1920x1200 vs 1920x1080

[Singh400]

You are confusing yourself over nothing.

1920x1200 - 1920x1080 = 120 horizontal lines of differences.

That's 60 lines at the top and bottom. You will not have. But most games lock FOV. So it won't make any difference.

[GheeTsar]

You are confusing yourself over nothing.

1920x1200 - 1920x1080 = 120 horizontal lines of differences.

That's 60 lines at the top and bottom. You will not have. But most games lock FOV. So it won't make any difference.

I agree that you will get another 120 horizontal lines, but if both screens are the same size (in this instance 24") there will be a (small) physical width difference as well as height difference. As mentioned before - I really wouldn't recommend you make your choice on this factor as neither are a bad choice.

[j.o.s.h.1408]

i too went with 1080p as i could then use it on my ps3 as well without any scaling issues or annoying black bars...if you are going to use it exclusively for pc, then i suggest getting a 16:10 120HZ monitor

what scaling issues? i have a U2410 and it looks fine on my monitor

[riviera76]

1920 x1200 is great for documents, programming, surfing the web etc. since the extra screen real estate makes a big difference. I also use my monitor for playing on the xbox and it just adds black bars to the top and bottom of the screen. When playing games the FOV will generally be the same, you'll just get a bit more height in the screen. As was said earlier, a quality 1920x1080 monitor will be better than a cheap 1920x1200 so if the prices are about the same, go with the quality.

[lnz]

My advice - don't worry about it too much. Pick your monitor based on other factors such as panel type, connections, responsiveness (if gaming is top priority), colour accuracy (if photo/graphic work is important), etc.

I suppose it depends :-))

For the purposes I use a monitor, having 120 pixel less vertically (that's 10% less) makes a significant, I dare say, essential difference.

Lorenz