What's your screen resolution?

**Puffin** · 07-13-2011 09:19 PM

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

**Solarflare** · 07-13-2011 09:20 PM

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** · 07-13-2011 09:22 PM

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

Mac
Apple --> System preferences --> Displays

**Solarflare** · 07-13-2011 09:27 PM

it doesnt say that... i have Windows 7 starter (my mom got a really crap laptop for me

) i went on desktop.

**Puffin** · 07-13-2011 09:32 PM

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

Try watching the video on this page!

**Solarflare** · 07-13-2011 09:38 PM

1024x600

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

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

**Puffin** · 07-13-2011 09:39 PM

Oh, haha.

**Solarflare** · 07-13-2011 09:41 PM

it looks sharp enough

**SpaceCowboyDave** · 07-13-2011 09:53 PM

1280x1024

**Mzzkc** · 07-13-2011 10:21 PM

1280x800

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

**Meakel** · 07-13-2011 11:05 PM

1440x900 (:

Mah bootiful 15-inch MBP.

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

**Kitties** · 07-13-2011 11:22 PM

Originally Posted by gameoverlord345

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** · 07-13-2011 11:32 PM

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

**Puffin** · 07-13-2011 11:33 PM

Originally Posted by Meakel

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.

**JussiKala** · 07-13-2011 11:37 PM

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** · 07-13-2011 11:41 PM

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

**JussiKala** · 07-13-2011 11:46 PM

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** · 07-13-2011 11:46 PM

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

**Puffin** · 07-13-2011 11:47 PM

Originally Posted by 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.

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

**JussiKala** · 07-13-2011 11:49 PM

I have no idea where manitoba is. But here Newegg.com - Dell UltraSharp U3011 30" 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** · 07-14-2011 12:02 AM

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** · 07-14-2011 12:43 AM

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

**Marvo** · 07-14-2011 12:55 AM

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** · 07-14-2011 01:05 AM

^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.