Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Information > RAM

Posts: n/a
What you said about DPI makes sense, but check it out... Windows must state
the numbers incorrectly. Increasing from 96 to 112 "does" make on-screen
text bigger. Maybe don't try it, your desktop icons will get moved around.

Yes sir, 1440x900 was my first choice. I toggled between that and native
(1920x1080) trying to decide if I could stand the displayed text smallness
using the native resolution. My monitor is a 16:9 aspect ratio while it's
more common for a wide screen computer monitor to be 16:10. Possibly that's
why 1440x900, for me, isn't as sharp as the native. I would have elected
1440x900 until discovering DPI adjusting. Changing DPI (WinXP) doesn't give
perfect results in that some things are and are not affected. The Windows7
has better results when modifying DPI - even icons resize and stay fairly
smooth. Yes, my IPS monitor is more awesome that I thought with this new
card, and native resolution helps (me).

Here's a useful site to adjust an LCD display:

If a monitor is not using it's native resolution, the gamma chart will have
horizontal bands; sometimes so severe it's hard to set gamma using this
tool. With native resolution, and the first time I've seen this correctly
with my LCD monitor, the gamma chart is smooth. Gamma, brightness, contrast
are related. I care because if I adjust something, a web page or a photo
for example, to look correct on an improperly calibrated display, the
person(s) I'm sending it too may not see it as I see it. This sort of tool
helps to promote standardization. I get somewhat different results when
adjusting my display with non-native and the native resolution.

PS: I'm guessing a 1920x1080 resolution needs a 27" monitor and no DPI
adjustment needed to make text big enough for Average Joe. I'll give my kid
a math assignment... 900 is to 1440 as 1080 is to 1920?

"Jeff Strickland" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
I got that you were writing about how nice the universe is with a card that
actually makes what the monitor can produce. I missed it when I started, but
I was all caught up later on.

You know that setting to MORE DPI makes the image smaller, right? You said
you set from 96 to 112, or whatever. The smaller dots will make the display
more crisp, but smaller.

Take a stab at setting the DPI back to 96, and the resolution to 1440 x 900.
This should give a setting that is pleasing as well as readable.

I've got a Vizio 24-inch TV connected to a notepad, and it's set to 1440 x
900, and looks great. I have a foreign visitor and an unused netbook and TV,
so I cobbled together something that she could load her pictures into on
their way to a portable HDD to take back home. Your video card might give
more options for setting, but 1440 x 900 is a true widescreen setting that
should work on anything that can display widescreen. It's true there are
more settings, but consider that 800 x 600 is a setting that works on a 4:3

I believe you will enjoy the 1440 x 900, it should give a crisp image and
icons that are sized so that they are useful.

Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help, no RAM, and ramfreer is err'ing, need freware RAM giver Morph Computer Information 4 10-10-2004 09:42 AM
No RAM left, n e 1 no of RAM giver (freeware) ? Morph Computer Support 2 10-09-2004 02:11 AM
NEW RAM V OLD RAM Allan Birnbaum Ditlevsen Computer Information 2 06-07-2004 01:50 PM
Looking for a VHDL or Verilog RAM Model that modles Common RAM Faults Robert Posey VHDL 0 11-26-2003 07:50 PM
Mixing SDR Ram with DDR Ram? Daz Computer Support 2 09-14-2003 03:28 PM