TFT Native Resolutions / nVidia SLi gfx

[haydnw]

I'm hoping someone can answer two questions I have regarding some display / graphics issues.

1) I'm looking to purchase my first TFT screen. I know I'm looking for one (ideally) with a response time of <10ms and as high a contrast ratio as I can get. But what about native resolution? If a monitor has a native resolution of 1280 * 1024, for example, will I be able to run games at 800 * 600 and 1024 * 768? Or will this fail miserably for some reason? Running through DVI if it makes a difference.

2) I'm looking at getting an nVidia SLi-compatible motherboard. I am on a budget so can afford two GeForce 6600s to run both on the SLi mobo, or a single 6800GT. How much difference would adding the second card make, and which would give the best performance? Is it worth bothering with SLi or would my money be better spent elsewhere?

Thanks very much!

h

 

[Ian]

1) You can run games at lower resolution, but the monitor trys to automatically stretch them to fill the entire screen (which is lower quality) or it just runs it in a box in the middle of the screen. Its always best to run it at its native resolution, but its fine for the occasional oldie in a low res.

2) There is a bit of info on 6600SLI vs 6800 here:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/content/186/19/

I'd go for the 6800GT personally

 

[G~MAN]

i agree with ian ... get a 6800gt now... and another one when the price loweres

 

[haydnw]

Thanks guys - will try to persuade the girlfriend that the 6800GT is a good idea then!

I'm looking at a TFT at the moment with a native res of 1280 x 1024. So the nature of the screens means that I am basically tied in to getting a graphics card that will run all my games at that resolution, unless I want a drop in quality or to run things in a window? That seems crazy! Why is no-one complaining about this?! I know that dropping the resolution would result in a drop in quality anyway, but I presume this is exaggerated by the screen trying to resize the pixels too. This is very disappointing, looks like I might have to stick to CRT for a while longer. Suppose a CRT is better for my graphics work anyway, it just would have been nice to have some more desk space!

 

[Ian]

Its nothing that can be helped by the manufacturers, its just one of the problems with LCD/TFT technology. It shouldn't be a problem running games at that resolution though? I run 99% of stuff fine with my 19" LCD (1280x1024).

 

[haydnw]

Sorry for the rant, I'd just woken up

At the moment I'm running a P4 2.2GHz machine with a GeForce 4600 in, and there's no way I can run games at 1280 x 1024. I'm just panicking that my new machine won't manage it either - I'm looking at an Athlon64 3000 (Winchester), 1Gb corsair CL2.5 RAM, and a 6600GT (I've been hit by a big vet bill so have had to downgrade the graphics card unfortunately). I guess it should be OK, but I've been "out of the game" for so long (relatively) that I'm no longer sure what I can expect from hardware.

My brother is looking at getting a 19" monitor with a native res of 1280 x 1024. He has a 5700LE - do we think this is a good idea?

Sorry for all the questions, but this forum has been a wealth of useful information for me.

 

[Ian]

I think you'll be able to run games in that resolution no problem! I do run a few games in 1024x768 (Battlefield 1942, Red Alert 2) and they still look good.

Your brother might not be able to run the latest games at that res with a 5700LE, but it may be worth him getting one still if he uses lots of windows applications.