# Off-Topic Discussion > The Lounge > Tech Talk >  >  What's your screen resolution?

## Puffin

I'm curious to see what resolution is the most common nowadays. I'm using 1440x900.

----------


## Solarflare

how do you check thatÉ

edit: FUCK, the question mark button got moved on my keyboard to shift 6, anyone know how to change it back???????v it got switched with french..... I HATE FRENCH!

----------


## Puffin

Windows 
Go to your desktop --> Right-mouse click --> Properties

Mac
Apple --> System preferences --> Displays

----------


## Solarflare

it doesnt say that... i have Windows 7 starter (my mom got a really crap laptop for me  :tongue2: ) i went on desktop.

----------


## Puffin

Oh, Windows 7. Jeeze. I have XP... 

Try watching the video on this page!

----------


## Solarflare

1024x600 

Im guessing this is bad because i have like a 300$ laptop

and i didnt need to download the vid, instructions were below  :tongue2:

----------


## Puffin

Oh, haha.   :tongue2:

----------


## Solarflare

it looks sharp enough  :tongue2:

----------


## SpaceCowboyDave

1280x1024

----------


## Mzzkc

1280x800

But I'd have it higher if the laptop supported it.

----------


## Meakel

1440x900 (:

Mah bootiful 15-inch MBP.

Though when I'm home, I hook it up to my HDTV. So that makes it 1920x1080  ::D:

----------


## Kitties

> edit: FUCK, the question mark button got moved on my keyboard to shift 6, anyone know how to change it back???????v it got switched with french..... I HATE FRENCH!



Lol, try ctrl+shift if you haven't fixed it already. That's how it is on my laptop.

Mine is 1366 x 768. Kind of weird numbers.

----------


## Caretaker

Laptop (Broken)
1600x900
Home PC
1440x900
This PC
1024x768

----------


## Puffin

> 1440x900 (:
> 
> Mah bootiful 15-inch MBP.
> 
> Though when I'm home, I hook it up to my HDTV. So that makes it 1920x1080



Yay, go 15-inch MPBs! The glossy screen is really nice.  :smiley:

----------


## JussiKala

Wow. That low for everyone? Surprise for me really.

I thought the average would be 1920x1080 because that's quite cheap these days for monitors, though plenty of you might be using laptops.


I myself use two 2048x1536 monitors. That makes my desktop resolution *4096x1536*. Still not enough IMO. But it shall do. I'll soon get a 1920x1200 monitor on the side to give more space on the desktop and serve as a third screen for triple screen gaming. c:

----------


## Puffin

Wow, I didn't know you could get monitors that big. o_O Are those monitors for consumer use, or for professional use?

----------


## JussiKala

Well these are two 21" CRTs, so they aren't exactly "big", just a heckuva lot of pixels in a small space. (I love small text). Flat screen, refresh rate high enough to not have any visible flicker no matter how hard  you try. And colors that beat any LCD to the ground. They were meant for people who do photoediting in their time, but as a gamer,  I can fully appreciate the quality, and as a broswer, the resolution.

While they may not have been targeted towards average consumers, they were free to buy them. The same is the case with 30" 2560x1600 monitors these days. While they are in many ways inferior to my CRTs, they are the only thing easily available today for a random consumer. They cost from 1000 dollars to 3500 dollars. That's the highest single screen resolution you can get as a consumer on the market today. Oriented towards photo editors and video editors of course, but everyone can appreciate the quality of good displays, and are free to buy such monsters if they can afford it.

----------


## greenhavoc

I've only ever had laptops, the one I'm using now is horrible.
It's 13+ x 7+

----------


## Puffin

> Well these are two 21" CRTs, so they aren't exactly "big", just a heckuva lot of pixels in a small space. (I love small text). Flat screen, refresh rate high enough to not have any visible flicker no matter how hard  you try. And colors that beat any LCD to the ground. They were meant for people who do photoediting in their time, but as a gamer,  I can fully appreciate the quality, and as a broswer, the resolution.
> 
> While they may not have been targeted towards average consumers, they were free to buy them. The same is the case with 30" 2560x1600 monitors these days. While they are in many ways inferior to my CRTs, they are the only thing easily available today for a random consumer. They cost from 1000 dollars to 3500 dollars. That's the highest single screen resolution you can get as a consumer on the market today. Oriented towards photo editors and video editors of course, but everyone can appreciate the quality of good displays, and are free to buy such monsters if they can afford it.



Well, I'm sold. I want one now.

----------


## JussiKala

I have no idea where manitoba is. But here Newegg.com - Dell UltraSharp U3011 30&#34; Height, Swivel & Tilt Adjustable Widescreen LCD Monitor 370 cd/m2

Price tag is quite high.

That is a top tier LCD, though many others beat that in terms of color, such as NECs medical grade PA301W, which costs twice that much, almost.

----------


## TheSkies

My main moniter is 1920x1080 (ful 1080p for blu rays and whatnot). My secondary (occasional) monitor is alrger but has am maximum od 18-- by something else, so I have to run it at 1366 x 768 (native resolution). My netbook has a 10.1" screen so that has 1024 x 600.

Old standard 800x600
less old standard 1024x768
modern standard 1280x720 or 1440x900

I am a geek, I know about these things

----------


## dark_grimmjow

I'm using 1920x1080. It's on my alienware m15x laptop. Looks great for Crysis 2 and blu-rays.

----------


## Marvo

1920x1200 on a 24" monitor. I wish manufacturers would start to make monitors with a higher DPI, instead of simply making bigger monitors. 24" is plenty big in my opinion.

----------


## JussiKala

^If pixel density is what you seek, CRT is the only way to go. Well that, or a U2711. (only marginally larger than a 24" 16:10), but even that can't beat CRT pixel density by any means.


Pixel density is not a thing manufacturers should start focusing on ATM. I'd much rather they abandon TN and start producing more PVA, MVA, e-IPS, and H-IPS for the average consumer as well. TN is the worst thing the monitor industry has ever seen. The technologies I listed should be relatively cheap to produce.

----------


## Mancon

1024x768

----------


## Solarflare

> Lol, try ctrl+shift if you haven't fixed it already. That's how it is on my laptop.
> 
> Mine is 1366 x 768. Kind of weird numbers.



i fixed it 

I pressed CTRL SHIFT FN

----------


## TheSkies

1366x768 aren't wierd numbers, they're pretty standard. old resolutions were 1024x768 so they just extended sideways for widescreen...

----------


## Marvo

> ^If pixel density is what you seek, CRT is the only way to go. Well that, or a U2711. (only marginally larger than a 24" 16:10), but even that can't beat CRT pixel density by any means.
> 
> 
> Pixel density is not a thing manufacturers should start focusing on ATM. I'd much rather they abandon TN and start producing more PVA, MVA, e-IPS, and H-IPS for the average consumer as well. TN is the worst thing the monitor industry has ever seen. The technologies I listed should be relatively cheap to produce.



I think pixel density would be great. Most smartphones have very high pixel densities, and by making monitors with high DPI, you'd eliminate the need for AA in games, graphics design would be much easier, and CRT monitors would be unnecessary. I know CRT is awesome, the colours are just so much better on there, but they are huge, heavy and often annoy my eyes.

----------


## fOrceez

1920x1080

----------


## Zhaylin

I'm another 1920x1080
Using some sort of Dell monitor (S2309W- whatever that stands for lol).

I really like this monitor.  It doesn't "flicker" like the old monitors used to.  But some mornings, when I first jiggle the mouse to wake it up, sometimes there's a bunch of lines running vertically on the furthest most right hand side.  I turn it off then back on and it's okay.
No other problems at all  :smiley:

----------


## Marvo

> I'm another 1920x1080
> Using some sort of Dell monitor (S2309W- whatever that stands for lol).
> 
> I really like this monitor.  It doesn't "flicker" like the old monitors used to.  But some mornings, when I first jiggle the mouse to wake it up, sometimes there's a bunch of lines running vertically on the furthest most right hand side.  I turn it off then back on and it's okay.
> No other problems at all



Try turning off the monitor when you shut down the computer. Saves a bit of power too.

----------


## JussiKala

Just a bit. I think it costs 80 cents per month to run an LCD, and something like 2.10 dollars a CRT where I live.

High end CRTs don't flicker. Dithering on TN LCDs is much more annoying.


If that still had warranty, I'd get it checked out. A minor issue but I'd still try.

----------


## khh

Should have made a poll :p

Stationary computer: 1680x1050
Laptop: 1440x900
Netbook: 1024x600
Parent's stationary: 1920x1080

----------


## fOrceez

> Should have made a poll :p
> 
> Stationary computer: 1680x1050
> Laptop: 1440x900
> Netbook: 1024x600
> Parent's stationary: 1920x1080



My pc is not my parent's stationary.. >;c

----------


## khh

> My pc is not my parent's stationary.. >;c



I'm not quite sure what to make of this.

----------


## Supernova

1024x768 on my laptop.  The monitor that came with my desktop was a full 1920x1200, but ever since my dad changed the power settings that monitor won't display anything most of the time for some reason  :Sad:

----------


## ninja9578

640x480 is enough for anyone

----------


## JussiKala

Scratch my previous resolution upgrade plans.

It's now two GDM-F520 CRTs, both 2048x1536 @ 85hz, and one compaq P1220 CRT, which could also easily do the same, but it will be limited by the connection it uses from my graphics card (displayport -> minidisplayport ->  VGA adapters), so it's a max of 1600x1200 @ 85hz :c . But rather a good CRT than a crappy 24" 1920x1200 LCD.  ::D:

----------


## ty4TheAdventure

Right now it's 1280x1024. When I move back to my university, it'll be whatever iMac's usually have by default.  :tongue2:  I would LOOOVE a nice widescreen display or something like a huge tv monitor to hook my computer up to. Movie nights would be so awesome!

----------


## duke396

This laptop: 1280x800
my mini tower: 1024x768 (crappy monitor)

----------


## WarBenifit156

I'm using 1366x768

----------


## Taosaur

My desktop is 1680 x 1050, 22" and really great colors. The one con is, the viewing angle from below is really limited--from either side is great, from top is solid, but from below the slightest deviation from straight-on makes everything dark, which kind of sucks for watching movies in bed. I've wanted to get an articulated mounting arm for the longest time, but never made it a priority.





> 1024x600 
> 
> Im guessing this is bad because i have like a 300$ laptop



Sounds like a netbook, which I believe are the main devices using that resolution. My tablet has the same res, but in a 7" IPS display instead of 10.1" and the difference is night and day. I used to read e-books and comics on a netbook, and even being smaller, the tablet's sharper screen is so much more comfortable.

----------


## Domition

1920x1080

I have a LED screen that's got an amazing picture and uses something like 15-20 watts on full brightness. It was pretty cheap ($140) considering its 5,000,000:1 contrast ratio.

AND ITS PURPLE!!!

----------


## Forsaken

Twin 1920x1200 stacked for 1920x2400 total.

----------


## StaySharp

1920x1080 is my resolution at 21,5". Its an BenQ G2222HDL LED screen and it's damn bright as well as having absolutely awesome colors. Holy fuck the time I had an CRT is long ago and I never ever want one of these fatties anymore. I don't want an LCD screen either.
Most I'd prefer an CNT Nanobud screen if they were ever to come into functionality.

----------


## Aeolar

1920 x 1080P as well. Sony Bravia TV 56"

----------


## khh

You certainly don't live up to your nick.

----------


## Stalker

Approximately 3.7 mm^-1. Or 1920x1200 on a 24" to give a more expected type of answer. Calibrated S-IPS of course. All the too bright TN-panels with crappy colours annoys me.

----------


## JussiKala

^which model?

----------


## Stalker

HP LP2475w.

----------


## BobbyLance

1280x800

----------


## Am I dreaming

1680x1050 + 1024x768 (dual mon. xD)

----------


## dasmiez

1.280 x 800; not that great but sufficient.

----------


## dakotahnok

*1024-by-768-pixel resolution at 132 pixels per inch (ppi) 

On iPad*

----------


## Marvo

Just added a 1680x1050 monitor to my 1920x1200 monitor setup! Dual monitor is awesome  ::D:

----------


## Taosaur

> Just added a 1680x1050 monitor to my 1920x1200 monitor setup! Dual monitor is awesome



I just hooked my mom up with her tv as a second monitor (well, for the second time--it needed straightening out after she moved) and wow, it's easy in Windows 7. I'm halfway surprised the old Pentium 4 Dell I gave her can handle it (1GB RAM, 256MB AGP GPU), but the main bottleneck with Netflix seems to be her 5MB bandwidth, not any of the 7+ year-old hardware. Playing videos locally on the TV doesn't slow down web browsing on the main monitor at all. I want to say her resolutions were 1920 x 1080 and 1366 x 780, or close to that.

----------


## JussiKala

Since my screen setup changes like weekly, I have a bit to post in this thread

It's currently 2x 2048x1536 and 1x 1920x1200. 


I  _was_ thinking about getting a 2560x1440 monitor  as my main for the last few days, but that costs 800€ and I don't really feel like spending the money. :/ I mean, I can't stay on these slowly dying GDM-F520s forever. I bet they won't last more than 6 months combined from here on. It'd also be a PITA to downgrade to anything less than these. A u2711(a 2560x1440) is the bare minimum of a monitor I am willing to use as my main after using these. ....... I guess this is what you get from being a videophile and / or monitor enthusiast.

----------


## LikesToTrip

23" 1920*1080

----------


## Enjyu

Mine is 1280x1024.

----------


## Dark_Merlin

3840 x 1080, dual 22" like it seems a few people here have  :tongue2: 

I was thinking about setting up Eyefinity and putting a third display in but I can't be bothered to spend the $50 on a displayport adapter  :tongue2:

----------


## JussiKala

^DP to VGA adapters supporting up to 1920x1200 @ 60hz are like 20 bucks

I got mine running my LCD.

----------


## JussiKala

If everything goes well, gonna get a 2560x1600 monitor next week to go with my two 2048x1536 displays. 

So excited.  ::D:

----------


## SpaceCowboyDave

Got a new 22" 16:10.  1680x150.

----------


## Rakjavik

2 LCDS+Laptop
1920x1080
1280x1024 - low because I'm using an external USB to VGA adapter, I think the monitor can actually hit 1600x1200
1440x900

----------


## Arra

1920 x 1080. 25". I just got it for my birthday.

----------


## Reav3R

1366 x 768

----------


## anderj101

(2x) 3840x2160 + (1x) 1920x1200

----------


## MobianAngel

1920 x 1080

----------


## IAmCoder

Casuals!

----------


## SomeGuy1

1920x1080, but at 144Hz (single monitor)

----------


## mobwicket

Mine's 1600x900. It's the recommended resolution and I just stuck with it.

----------


## clayhouse

I also use 1600x900. It's the highest it can go.

----------

