Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

mrkapqa

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 7, 2012
500
89
Italy, Bolzano/Bozen
Hello ,

today i got a MacPro 5,1 which is really great (finally!)
and one odd thing i noticed, after installing a Radeon R9 280

my monitor 19'' HP LP1905 Monitor with 1440x900 resolution

shows native 2560x1600 resolution!


That makes me think that a lot of monitors would be actually able to display higher resolutions , but for some odd reason , they don't!
 
With the right software you can run the OS at a higher resolution than the monitor physically can display, but it is either downsampling to fit the whole image into 1440x900 (throwing out a lot of pixels, and it will look fuzzy and small), or it is a virtual desktop with 2560x1600 size that you pan around with.

There aren't a lot of use cases where these are better than simply running native resolution.
 
interesting!
actually , all the 16:10 ratios fit-stetch the image perfectly
the 16:9 ratios do not (the leave space)
so actually one, even two sizes above looks nice like 1680x1050 or even 1920x1200 (tad small, though, but lot of estate)!
 

Attachments

  • Bildschirmfoto 2018-05-14 um 22.47.05.png
    Bildschirmfoto 2018-05-14 um 22.47.05.png
    15.2 KB · Views: 104
Rendering resolution and display resolution are two different things. There is no way that your monitor can display something more than it's pixel count.

In my case, the "Resolution" has nothing to do with the monitor resolution, it's just the rendering resolution. Obviously there is no 7680x2160 144Hz monitor on the market.
3840x1080 HiDPI 10bit.png
 
interesting!
actually , all the 16:10 ratios fit-stetch the image perfectly
the 16:9 ratios do not (the leave space)
so actually one, even two sizes above looks nice like 1680x1050 or even 1920x1200 (tad small, though, but lot of estate)!
i just noticed that the 16:9 are no more shown in the monitor panel - maybe the zapping of PRAM made them go away :)
[doublepost=1526331204][/doublepost]ok, i am trying to understand, but will have to sleep a night over. rendering resolution vs display resolution .

ok, i see also that the monitor is nowhere near sharp as with native resolution , but i thought that is because it is just 19 inch anyway.
 
i just noticed that the 16:9 are no more shown in the monitor panel - maybe the zapping of PRAM made them go away :)
[doublepost=1526331204][/doublepost]ok, i am trying to understand, but will have to sleep a night over. rendering resolution vs display resolution .

ok, i see also that the monitor is nowhere near sharp as with native resolution , but i thought that is because it is just 19 inch anyway.

Unless you go for 4x native resolution (e.g. from 1920x1080 all the way to 3840x2160). Otherwise, because the rendered picture cannot fit the screen's pixels without interpolation. The image usually will look blurry.
 
yes, it is a bit blurry, the fonts lack sharpness, but it could also be a diminishing eyesight on my side.
not to bad for this old TFT Monitor
19'' now somewhat 2560x1600 :)

(ps. when i want to upload screenshot it says )
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-05-16 at 10.27.34.png
    Screen Shot 2018-05-16 at 10.27.34.png
    35.9 KB · Views: 108
yes, it is a bit blurry, the fonts lack sharpness, but it could also be a diminishing eyesight on my side.
not to bad for this old TFT Monitor
19'' now somewhat 2560x1600 :)

(ps. when i want to upload screenshot it says )

Try to make a high compression ratio jpg rather than png. The native screen capture PNG file often too large for uploading to here.

And NO, your 19" monitor is still 1440x900. Just like your computer can play 4K (3840x2160) video on that screen at full screen mode, but the 1440x900 monitor will not show you all 3840x2160 pixel. There is a big different between "native resolution full screen mode" and "scaled resolution full screen mode".

When you choose 2560x1440, there are about 65% of the GPU rendered pixels won't be displayed on your 1440x900 monitor. And the rest are all interpolated. Only very few of them can luckily display the exact colour to you.

If it make you feel better, that's fine. I am also using 7680x2160 resolution on my 3840x1080 monitor because that make the text look better on my screen. But it's purely for rendering, nothing change on the monitor side.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mrkapqa
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.