[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Simon Williams wrote: > Hello everyone. > > Maybe somebody here can help me. I am attempting to buy a TFT. This > should be simple, but apparently not. > > I regularly have to run games at 1024x768, which is guaranteed to be > less than the monitors optimum resolution. The problem with this is that > every TFT I have ever encountered has the totally *brain dead* behavior > of stretching and blurring the image to fit the whole screen. Not only > does this make the image all fuzzy but I'm sure that it makes the > response time longer, which increases the ghosting effect. > Ahh the annoying stretch everything to fit feature. That bugs me at work, we have just about got 17" TFTs on every office PC but the majority of the staff (with about 3 exceptions) complain when I set the resolution to be the screen's native resolution of 1280x1024 because 'it's too small'. I can't think of any screens on the market these days that don't stretch the image. I presume the screen would have to be a 1024x768 resolution screen otherwise it'll either stretch it or have big borders (which rules out just about all monitors bigger than about 15"). What games are you playing anyway? Do you _have_ to run them at 1024x768? Is it a limitation with the hardware? Not being a PC gamer, I'd have thought if it's a framerate problem, throwing more graphics power at the problem would fix it, but then I guess you have the problem of poor support with Free drivers (Nvidia especially). At least things will eventually improve now ATI have opened up the documentation, although I guess it could be anything from a few weeks to maybe a year or two before the drivers have great 3D support. That's part of the reason I stick to consoles (or Mame). Rob -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html