Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA GeForce 7, 8, And 9 Series

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-28-02, 01:38 AM   #13
mavis
Radeon X800 Pro
 
mavis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 44
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by skipparoo
Well then don't go by what you "think" looks best, go by what you "know" is right.
Yes, SIR!!!

Very amusing thread. Looks good even at 1280x1024 (oh the horror!!!)



mavis
__________________
my rig
mavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-02, 01:54 AM   #14
Cereal-Killer
Posts: 4159
 
Cereal-Killer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 73
Default

Here's my $0.02: I'm using a flat panal monitor with the native res @ 1280x1024. I can't notice any kind of distortion when playing games or browsing the web. But let's say I draw a circle in Photoshop, it'll be more like an ellipse. Even that is hardly noticable though... if at all. Mathematically incorrect? Yes. Big deal? No.
Cereal-Killer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-02, 01:57 AM   #15
Matthyahuw
Registered User
 
Matthyahuw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: AZ
Posts: 919
Send a message via ICQ to Matthyahuw Send a message via AIM to Matthyahuw Send a message via Yahoo to Matthyahuw
Default

I use only 1280x960 (unless it's unselectable), but if someone wants to use 1280x1024, go right ahead!
Even if it is WRONG
__________________
Shalom!
Matthyahuw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-02, 02:29 AM   #16
SavagePaladin
info*****
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,395
Default

I'm so wrong-headed.
I'm going to go hang myself now...
Well, actually, I'm not on 1280 until I get a better vidcard and monitor.
Maybe just the monitor.
I will note one of my fav games hates 1280x960
SavagePaladin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-02, 02:48 AM   #17
koslov
Omnipresent Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 33
Default

It is my understanding that 1280x1024 will not distort the picture in 3D applications. It just samples more pixels in the same space as 1280x960 does. The 5:4 ratio only applys to 2D apps... I still use 1280x1024 as a desktop res because I am not a 2D artist and the difference is insignificant to my eyes.
koslov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-02, 05:44 AM   #18
Feanor
Registered User
 
Feanor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 37
Default

Well as to the use of imaginary numbers (the complex number system), if the algebra teacher I had when I was back in highschool is correct, imaginary numbers did come into play (an application thereof) when radio technology was being developed. Though I have worked with some circuit design (in regards to computers) I have not looked into this to see if he was correct. Imaginary numbers could have their practical applications however.

As to the 1280 x 1024...I really don't care if the same 5:4 aspect ratio is used or not. I've had too many monitors in the past where 1280 x 960 looks rather distorted, and on my current one (a Viewsonic A90) it's all off center and takes a lot of work to get it centered and to fill the screen. That includes increasing the horizontal size and seriously changing the positioning... At least it isn't distorted like it was on my older 15" though...

1280 x 1024 is also the highest res I can use without going below a 75 Hz refresh rate....and 60 Hz refresh looks kinda dim, flickers, and can give me headaches...hence 1600 x 1200 is out. I don't like smaller desktops that fit less on them...and also prefer what displays without distortion or requiring substantial adjustment to my monitor. (And though I have worked inside a monitor before, if it's so far off I couldn't adjust it from the controls in the front...I'd rather pass on having to open it up to make course adjustments ...Lets just say it's so extremely off center, the right most 1/2 to 2/3 or so of the desktop is way off the screen when set to 1280 x 960 H position is also at 14...and it won't go much more to the left...) 1280 x 1024 doesn't have the inevitable "my desktop won't center on the screen" effect on this monitor.

In games I do use 1024 x 768 though, with Quincunx AA and Aniso

Last edited by Feanor; 07-28-02 at 05:50 AM.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-02, 07:10 AM   #19
Kruno
TypeDef's assistant
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,641
Send a message via ICQ to Kruno Send a message via AIM to Kruno
Default

I asked my maths methods teacher about this before (if imaginary numbers could be used anywhere) he went whacko at me and said you just simply can't because the square root of a negative doesn't exist. He said Imaginary numbers are there to help you understand maths better and is an extension of learning maths BUT I.N s can't be used practically.

That's what my maths teacher said. Prove him wrong and I will be happy to tell him


"Well as to the use of imaginary numbers (the complex number system), if the algebra teacher I had when I was back in highschool is correct, imaginary numbers did come into play (an application thereof) when radio technology was being developed. Though I have worked with some circuit design (in regards to computers) I have not looked into this to see if he was correct. Imaginary numbers could have their practical applications however."
__________________
"Never before has any voice dared to utter the words of that tongue in Imladris, Mr. Anderson" - Elrond LOTR
Kruno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-02, 07:40 AM   #20
Babel-17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: New York, USA
Posts: 2
Default

koslov hits the nail on the head. I've used several funky resolutions in UT and they do not distort the 3D display. At 1600x1024 the game looks excellent and I get to enjoy a refresh rate of 85Hz instead of the 72Hz I would get at 1600x1200. Lol, the UT console (or should I could it "browser"?) looks distorted at that setting but I don't really care.
Babel-17 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 07-28-02, 08:08 AM   #21
Dazz
"TOON ARMY!"
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Newcastle, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,138
Send a message via AIM to Dazz
Default

1280x960 on my monitor looks squshed up, 1280x1024@85Hz looks alot better. I have a Hansol 710P monitor which can do 1600x1200@75Hz even though i can rerely run games nice at that high damn processor. Although i started to except 60Hz now
Dazz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-02, 09:12 AM   #22
DIMA
Registered User
 
DIMA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 78
Send a message via ICQ to DIMA
Default

What are u guys talking about?!

The best resolution both for 2D & 3D: 1024x768@32bit at 85hz with AA & AF (the later two things for 3D obviously )
__________________
P4 2ghz
512mb RDRAM
GF4 TI4600
DIMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-02, 09:16 AM   #23
Kruno
TypeDef's assistant
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,641
Send a message via ICQ to Kruno Send a message via AIM to Kruno
Default

I could argue 320x240 looks best but considering the amount of work devs placed into getting rid of that resolution it wouldn't seem fair to compare such a 1337 resolution like 320x240 to sux0ring resolutions like 1600x1200 and so on
__________________
"Never before has any voice dared to utter the words of that tongue in Imladris, Mr. Anderson" - Elrond LOTR
Kruno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-02, 09:19 AM   #24
DIMA
Registered User
 
DIMA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 78
Send a message via ICQ to DIMA
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by K.I.L.E.R
I could argue 320x240 looks best but considering the amount of work devs placed into getting rid of that resolution it wouldn't seem fair to compare such a 1337 resolution like 320x240 to sux0ring resolutions like 1600x1200 and so on
LOL

Actually, 320x240 will be pretty popular when DOOM III comes out, cause according to Carmack, enjoyable framerates for GF1SDR owners will only be achievable with this resolution!

There, found that comment:
Quote:
The slowest cards will be the 64 bit and SDR ram GF and Radeon cards, which will really not be fast enough to play the game properly unless you run at 320x240 or so.
__________________
P4 2ghz
512mb RDRAM
GF4 TI4600

Last edited by DIMA; 07-28-02 at 09:22 AM.
DIMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
nvidia-settings only allowing 1440x900 resolution lumina NVIDIA Linux 4 11-17-12 03:09 PM
Regression with GTK+ menus when using a virtual resolution alex_sh NVIDIA Linux 0 10-20-12 04:20 PM
The Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 Ti GPU is Out Now, Great for 720p S3D News Archived News Items 0 10-09-12 10:40 AM
8800 GT and Ubuntu - Plymouth low resolution legluondunet NVIDIA Linux 3 06-24-12 04:22 PM
30.82 and 40.41 resolution + monitor OSD. Max3D NVIDIA Windows Graphics Drivers 2 09-05-02 03:15 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.