Samsung Preparing a 27-inch WQHD (2560 x 1440) Monitor

[Wile E]

You are right in only one aspect. And that is Windows desktop applications. As i said, in games or movies, the wider the screen the MORE information you have displayed on your screen . Here the resolution in irrelevant, the ratio is making the difference.

There is no difference, because the 4:3/16:10 monitor can display the 16:9 image 1:1 on the screen. No scaling of any kind. So again, the 4:3/16:10 monitor is superior in abilities. It can do the wide content as well as the taller content.



Lets use 1920 monitors 1080p (1920x1080) content to keep it simple and realistic.

16:9 = 1920x1080. Perfect fit.

16:10 = 1920x1200. Will display 100% the same image as the 1080p monitor at the same quality with a 60px black bar on top and bottom. Quality is 100% unchanged.

4:3 = 1920x1440. Will also display the 100% identical image, but with 180px bar on top and bottom. (Though none of these exist in the wild.)

If horizontal resolutions remain constant, the 16:10 and 4:3 are superior in abilities. They do absolutely everything a 16:9 monitor does with the exact same quality, and are capable of more when you aren't watching 16:9 content.

And if games are your argument, you can just set it to 16:9 if you want, as the 4:3/16:10 screen is capable of displaying an unaltered 16:9 image. Or, you can just tweak the FOV. Point remains though, that the 16:10 and 4:3 are capable of absolutely everything the 16:9 is. So my point still stands.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Common man, used you head, you're fixed on numbers. Sure a 4:3 screen can display the same amount as a 16:9, but the cost is that the image needs to be stretched, therefore looking like carp. The same this happens when playing (real) older games that don't know wide aspect.

 

[radrok]

Why would the image be stretched? If you display a 16:9 content on a 4:3 monitor provided the width remains the same (2560 for both) on the 16:9 you'd have a filled screen and on the 4:3 you'd have black bars on the unused pixels, no stretching.

sorry for the edit, mispelled a word

 

[Frick]

Why would the image be stretched? If you display a 16:9 content on a 4:3 monitor provided the width remains the same (2560 for both) on the 16:9 you'd have a filled screen and on the 4:3 you'd have black bars on the unused pixels, no stretching.

sorry for the edit, mispelled a word

This.

I have a 1280x1024 monitor. If I play a game using 1280x960 there are black bars on the top and bottom and image quality is exactly the same.

 

[Mega-Japan]

Why would the image be stretched? If you display a 16:9 content on a 4:3 monitor provided the width remains the same (2560 for both) on the 16:9 you'd have a filled screen and on the 4:3 you'd have black bars on the unused pixels, no stretching.

sorry for the edit, mispelled a word

Point taken.
But I think the point cousin is trying to make is, why would you want black bars on top and bottom of the screen?

 

[Completely Bonkers]

You can't argue with logic frick. They'll only say they don't like the black bars... they say they are ugly... but then they go any buy a monitor with a black bezel... lol... or play with the lights turned down... lol again.

 

[Mussels]

You can't argue with logic frick. They'll only say they don't like the black bars... they say they are ugly... but then they go any buy a monitor with a black bezel... lol... or play with the lights turned down... lol again.

black bars are ugly. black bezel is not.

 

[Mega-Japan]

You can't argue with logic frick. They'll only say they don't like the black bars... they say they are ugly... but then they go any buy a monitor with a black bezel... lol... or play with the lights turned down... lol again.

Unless you have a perfect contrast ratio OLED TV, you ARE going to see the black bars. I have a "top of the line" LED HDTV and I clearly see those black bars when playing 21:9 movies. The bazel however, is invisible in the dark room.

 

[Wile E]

Common man, used you head, you're fixed on numbers. Sure a 4:3 screen can display the same amount as a 16:9, but the cost is that the image needs to be stretched, therefore looking like carp. The same this happens when playing (real) older games that don't know wide aspect.

There is no stretching at all. I know this for a fact, because I have a 1920x1200 monitor and play 1080p content on it all the time. It adds a 60 pixel bar on top of the image and one on the bottom. It displays a perfect 1920x1080 pixels.

The only argument against is the black bars, and considering how many movies have them even on 16:9 monitors, I find it a questionable argument at best. But not having black bars is a personal preference, not a technical limitation. If you prefer to not have the bars, that's fine, but it doesn't take away the fact that 16:10 and 4:3 are more capable.

 

[theJesus]

Yup, it's the bars I hate. For me though, there's no escaping the bars, because I also emulate/play lots of old games that are 4:3 and watch older shows and movies that are 4:3, so I end up with bars on the sides.

I find bars on the sides less annoying than bars on top/bottom though.

 

[Frick]

Yup, it's the bars I hate. For me though, there's no escaping the bars, because I also emulate/play lots of old games that are 4:3 and watch older shows and movies that are 4:3, so I end up with bars on the sides.

I find bars on the sides less annoying than bars on top/bottom though.

It's the opposite for me. I don't mind top/bottom bars at all, side bars I hate though.

 

[Mega-Japan]

I think we will ALWAYS have bars. Most (if not all) recent blockbuster movies come in a 21:9, and how many of you have a 21:9 TV/Monitor?
TV Shows, late 1990's, early 2000's movies come in 16:9.
Antique stuff comes in 4:3.
Though I can't think of anything that comes in native 16:10...

 

[Wile E]

I think we will ALWAYS have bars. Most (if not all) recent blockbuster movies come in a 21:9, and how many of you have a 21:9 TV/Monitor?
TV Shows, late 1990's, early 2000's movies come in 16:9.
Antique stuff comes in 4:3.
Though I can't think of anything that comes in native 16:10...

That's why I don't really think bars should drive a monitor decision. We get them no matter what we do.

 

[theJesus]

Have you ever tried watching something in 21:9 on a 4:3 screen? lol it's probably the worst situation ever

 

[Wile E]

Have you ever tried watching something in 21:9 on a 4:3 screen? lol it's probably the worst situation ever

Yeah. Doesn't bother me at all, as the image quality is still identical, and I see all of the content I was intended to see.

 

[Mega-Japan]

Have you ever tried watching something in 21:9 on a 4:3 screen? lol it's probably the worst situation ever

I can only imagine. A few years back when I had a 16:10 monitor, I used to think it was the "medium" for 16:9 and 4:3 shows that I'd constantly watch.

Then the wave of 21:9 media fell upon us, and I moved to a 16:9 monitor (reasons being because it was technologically superior, not because of aspect ratio), and now I find this to be the new medium.

 

[theJesus]

Yeah. Doesn't bother me at all, as the image quality is still identical, and I see all of the content I was intended to see.

Maybe it bothered me because my screen was only 21" to begin with, so I'm sure you can imagine how small the image ended up being.

 

[Prima.Vera]

I hate black lines. I hate those console ports craps when you are forced to play 1080p games on a 1200p display with black borders. Those black borders are really really annoying!!!

 

[Mega-Japan]

I hate black lines. I hate those console ports craps when you are forced to play 1080p games on a 1200p display with black borders. Those black borders are really really annoying!!!

You know, back when I had a 1920x1200 27" Monitor, I remember playing my XBOX 360 on it and the games would cover the entire screen, no black bars. I'm sure that the image was being stretched, but 60px on top and bottom isn't large enough to significantly distort the image upon the stretch, so I hardly noticed. If it would have been a 4:3 display however, that's another story.

And then I sold the 360 and bought myself a ZuneHD. Good times...

 

[Meizuman]

For fcuk sakes guys! This again?! Whenever I open a news post about a screen that is xx:x the shitmill about black bars, resolution, games, movies, stretching etc starts. How about focusing on the product and its features? 2 pages of aspect ratio? C'mon! :shadedshu

Wonder if Samsung has gotten better in the PLS backlight bleed department, 24" SA850 is quite bad on that aspect.