2

I have a 16:10 Monitor, which has a maximum resolution of 1680x1050.

When I have games that don't run perfectly on my Monitor, I select a lower resolution. The problem is, that on 1440x900 everything seems to be very blurry and look much worse (as in less sharp) than on 1680. That problem is consistent across most games.

This is my monitor: http://www1.viewsonic.com/products/archive/vx2235wm.htm

So is there any recommended lower resolution that does not make everything look like ass?

4
  • Are you connected via VGA or DVI-D/HDMI? – Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams Sep 17 '13 at 19:29
  • It is connected via DVI. It does not have HDMI. – leetfan Sep 17 '13 at 19:30
  • added link to monitor – leetfan Sep 17 '13 at 19:32
  • 4
    Usually, unless you are in the LCD's native resolution, things look like ass, regardless of whether it's an even division of pixels or not. – Ƭᴇcʜιᴇ007 Sep 17 '13 at 19:33
3

As Ignacio said in his answer the image will not look good in any resolution except the native resolution. However, one potential work around is not to run the game in full screen mode but in windowed mode. Yes, the image area will be smaller doing this but you will have crisp images in that smaller area.

So in summary here are your options:

  • Live with a blury screen
  • Live with playing in windowed mode on a smaller section of your screen
  • Lower the quality settings other than resolution (AA, shadows, reflections, ect...) and play at native.
  • Buy a better video card so you can play the game at the monitors native resoltuion
  • Buy a better monitor that does better interpolation at non native resolutions.

Edit: I found this review of the monitor, it says the interpolation options may be able to be changed via software

The interpolation behaviour of the ViewSonic VX2235wm can not be modified on the hardware side. Resolutions which do not correspond to the native 1.680 x 1.050 are therefore always interpolated on full screen. The result is that resolutions with a page format other than 16:10, e.g. 1.280 x 1.024 (5:4), are distorted by the monitor.

If the LCD is linked digitally with the graphics card, the interpolation behaviour can usually be modified via the graphics card driver: full screen 1:1 and justified. The graphics card does not convert the entire image however, but instead sets corresponding margin areas for the images which are then displayed and justified in the LCD full screen interpolation. In this process, the LCD takes over the actual interpolation work.

We rate the interpolated image quality of the ViewSonic monitor as very good. Loss of detail or definition is at a very low level overall.

1
  • 1
    Both ATI and nvidia have a "gpu scaling" option which will adjust aspect ratio. I am 75% certain they also scale the image (contrary to the review) rather than let the monitor actually scale it. As far as I know, this scaling is a better option since monitors tend to do a simple "stretch" or "fast" interpolation rather than a "quality" one. If the OPs picture quality is truly "ass" then the monitor is stretching it. If it is just a blurry, then it is interpolated. Blurry images are a byproduct of interpolation unfortunately. – horatio Sep 17 '13 at 20:28
10

There is no decent resolution that will look good on a digital connection other than the native resolution. The next step down that won't look like complete ass is 1:2 scaling at 840x525, but most games won't like a resolution that low.

3
  • Would 840x525 really use 2x2 square pixels without any interpolation (unlike e.g. most image viewers)? – Daniel Beck Sep 17 '13 at 19:34
  • 6
    Monitors usually aren't smart enough to do anything other than linear interpolation. – Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams Sep 17 '13 at 19:35
  • Thanks for the answer, even tho I didn't accept it, but the other one is more complete. – leetfan Sep 17 '13 at 21:31

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.