I'm looking for a monitor, 1600x900, cause the full resolution is too much, and probably budget if possible. Here's a list. What's the difference between them and which companies are good? Also, do they all have display options for lower resolutions, like stretching or centering?
I asked my boss if I could take the rest of the day off to go through your list, and he declined.
Key points would be whether it's an IPS (IPS good), LED good, and lower dot pitch number (pixel density) good. Most will have similar contrast ratios and response times. Also check inputs, having hdmi, dvi, and vga futureproofs the display.
Most will run several non-native resolutions, like 1024x768, 800x600, etc. How many different resolutions isn't really a factor as you shouldn't be runinng it non-native anyway (looks like poo). They have to run all the basic lower resolutions for bootup bios screens, windows install screens, diagnostics, etc.
I've never owner either. Have seen both and the models i saw were fine, but... you do often get what you pay for with regards to lcds. If it's just a matter of a couple dollars id go with a name brand.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.