1680*1050 on a 15" laptop Opinions?

conzy

Anyone have this setup atm, Its hard to imagine the same res as my 20" screen on a 15" screen, the extra space would be great but is it eye meltingly hard to read?

Is 1440*900 a good compromise? Or is 1680*1050 where its at?

Thanks

AlmightyCushion

I've got 1440x900 on my 17" laptop and it's great. I can imagine that 1680x1050 would still be comfortable on a 17" but on a 15" I would want to see it for myself before buying just to be on the safe side. I'd try and hunt down a 1680x1050 15" laptop to see what it's like. If I couldn't find one, I'd stick with 1440x900.

RoyalMarine

im running 1920 x 1200 on my 17" and its excellent.
wouldnt suit a 15" tbh

conzy

hello fellow insomniac

Im not sure what to go for yet.... Ill make up my mind later!

RoyalMarine

im at work

conzy

damnit, you're getting paid to internet!

jabberwock

I'm running a Dell Inspiron 8200 and the naive resolution is 1600*1200.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell_Inspiron#Inspiron_8200.2C_8100.2C_and_8000

Even though we have dual monitors at work I hate having to go as it's 17"@1280*1024 & 15"@1024*768.

Capt'n Midnight

It depends on your eyes and remember while Vista is better at font scaling then XP other stuff like pictures and fixed size fonts won't scale.

Anything above 1280 on a 15" you would have to look at first.

It's handy if the laptop has the same dpi as your external mointor if you are using an extended desktop

Voodu Child

The difference between 1440x900 and 1680x1050 isn't huge; it's a little more screen space vs. a little better readability.

Plus you may want to consider other things - brightness, screen quality, running games at native res etc.

Its also worth googling some owners boards before ordering. Dell have had problems from time to time with screen suppliers. At the time i was ordering, if you got a 1440x900 panel, you were most likely to get a LG display, which was infinitely superior to the Samsung panels that were shipping on most 1680x1050 models. The Samsung screens just had a possiblity of some quality control issues (blurryness/grainyness) - so much so that they've discontinued them now.

conzy

voodoo_child wrote: »

The difference between 1440x900 and 1680x1050 isn't huge; it's a little more screen space vs. a little better readability.

Plus you may want to consider other things - brightness, screen quality, running games at native res etc.

Its also worth googling some owners boards before ordering. Dell have had problems from time to time with screen suppliers. At the time i was ordering, if you got a 1440x900 panel, you were most likely to get a LG display, which was infinitely superior to the Samsung panels that were shipping on most 1680x1050 models. The Samsung screens just had a possiblity of some quality control issues (blurryness/grainyness) - so much so that they've discontinued them now.

I saw that huge 70+ page thread on notebookreview.com forums, Hopefully I iwll be lucky enough to get an LG and all the Samsung crap will be sold / destroyed by then!

coldfire1x

If you are not sure then take 1680x1050. If you dont like then you can always change the setting to 1440x900 in dispaly properties. It's always nice to have an option.

I do have a 1600X1200 on a 15" and having used it so long, would not like to go on any resolution lower than that. The space it gives you is really good.

AlmightyCushion

coldfire1x wrote: »

If you are not sure then take 1680x1050. If you dont like then you can always change the setting to 1440x900 in dispaly properties. It's always nice to have an option.

I would never run an lcd on anything but it's native resolution. Everything look crap and fuzzy.

RoyalMarine

conzymaher wrote: »

damnit, you're getting paid to internet!

every second week i work nights. 12 hour shifts pass so much easier when you get to surf and watch movies/tv/play css only my ping sucks at work
80+.

back on topic, vista is a lot easier on the eyes at higher resoloutions i think.
im just after buying vista ultimate for my home pc as im sick of xp killing my eyes.

Capt'n Midnight

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I would never run an lcd on anything but it's native resolution. Everything look crap and fuzzy.

amen.
one exception though - if you run it at 2:1 it will be crisp but what's the point ! ( eg: 1900x1200 --> 950x600 or whatever )

It's a shame but if video drivers had scaling it would make it so easy. You can't do real scaling in windows itself.

conzy

Sometimes scaling can look like "free anti-aliasing" :P

The upgrade to the 1680*1050 is an additional 110 euro, so 1440*900 really seems the better option

TerrorFirmer

You also mentioned in another thread that you're looking at the gaming side of things with the mobile 8600GT, which isn't good enough to run most games at 1680x1050 or even 1440x900 without seriously sacrificing other visual details (apart from the hardware friendly games like TF2).

Personally I'd opt for the 1440x900.

fletch

I run 1680*1050 on my Dell Inspiron 6400 with 15.4" screen and have no problems reading the screen.