Hey i'm about to buy a TV for home and considering that i have a macpro from late 2011 i'm wondering whether should i get a 1920x1080 full hd TV or look for a 2560x1600 one since this model can support such a resolution. I haven't checked any producst or prices yet, i'm only asking hypthetically, can a intel core i7 2.4 GHz, ati radeon hd 6770m, 4gb ram macbook pro run stuff like games at that insane resolution seamlessly. I understand they won't run as well as on my native 1440x900, but will they run on a bit lower settings and will there be a big difference in comparison with regular full HD. Also, what will the impact on the battery life be, etc...Tnx in advance...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Which TV for it..
- Thread starter shonboy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You should ask that question on the MacBook Pro forum
I don't know anyone who runs a tv with a Mac Pro.
I've never heard of a 2560x1600 TV. Usually they are 720P, 768P, 1080P, and some day 4K.
If you mean a computer monitor, then I'll say that 2560x1600 is a fairly challenging display resolution for a mobile GPU. You'll almost certainly have to dial down the output resolution and/or quality settings for some games and many more in the near future.
If you mean a computer monitor, then I'll say that 2560x1600 is a fairly challenging display resolution for a mobile GPU. You'll almost certainly have to dial down the output resolution and/or quality settings for some games and many more in the near future.
My bad..
Sry for the wrong section. Yeah i meant a computer monitor, and i figured about the effects going down with resolution going up, but i was interested in weather or not was it worth it. Is such a high res really better than a regular full hd?
Sry for the wrong section. Yeah i meant a computer monitor, and i figured about the effects going down with resolution going up, but i was interested in weather or not was it worth it. Is such a high res really better than a regular full hd?
I suppose that question comes down to personal opinion.
In my experience, for gaming, there are noticeable improvements up to 1920x1200 or so. This is mostly when you need a lot smaller pixels to render far away distances with any sort of detail. I have a 2560x1600 screen but don't really see any benefit over my 1920x1200 screen.
Especially with a lot of movement on the screen you cannot tell the difference. Heck, a lot of console games get by with such limited resources because they drop the resolution down to as little as 480P when panning, and very few people notice.
There are a few exceptions that might benefit more noticeably, such as X-Plane or some games where you can get a very high resolution texture package, but these are rare and I don't know much about that.
In my experience, for gaming, there are noticeable improvements up to 1920x1200 or so. This is mostly when you need a lot smaller pixels to render far away distances with any sort of detail. I have a 2560x1600 screen but don't really see any benefit over my 1920x1200 screen.
Especially with a lot of movement on the screen you cannot tell the difference. Heck, a lot of console games get by with such limited resources because they drop the resolution down to as little as 480P when panning, and very few people notice.
There are a few exceptions that might benefit more noticeably, such as X-Plane or some games where you can get a very high resolution texture package, but these are rare and I don't know much about that.
That depends on two factors. Your proximity to the monitor and the size of the monitor.
I typically sit about 80cm from the monitor (eye ball to screen surface) and 1080 is fine! IMO, at 80cm from 25" and under screens 1080 is just right. I do not want more. However, if it's a >30" screen then the extra res is needed actually! Or, I need to move back another 70 or 80cm - and that's not comfortable for me.
This is of course for use as a computer monitor. I don't watch TV and haven't for decades so I wouldn't know about that specifically - but I'm sure the same variables are relevant.