2. 1900 X 1200 is a widescreen resolution and should not be used as a median of the 4:3 resolutions you mentioned.
19x12 also happens to be the resolution of the 2405 which is a display that does benefit from the higher levels of performance that the 7800 series offers. Imagine that- there was a point to using that over 19x14.
I am not sure if any CRT's are able to handle 2048 X 1536 @ 85Hz or higher
The FP2141SB-BK and the 2070SB-BK both handle 2048x1536 over 85Hz(unfortunately vid cards top out @85Hz running that res).
Have to keep in mind that many gamers also use 800 X 600 at times
If they are buying 7800s to do it then they are morons at best. That is the point of this thread is it not?
Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Not holding my breath for Stalker though I am keeping an eye out for it.
What do you mean by calling DOD-S subpar Benskywalker?
Outdated play mechanics. The FPS genre needs some improvements in the core gameplay elements, either that or they need to hit much higher levels of existing mechanics for it to remain interesting moving forward.
You certainly have a POV on many, many things that leave you in an extreme minority..
You tell me all about the great performance benefits of a 7800 series running 1024x768- is that not the point of this thread? Is this thread not about the 7800? Why is that people can't simply follow the links I provided and see that I am stating a point of fact- nothing to do with my persepctive or how I see things. The benches speak for themselves.
But regardless, on your comment.. you are missing the point.. the world is much bigger than you and Anand..
And in these other people's worlds does the 7800 run out of steam at such low resolutions in the games the poster was talking about? Because in the world I live in they are CPU limited with a 7800 as I demonstrated by posting benches.
If he benchs at 16x12 minimum, which isnt always true BTW unless the cards merit that res to show their prowess..
WHICH IS THE TOPIC AT HAND
Can you read the thread title? We are talking about the 7800 series and those boards certainly qualify for the exact discussion I am partaking in.
He does that to not waste our time with games that are setup for less powerful cards, and benching on them with brand new cutting edge shtick.. not because Anand feels that "this is a real mans low res".
When did this thread swap around to being about something other then the 7800 series? I missed it, in fact I just double checked the title and it still states that it is about the 7800 parts.
I bet he wouldnt call 16x12 "low res", and I am sure the reason for starting a given benchmark at 16x12+ is due to the fact thats where the differences started to show.
THAT IS THE POINT!!
Are you capable of analytical thought? When I say that the 7800 is bad for low resolutions do you somehow not understand that the statement is made in an explicitly clear context? Is this somehow too vague for the posters here to understand? Is spelling things out to the letter not good enough for the comprehension skills on this forum?
Resolution isn't everything to everyone; I'm much happier with my 2005fpw than any CRT I've owned in the past. Guess what Ben? Not everyone running 2001fp's/2005fpw's are dumbasses who haven't yet 'seen the light' of a high res CRT, so just deal with it.
Guess what jiffy- Dell makes this panel called the 2405 and Apple has this cinema display that is 30"; neither of those displays are low res and- wait for it- they are LCDs. Take of your blinders. The Apple 30 is higher res then any consumer CRT I have ever seen.
And Ben, my 21" Sony CRT e540 doesn't hold anything against this LCD.
If people would notice nigh everyone who is talking about the big LCD advantage comes from Trinitron tubes. Coincidence?