aceman said:
If you are asking on if the LCD will do 1:1 and aspect ratio then the answer is n

nly the higher end models like Ultrasharp 2007 and 2407-HC ....etc can do 1:1.All other LCD scale to their native resolution.
Ideally you can scale using the Video card but the "Do not scale" and "Maintain aspect ratio" features are buggy in the Nvidia drivers and will not work in the current driver set.
All the current Nvidia drivers work with the 8 series and give perfect scaling. The earlier drivers had problems in vista, but that was solved a while ago. Refer to AT forums for some threads on those.
Therefore, you can a) Play at native resolution b) Lower resolution at fixed aspect ratio c) Fixed aspect ratio - scaled (image will scale to the edge with black bars on the sides or top depending on the movie or game)
aceman said:
Video drivers also do the same, ie take a 1280*1024 and fill the remaining portions with black pixels and feed to the screen.It is just that this feature is buggy in the Nvidia driver.
Yes even I miss the CRT days, currently typing this reply from a Dell 21 inch Trinitron display

.
Again, it WAS not working earlier on, the new drivers work perfectly well. Also have a 19" Viewsonic CRT and a 17" Flatron apart from my Dell E228 - all have their advantages and disadvantages
sangram said:
I've never managed to get the black bars, but YMMV.
Overall, I prefer the LCD. It runs cooler, has a smaller footprint, and is much easier on the eyes on long sessions. The colour accuracy ain't great and neither is the black level. In the better LCDs the colour accuracy improves but the black level problem will always remain as long as there is a light behind the screen. But your eyes get used to it no problem at all, and anyway your brain translates it as a picture and not real life.
LCDs also have the stretching issue, but it doesn't bother me much at all in gaming. It's very irritating in text mode, but most cards cope with the resolution fine (except Intel integrated video, grrr!). I would say an LCD is better, overall. Unless you watch a lot of movies I would take a 4:3 LCD over a WS, you get more pixels and games won't get stretched.
My dell is pretty colour accurate - for a TN panel. You're right about the black level, but then, who pays attention to that when playing games or watching movies

.
deep_nx said:
I almost have the same QUESTION here but with a small zing !!
I have a 15" LCD syncmaster 152s planning to get an viewsonic 22" Q22wb
Now As a noob in this thing !
What is Native resolution
is it 1680x1050 in case of 22" Q22wb ???????
if it is will i get good OUTPUT from a 8800GTS 320Mb card at everything maxxed with SHADOWS ?? @ 1680x1050
if i decrease the res will it CRAP the whole GAME like some sorta ARCADE game ??
cause if it will ill keep my 15" which has a 25ms Response time compared to 5ms of the 22"
OR shud i go for the 19" ????
Yes, the native resolution is 1680x1050 for the 22" TN panels. If its an 8800, it should be able to handle all the current games easily with shadows, AF and AA.
If you decrease the resolution, it won't look terrible at all. If you have an 8800 class, there's no reason not to go for the 22" monitor.
deep_nx said:
EDIT:
i am not too far from the monitor MAX 30inches away......... so will d 22" screen be dat harmful ??
Not at all, I'm a hand's distance away from the monitor myself.
Finally
If you scale TEXT - it doesn't look great on an LCD.
Games and Movies
Movies are obviously up-scaled in the case of DVDs and DVD rips etc, so there's no problem there, they look GREAT on a widescreen.
Games look great at native resolution. They look very nice even when scaled. I will take pics later on for comparison
