Widescreen Gaming Forum

If you game mainly and love FPSs, then a higher resolution just means you have to sit more away from your screens, its the same fov whether you game on 5040x1050 or 5760x1200.


on the other hand, bigger screens cost more, take more deskspace, eat more power and worse of all, they make you a slave for life, a slave that has to buy the next high end gfx card, and the next, and the next, to be able to drive them in a native resolution.

I think a native smaller resolution with some AntiAliasing and other eyecandy is better than a bigger one without AA or blurry scaling.
Screen real estate is only of importance for RTS, MMORPGs or work, in FPS and Racers its just more to render, not more to see.
and going 16:9 just to succumb to crappy console ports, where is your rebel spirit ppl? :D 8)

So my advice would be, get another 2 22" 1680x1050 if they make the same model with display port.

I have 3 1680x1050 monitors. One dell native dp and one samsung and a gateway. All black. I do have them color matched pretty well. Since getting the native dp I have not had any problem yet at all. I have not tried bezel management yet though. I have read that may be a issue with 3 diff monitors. To me it is not a big deal yet but I have not played any of my flight sims yet. With the smaller screens you seem to get just enough extra performance to play games with the settings slightly higher then the 1920x1200 and 1080 screens. I like this better but that is my opinion. Good luck with your choices. And yes I did try 3x1920x1200. This is with my i7 920 at 4.0 and my 5970.

If you game mainly and love FPSs, then a higher resolution just means you have to sit more away from your screens, its the same fov whether you game on 5040x1050 or 5760x1200.


on the other hand, bigger screens cost more, take more deskspace, eat more power and worse of all, they make you a slave for life, a slave that has to buy the next high end gfx card, and the next, and the next, to be able to drive them in a native resolution.

I think a native smaller resolution with some AntiAliasing and other eyecandy is better than a bigger one without AA or blurry scaling.
Screen real estate is only of importance for RTS, MMORPGs or work, in FPS and Racers its just more to render, not more to see.
and going 16:9 just to succumb to crappy console ports, where is your rebel spirit ppl? :D 8)

So my advice would be, get another 2 22" 1680x1050 if they make the same model with display port.

Eh, higher resolution (ie lower dot pitch) allows you to sit closer to your screen without a drop in quality, I guess you just mean the larger screen size means you have to sit further away to take it all in? The edges of the right and left panel are fine in your peripheral so I don't think you need to sit further away..

I do think 1680x1050 is fine, but also on the crappy console ports I think it's best to have a 16:9 center screen to make sure the UI is going to fit since most games are aimed at fitting on 1920x1080. I've played on a 1368x768 24" monitor and it was terrible at the distance you sit from a monitor (~2.5 feet), no AA can fix the gap between pixels.