 36
2/11/06 at 7:12am
fetz just get different drivers
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 36
2/11/06 at 6:27pm
WUXGA is not necessary for primary gaming purposes. WUXGA is for guys (like me) which cannot have enough screen real estate ever.

Be warned that WUXGA displays are not as bright as WSXGA+ because their light transmission factor is limited due to the higher transistor count (1.5 million more thin film transistors). For the same reason, the color precision is also not as good as with a 1680 display.

If you're a serious gamer, I won't recommend to go for 1920.

Regards, WillyDee
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 36
2/11/06 at 8:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by willydee
Be warned that WUXGA displays are not as bright as WSXGA+ because their light transmission factor is limited due to the higher transistor count (1.5 million more thin film transistors). For the same reason, the color precision is also not as good as with a 1680 display.
My experience has been different. I had my 9750 and my AX7 (4750) side by side and they looked equally bright. Now the brightness specs for the wuxga are slightly higher so that may be the equalizing factor. Next to my Samsung 173p both screens look pathetically dim.

As for the color precision, both are terrible. No color profiles could get my AX7 looking decent. Big problem because I do a lot of web and print work. Now the 9750 wuxga default settings were equally poor, but lowering the blue brightness by 14% returned very nice results. I can actually do some design work on this machine and know my colors aren't off in left field. I did try some different icc color profiles but none looked good.

The wsxga 4750 looks a little washed out, while the 9750 wuxga tends to have a bit too much contrast. These issues are pretty easy to fix, fortunately.

Keep in mind i'm comparing a 4750 screen and a 9750. We know now that the 9750 wuxga screen is different than the other wuxga clevo's so my results may not be consistant with other models.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 36
2/12/06 at 12:27am
Thread Starter 
Is the only difference between WS and WU are the native resolutions?
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 36
2/12/06 at 2:03am
all i know is I spend $5000 on an gamming blaptop"gen2" to find every game is blurry from stretching . i could have a faster micro atx game cube with a perfect rez lcd for less money . it's not the money it's the fckn screen blurry that pises me off . Ii also have an IBM laptop that has a nice screen it looks really good and low native rez and good colors but the video card sucks and cant play any games .LOL
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 36
2/12/06 at 2:26am
Prefer higher res myself, but your eyes may vary
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 36
2/12/06 at 4:29am
i think you're all missing my point . Any one of these screens has to stretch the picture to fill the screen. This causes a fuzzy affect on my gen2 with at native rez of 1920x1200 . WHY CANT THEY JUST MAKE A SCREEN FOR GAMERS SO WE CAN RUN THE GAMES AT NATIVE REZ ? When you order the laptop it can be one of the screen options.
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 36
2/12/06 at 5:47am
fetz calm down. at least i'm not missing your point and i dont think the others are.

1. you dont have to strech the picture to fit the screen, you can play games at 1600x1200 with black borders on every side and i wont be blurry.
2. you should have thought of that before. i personally would also prefer that my sager came with a wxga resolution. you can always add aa when you need it.
3. there wont be any new laptops in the future that can actually be called gaming machines and have a low res screen. most people think the bigger the better and thats why they buy it.
4. you can still plug your laptop to an external monitor and play at lower res.
5. and next time dont spend more than 3k on a laptop.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 36
2/12/06 at 7:23am
I sometimes use better drivers, but they wont let me use the tv out unless i force it . i came to the assumption that the dell drivers are more optimized for go video . But they don’t look as good. When I install newer driver all of the sudden the screen is sharper .hmmm maybe i try more with the tv out and new driver cause if the lcd looks better and i mean a lot sharper with new drivers then the tv out may also look sharper. i just didn’t like forcing the tv on . any way yea i have desktops, more then one, that rock and don’t have any monitor problems i guess i got spoiled just like watching HDTV on my 24inch dell lcd monitor at 1920x1000 , it looks incredible . Better then in the store displays. i go now and play with new drivers . See ya

edit
I tell you what if they made an optimized screen for games. Why not? Dell made the gen2 xps as a gaming laptop. So if they made a gaming screen and listed it as an option when buying the laptop I think more people would be happy and be willing to pay for it . Just look at the dell forum all they do is play games on there laptops. The gen2 is a gaming laptop. Why not make a special screen optimized for games?
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 36
2/12/06 at 1:23pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Ottis
Is the only difference between WS and WU are the native resolutions?

????????????????????
Reply
Reply
post #31 of 36
2/12/06 at 1:41pm
i installed 83.60 drivers on my gen2 .even though the 3dmark05 dropped over 1000 points it looks better and i disabled scaling fit to screen . i see what you mean . my 9750 went into production Friday do you think it would be to late to change the order ?
Now i have to spend the rest of the day playing games with black borders to see if i like it . LOL and it snowed 22 inches .LOL perfect
Reply
Reply
post #32 of 36
2/12/06 at 2:09pm
i played with borders and MAN IS IT CRISP . But you loose either way. Even with 1920x1200 you can’t use all the pixels unless you stretch it to fit the screen. 1600x1000 you play with a smaller screen but you will have more frame rate and with all eye candy on. Frame rate is what i am looking for. i don’t like to play games choppy at 30 frames .I like 200 frame madness .
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 36
2/12/06 at 5:29pm
fetz,
If you read my earlier posts in this thread, I addressed all the issues you are bringing up. The fact that not every game supports 1680x1050 or 1920x1200 is not the fault of the screen... The developers of the game simply chose not to make their game compatible with high res, widescreen displays.

I don'y like the streaching either. I like things looking very crisp in the native res. Try this:
-Go to your nvidia display drivers.
-Go to nView display settings.
-Click the Device Settings button at the bottom
-Choose Device Adjustments
Modes:
-Choose Centered Output for Native Res with black borders.
-Choose Display Adapter Scaling for display scaling and streaching.
-Choose Fixed Aspect Ratio Scaling for scaling, but not streaching.

I can't tell for sure if you have things working from your posts, but i'm posting this anyway. Also, there are many games that support 1920x1200.
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 36
2/12/06 at 6:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by fetz
my eyes are perfect i have 20/20 vision . i play games on my desktop lcd at 1600x1200 screen cause it looks so much better . but wait a second what do you mean it wont play games at 1600x1200 ? Why not?
Eh, if you are having a problem reading that resolution you might be due for an eye exam. I read 1600 x 1200 no problem on a 16" screen and sit a pretty good distance away from it and my eyes are terrible.
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 36
2/13/06 at 12:53am
my screen is 1920x1200 . it's not the size i read books no problem . i think it's the backlight on the lcd "the contrast”. I up all night reading on the internet. Or maybe it's just that i up all night . LOL

bigtrouble77

i got borders working but i think the 83.60 drivers are for 7800gtx my gen2 has a 6800ultra . Still it works oh and by the way the tv out worked automatically and looks better then ever. i think i will stick with the 83.60 driver for now
Wile i wait for my 9750 to arrive. i had to order just before weekend right an extra 2 days added.
don’t now how i feel when the sli laptop is releasedBecause I not spend another five grand I don’t think, I am saving to buy land, I cant. I don’t think. well at least not till after I buy land
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 36
2/14/06 at 1:06pm
I had the 9750 with 1920x1200 (NOT the GlareType) - and could compare it directly to my 1680x1050 GlareType in 9860. And I can tell you, the GlareType - in spite of the lower resolution - is MUCH better.

BTW - the 1920 broke and due to a lack of those displays I decided to let them build in a GlareType. Now I am absolutely happy, because the resolution is absolutely unimportant in this case. 1920 looked crispy, 1680 is like printed, I can tell you.... But when you use it without comparing you forget how bad or great it is... .
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sager & Clevo Notebooks