Which TV for it..

shonboy

macrumors newbie
Original poster
May 12, 2013
25
0
Hey i'm about to buy a TV for home and considering that i have a macpro from late 2011 i'm wondering whether should i get a 1920x1080 full hd TV or look for a 2560x1600 one since this model can support such a resolution. I haven't checked any producst or prices yet, i'm only asking hypthetically, can a intel core i7 2.4 GHz, ati radeon hd 6770m, 4gb ram macbook pro run stuff like games at that insane resolution seamlessly. I understand they won't run as well as on my native 1440x900, but will they run on a bit lower settings and will there be a big difference in comparison with regular full HD. Also, what will the impact on the battery life be, etc...Tnx in advance...
 

Topper

macrumors 65816
Jun 17, 2007
1,186
0
i'm only asking hypthetically, can a intel core i7 2.4 GHz, ati radeon hd 6770m, 4gb ram macbook pro run stuff like games at that insane resolution seamlessly.
You should ask that question on the MacBook Pro forum

Hey i'm about to buy a TV for home and considering that i have a macpro from late 2011 i'm wondering whether should i get a 1920x1080 full hd TV or look for a 2560x1600 one since this model can support such a resolution.
I don't know anyone who runs a tv with a Mac Pro.
 

ActionableMango

macrumors G3
Sep 21, 2010
9,396
6,480
I've never heard of a 2560x1600 TV. Usually they are 720P, 768P, 1080P, and some day 4K.

If you mean a computer monitor, then I'll say that 2560x1600 is a fairly challenging display resolution for a mobile GPU. You'll almost certainly have to dial down the output resolution and/or quality settings for some games and many more in the near future.
 

shonboy

macrumors newbie
Original poster
May 12, 2013
25
0
My bad..

Sry for the wrong section. Yeah i meant a computer monitor, and i figured about the effects going down with resolution going up, but i was interested in weather or not was it worth it. Is such a high res really better than a regular full hd?
 

ActionableMango

macrumors G3
Sep 21, 2010
9,396
6,480
I suppose that question comes down to personal opinion.

In my experience, for gaming, there are noticeable improvements up to 1920x1200 or so. This is mostly when you need a lot smaller pixels to render far away distances with any sort of detail. I have a 2560x1600 screen but don't really see any benefit over my 1920x1200 screen.

Especially with a lot of movement on the screen you cannot tell the difference. Heck, a lot of console games get by with such limited resources because they drop the resolution down to as little as 480P when panning, and very few people notice.

There are a few exceptions that might benefit more noticeably, such as X-Plane or some games where you can get a very high resolution texture package, but these are rare and I don't know much about that.
 

Tesselator

macrumors 601
Jan 9, 2008
4,601
4
Japan
Sry for the wrong section. Yeah i meant a computer monitor, and i figured about the effects going down with resolution going up, but i was interested in weather or not was it worth it. Is such a high res really better than a regular full hd?
That depends on two factors. Your proximity to the monitor and the size of the monitor.

I typically sit about 80cm from the monitor (eye ball to screen surface) and 1080 is fine! IMO, at 80cm from 25" and under screens 1080 is just right. I do not want more. However, if it's a >30" screen then the extra res is needed actually! Or, I need to move back another 70 or 80cm - and that's not comfortable for me.

This is of course for use as a computer monitor. I don't watch TV and haven't for decades so I wouldn't know about that specifically - but I'm sure the same variables are relevant.