Problems at 2560x1440

[amagad]

Hi, i recently bought the Dell u2711 27" monitor. Been playing games and watching movies on it fine but im getting some problems running games at 2560x1440. At the beginning the games run in slow motion, sometimes everything goes back to normal after some minutes but most of the times i have to lower the res to 1920x1600 for them to run smoothly, including A-10 and other FPS games. Ive tried playing around with the settings, v-sync and also unninstalling and re-installing the latest ati drivers but no luck. Im also using a good quality DVI cable and i know for sure my pc can handle the games at the native res of 2560. Can anyone help?

 

 

Thanks.

[airea]

I have the same monitor, and playing even A-10c at 2560*1440 with ati 4870. Can it be related to Windows? I dont think that it should be a monitor issue...

[power5]

Do not understand why this 16:9 resolution came to the huge 30" market for monitors. TV HD is 1080p, not just 16:9. Movies have all gone beyond 16:9 now and I think even beyond 2.35:1 for some movies. Every new movie I watch still looks letterboxed on my HD TV. But computer monitors are better when they have maximum screen pixels. What made you want 16:9 instead of 16:10 when the 2560x1440 resolution is not native for HD content. Does the monitor upsample movies to the bigger resolution, or just stretch the 1080p feed?

[airea]

If the question is to me, then I did not buy the monitor for viewing HD movies. I am glad that I have this resolution, as it is great for photography and editing. Games are also nice...

[power5]

Question was in general. I understand 16:9 for TVs but never really did for computer monitors. Especially ultra high resolution ones. The purpose of getting a 30" monitor is for the vast screen space it gives you. Then they cut that down to 16:9 even though its above native 16:9 1080p TV feed. Is photography done in 16:9 a lot now? Even if it is, a 16:10 would give more screen real estate for menus and windows stuff. Would think a game would be better with as much vertical as possible as well. Though any loss in amount of pixels helps relieve the strain on GPUs.

[Boot910]

Couple reasons I can think of for going with the 27" (16:9) vs the 30" (16:10).

 

1. Cost - The 27" is about $400 cheaper than the 30"

 

2. Desk space - If you just don't have the desk space for the 30" but want as big a monitor as you can fit, the 27" might fit the bill.

 

3. The 27" has slightly smaller pixels and is slightly faster than the 30" but these are very minor overall.

 

4. The 30" Ultrasharp might not have been out/available when he got the 27" monitor. The 30" is listed as "New"

 

Pretty much all photos are still 4:3 when taken, so aspect ratio doesn't have much to do with this.

I would agree that for non-gaming and non-movie watching you'd want as much screen real estate as possible. If the first two reasons I cited above come into play, then the 27" is a fantastic compromise. You get the same amount of pixels horizontally and slightly less vertically so you still have plenty for room to work with.

I like the specs on Dell's new Ultrasharp monitors. If I couldn't get the 30" for what ever reason, I'd be happy with the 27" too.

[metalnwood]

Horses for courses really. It depends what suits you and what you are doing. I have a 30" dell and a 27" 16:9 on my imac. Both offer a lot of screen and there are certainly advantages to the 16:9 for some things. E.g. the new version of xcode seems to want alots of things alighned vertically on the sides. With 16:9 giving you more width for the height it suits this well.

 

It seems easier for me to work on areas of the screen by moving my head left/right without varying how much I look up/down. On the 30" the bottom of the screen is neglected a lot because it's so low and I need to work at the top for menus etc.

 

Having worked with development environments, PS etc a lot the 27 works well

[power5]

Yeah, I agree adobe programs place tools on left and right so a wider format will be better. As long as those Dell are height adjustable having a shorter monitor will help with POV. But I would hope the 30" has height adjustment as well. Then you can neglect the top few hundred pixels. :)

 

Desk space can not be much different between a 27" 16:9 and 30" 16:10 but I understand that the cost savings for the loss of 160 pixels in vertical is very considerable.

[amagad]

Sooooo..... Any solutions to my problem?

[Boot910]

Your sig says you have 8" LCDs for your MFDs. Have you tried unplugging them and seeing if the slowdown problem still happens?

[power5]

Another person has the same monitor and a 4870 vs your 5870 with no issues. I would say its a driver issue. Try an older driver. I had issues on my 4890 with the 10.12 drivers. While messing with HELIOS I would get blacked out areas and other tearing. Put it back to 10.02 (yeah, I know I do not update often) and everything works great again.