1400x900 vs 1920x1600

Discussion in 'Design and Graphics' started by kampret77, Oct 14, 2008.

  1. kampret77 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #1
    Greetings,

    I hope this is the right place to ask

    "Does it make any different between 1400x900 and 1920x1600 for image editing with MBP 15"

    Guys, I just plan to buy MBP, I wish I could buy the "refresh 17 inch (new VGA, chasing like new MBP 15) " but there is no new 17 inchi yet just polished 17 inch with more HDD and memory.

    So I am thingking to buy the new MBP but it has no HighRes screen option anymore.

    I am mostly welcome for any suggestion from anyone who have tried before the different high res and standard res in MBP 15 inch.

    and another question is, what SLI NVIDIA means? It means that the on board GPU can working together with dedicated GPU like AMD puma platform offers or just switch between onboard GPU and dedicated GPU ?

    best regards
    kampret77
     
  2. heehee macrumors 68020

    heehee

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    Location:
    Same country as Santa Claus
    #2
    It makes all the difference in the world. I have a 15" 1440x900 and I really can't work on the thing for long periods without plugging in my external monitor. That being said, I can't picture working on the hi-res either. I haven't used one before, but I picture everything would be so small it'll be hard to work on. IMO, you should get a 1440x900 15" and get an external monitor for your home/work.
     
  3. Loge macrumors 68020

    Loge

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    England
    #3
    A hi res 1920 by 1200 screen has about 78% more pixels than a 1440 by 900 one. I'd say that is a significant difference.
     
  4. Ryvius macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2004
    #4
    The extra space is absolutely critical. You see more and you see better.

    I find as a professional photographer that the best setup is always a nice 24" iMac with 4 gigs of ram and a lowerend MBP with 4 gigs.

    I primarily use Aperture so synching photos is relatively easy as long as you have your Vaults configured right.
     
  5. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #5
    You want the 17" really. Not just because of the space, but because its the only model left on which you can get the anti glare matte screen as a build to order option, which is better for graphics and photos.

    So yeah when you buy it don't forget to select Antiglare.
     
  6. kampret77 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #6
    not not :)

    I can use additional "plastic" to make glare tft into mate. I dont think that it is the main problem.

    Personally I love 17 inch, I don't know why, I just loved it. But the problem is the new MBP 15 inch has better VGA card 9600GT. I want also to play games ini my MBP even I am not a HARDCORE gamer (DOOM3) and THERE IS NO NEW 17 inch currently just a re polished 17inch with old 8600 GT.

    And it will be a very big INVESTMENT, here it cost 2300€ for a student price. I plan to buy it and stay for the next 4 year at least so that 9600GT is the best choice for currently.

    What a pity, my old centrino 1.5 can't run any faster any more to deal with my hobby which is traveling fotography even though I "whip" it to make it faster.

    Btw thx for all who drops me their opinions in this thread. Thx guys.

    best regards
    kampret77


    I
     
  7. NinerRider macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    #7
    Went through the same thing... I first bought a 17" MBP and it was OK, but a PITA to carry around. Finally settled on a 15" MBP with an external 24" monitor. Much better solution in my opinion. The 15" MBP is small enough to transport it easily (it's also easier to find a decent bag for it) and OK to work on for most of the stuff. I do most of my work on the 24" monitor and it gives you a much better view on what you're working on than the 17" would. Plus is probably cheaper too...
     
  8. CrackedButter macrumors 68040

    CrackedButter

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Location:
    51st State of America
    #8
    Interesting thing about Gloss vs Matte. I use to be against Gloss but the new screens while glossy have a bigger colour gamut so when people talk about colour accuracy with the matte screen I tend to not listen as much as I did.

    How can a matte screen compete nowadays when the gloss screens are able to shown a wider range of colours? What difference would it make once properly colour calibrated as well? None as far as I can tell.

    Another thing to note is that the iMac screens show an even much bigger colour range than ANY of the MBP's.

    http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8741-9027
     
  9. ktbubster macrumors 6502a

    ktbubster

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2007
    Location:
    US
    #9
    I am not sure what you mean by "anymore" the 15inch MBP never had a highrez option, just the normal 144 by 900 one so you won't find anyone who had tried a highrez and regular mbp 15 because there wasn't ever one.

    You could wait for the 17 to be redesigned proably in dec or january, but I would just go wth the 15 inch and an external monitor and keyboard, it's a great set up.
     
  10. wheelhot macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    #10
    SLI is the ability to run dual GPU at once, so far the new MBP is not capable of doing so, in fact it has a really embarrassing thing where the user is required to log out and relogin to switch GPUs, I find this really embarrassing cause the Vaio's had this feature for quite a while and it doesn't need to log out to switch GPUs.

    I do hope Apple will fix this in the future.

    You can expect the 17" to be ready by MW09 :D
     
  11. leighonigar macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    #11
    That is bizarre, I could have sworn there was a 1680x1050 option the last time I checked the BTO page (before the late 2008) but I can see no reference to it, so I must be going mad.
     
  12. ktbubster macrumors 6502a

    ktbubster

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2007
    Location:
    US
    #12
    You probably just combined one of the 17 inches options (normal 1680 by whatnot screen was the normal rez for them) with a 15 incher in your mind :)
     

Share This Page