16:9 vs 16:10 (Picking a monitor)

For gaming, it's more safe to go with the 16:9. It's also less taxing because 16:10 means 1900x1200. There's no need for that higher resolution yet it takes a noticeable toll in performance. Plus, 16:9 is the general ratio developers go with.

get Dell u2312hm for gaming

Real man use 4:3

16:10 for the PC Gaming Master Race, 16:9 for the dirty console peasants ;)

Seriously though, room for more shit on the screen(s) = good.

I own a 16:10 and wish it was a 16:9, as a few of my fav indie games do not support that aspect and i therefore get nice big black bars on the screen:(

2 that come to mind are Gotham Impostors and Skydrift

and more disappointingly... Scribblenaughts...

16:10. Room for more on the screen = good. Some games doesn't support resolutions that high though, but it's really good when you have a lot of programs running at the same time :)

Im also having the same doubt; read the comments and researched and seems that 16:10 is better, tho its more expensive, is it REALLY worth the money? (would it have a great impact on a dual core processor, tho will be upgrading to a quad later.)

Also can someone tell me, some 'Full HD/1080p' monitors dont come with HDMI connectors and only have DVI, is there that much of a difference between DVI and HDMI and is it worth the extra money to get?

Have 16:10

16:10 may offer some more space when you have multiple programs opened, but I really don't understand why anybody pushed this. Just to f with the standards I guess. You don't really get THAT much space on the sides. If you really do most of your work with multiple windows opened, then get two monitors.

And what the hell do you do when you browse the internet!? I've been browsing for more than 10 years and I'm pretty sure more than 80% pages don't go that far to the side anyway, they keep to the middle of the screen, for example steamgifts, so I really think that part of the argument is bs. Now if you're writing html and watching it in the next window in a browser, that is ok, but seriously don't say that you need a 16:10 to go online.

5:4 :(

I suggest 16:9 but only so you can watch more movies without the black borders

I'd go with Dell UltraSharp U2410, it's a pretty famous one. There's also Eizo for that price, so check that out as well, HP ZR2440w is worth mentioning too. If you want to save some money, check the Dell U2412M. Or if you want just something for gaming, then check some 120Hz monitors. It's gonna be just a TN panel tho, so nothing good for viewing & editing photos nor watching movies.

16:10, those extra pixles really come in handy.

16:9 FTW

I'd say 16:9, it has much better support for practically anything these days. I have a 16:9 and my bro has a 16:10, 16:10 is quite a nightmare for making videos (black bars ect)

16:10 masturrrrrrrraaaaaaace

The only real problem with that ratio is watching 16:9 movies. You'll end up with black bars on you black bars. Video game wise? Never an issue unless the game is retarded and you'll actually have less view. Very few games do that though where most games actually give you that extra sight. Is 16:10 really worth it? Not really. Though I do enjoy 1920x1200.

C'mon, what's so wrong with little black bars in video? I'm already used to them whatching video on my 5:4 monitor anyways.

Also, I am a pervert and prefer to watch my videos not in fullscreen so that the taskbar is visible.

16:10 owns all.
couple of notes though:
-there is no REAL 120Mhz TV. everything is interlaced anymore. cheap bastards.
-the Apple 27" IPS display can be had on the cheap via Ebay as LG seconds such as the Yamasaki catleap, etc, etc. look into it. Awesome buys even if it IS only a 16:9.

Go big or go home

16;10

Number of pixels don't matter. What does is that your eyes aspect ratio which is 16;10.5

go for 16:10. i have a 16:9, i know what i'm talking about

I use a 16:10, but they are getting harder to find. Most of them use older technology.