View Single Post
  #22  
Old May 22nd 07, 02:37 AM posted to alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt
Frank McCoy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 704
Default HIGH Screen resolution kills performance in WIN/XP?

In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt "Mr.E Solved!"
wrote:

Frank McCoy wrote:


So the LCD panel at close to the same number of pixels *greatly*
outshines the CRT at the a similar resolution.


Can you say that again for the audience at home having a hard time
trying to understand what you are saying?

Well, you can put one side-by side, and SEE the difference.
However, think of it this way: On an LCD, a pixel is a pixel is a pixel.
Each has *NO* effect on the one next to it.
On a CRT, each pixel is a blurry dot. HOW blurry, depends on the native
resolution of the monitor, or "dot-pitch", along with overall monitor
size. Usually people pay no attention to dot-pitch; only the number
lines or dots it can take in as supposed "resolution". However, the
resolution of a CRT monitor mean nothing if the dot-pitch is large
enough that several pixel bleed over into each other as one dot to the
eye.
VERY few CRT monitors, except some very expensive 21" types can actually
get any benefit of much higher resolution than 1280x1024. The dot-pitch
and monitor-size work together to determine the largest *practical*
resolution for that particular monitor; even if it will *accept* much
higher resolutions as input; and the video-card will output those modes.

Thus each colored pixel on the CRT monitor "bleeds" over onto the next
one; modifying it's color unless the two adjacent pixels are nearly the
same color anyway. The overall effect is slight out-of-focus fuzziness
on higher resolutions; when the effect *should* be increased sharpness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot_pitch

Note that focus, type of screen, and a bunch of other parameters all
effect dot-pitch; and the screen-size also has lots to do with the
maximum density displayable. Divide the screen size by the dot pitch
(using the same type of measurements. Screens are measured in inches
while dot-pitch is measured in millimeters) and get the *possible*
resolution of the monitor. However, due to various CRT defects, along
with things like misalignment, and very few CRT monitors live up to
their promises.

On the other hand, EVERY pixel in an LCD monitor is separate from every
other, there's NO bleed-over, no pincushion effect, no misalignment of
three different colors even at the extreme corners, etc. Each pixel is
alone, separately addressed, and as clear and distinct from all others
at the corners as it is in the center. NO CRT monitor can make that
claim; not even those costing several thousand dollars.

Sometime LOOK at a CRT monitor with a magnifying glass, or better-yet, a
jeweler's loupe. Especially look in the corners.

Then do the same thing with an LCD panel at native resolution.

Finally, do the same thing with an LCD panel emulating some *other*
resolution than native.

The LCD panel at native resolution will outshine either of the others;
while likely the CRT will FAR outshine the LCD panel when running at
reduced resolution.

That's both the plus and the minus of LCD or plasma panels. At their
native resolution (if decently high enough) they FAR outstrip CRT
displays at similar resolutions. However, if your job requires changing
resolutions often, then you'd usually be far better off with a CRT
monitor of decent size and dot-pitch.

I really don't recommend anything less than a full 21" CRT Monitor these
days; nor an LCD panel with less than 1680x1050 (if wide-screen) or
1600x1200 (if "standard" shape).

Even a *good* 21" CRT monitor is usually being pushed past it's
dot-pitch when you select resolutions above 1600x1200; so I don't
recommend that, even though most such monitors support far higher input
resolutions. They just don't do a decent job of actually *displaying*
such stuff.

That's why I bought it ... That and the CRT getting a tad jittery.


You were quite right about LCD panels being at their best at their
native resolution, you should quit while you are ahead, fair warning!

Don't think so. I know whereof I speak.
I've worked with CRT displays since long before most people here were
even born.

Like I say, LOOK at the various displays under magnification.
It's a real eye-opener.

THEN look at the two in side-by-side comparisons.
Again, if your eyes are any good, the difference is astounding.
MOST people just stand back and look at the total picture-size and think
that's what actually counts. It isn't. Dot-pitch, versus screen-size
does. Or, in an LCD panel, the equivalent is native resolution.

--
_____
/ ' / ™
,-/-, __ __. ____ /_
(_/ / (_(_/|_/ / _/ _