Posts: 17,292
Threads: 1,510
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
anybody using 1400 X 1050 rez w/ their normal aspect 20" LCD instead of the more popular 1600 X 1200?
I guess it's kinda like using a 19" instead of a 17" at the same 1280 X 1024 rez to have easier to see images. 1400 X 1050 doesn't seem to be a big Mac favorite near as I can tell, so just checking for other real world adopters out there... the widescreen 1680 X 1050 seems to come in lots of sizes and flavors. I like the 5:4's and the 4:3's because they play nice when rotated. thanks,
Buzz
==
Posts: 12,924
Threads: 470
Joined: Feb 2010
Reputation:
0
Anything BUT Native Resolution looks like crap on a LCD.
BGnR
Posts: 17,292
Threads: 1,510
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
1400 X 1050 is native...
as noted, it's sorta the reverse equivalent of 19" vs. 17", basically a 20" 1600 X1200 w/ natively bigger pixels (same size as 19") to retain same aspect at lower rez...
Posts: 12,924
Threads: 470
Joined: Feb 2010
Reputation:
0
So what is the problem then?
BGnR
Posts: 17,292
Threads: 1,510
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
potential problem is what Mac video cards support 1400 X 1050 resolution... horsepower obviously not a problem, just availability of the monitor's native 1400 X 1050 rez after hooking it up. obviously it will be on the monitor's supported rez list, but will it be available on the Mac's video side? ...not sure how the cards process not-so-standard resolutions... IOW, will it work at 1400 X 1050 on an ATI 9000, 9200, 9600 or nVidia 6600 or older GeForce2 MX? or possibly external output from laptop or iMac? If others are using this rez successfully, it significantly reduces testing :-)
Posts: 12,924
Threads: 470
Joined: Feb 2010
Reputation:
0
Did you look up the card specs?
"Not so standard"?
In what way?
BGnR
Posts: 5,338
Threads: 670
Joined: Dec 2021
I have my Westinghouse 37" @ 1920 x 1080. Great for old eyes. The heat it throws is another issue entirely.