i5-3570k CPU, Graphics Max Resolution

(Onboard video, HD Graphics 4000) appears to be 2560x1600?
(I had always thought it was 1920x1080.)


I do need a new monitor (or TV as monitor) & thought I was limited to 1920x1080 (by my CPU video).

Had been using an LG TV, 32" 1080p (most likely at < 1920x1080).


When I check (Win7) Display Properties, I'm only afforded a max resolution of 1920x1080.

Why is that?
Is what I'm offered based upon the monitor I have hooked up?
So if I hook up something with higher resolution, will I be offered something higher then 1920x1080?


If I can go higher resolution, up to 2560x1600, I'll look into that.
QHD is 2560x1440. (Wonder why Intel includes that extra 160?)

--------------------------------------
BANK OF AMERICA.COM ONLINE BANKING SUCKS IN THE HUGEST WAY IMAGINABLE

Newegg.com's new image gallery layout sucks in the hugest way imaginable too !
And now they're using JavaScript to "turn" pages to boot ! SUCKS

Behind every good computer... is a jumble of wires 'n stuff.

--------------------------------------
BANK OF AMERICA.COM ONLINE BANKING SUCKS IN THE HUGEST WAY IMAGINABLE

Newegg.com's new image gallery layout sucks in the hugest way imaginable too !
And now they're using JavaScript to "turn" pages to boot ! SUCKS

Steve, take a look at the newer 4K screens. They have far denser resolution than the older 1080p models. Please let us know how this plays out. Thanx!

PS: I'm talking about tv screens

.
Onward & Upward !
Sid

WINDOWS 10
ASUS P8Z77-V Pro MB
Intel i5 3750K CPU
8g Corsair Vengeance DDR3 RAM
Corsair Neutron 250g SSD

So I bring this little Dell desktop home from work, hoping that it will work at native resolution.

It has Intel HD 530 graphics on it.
I hook it up to the monitor (via HDMI), & it comes up 2560x1440, so that worked.

And overall, everything looks better (then when hooked up to my computer), but still it is not "right", well, at least doesn't look right to me.

(Mainly talking about, text...)

Some place, some sites, look just fine.

Some, it looks washed out.

Some sites can be made to look better, but adjusting the page zoom.
Sometimes a page goes from "just not right" at 1 zoom level, to being "dark & bold" at the very next level. So you might have; gradual, gradual, gradual, them BAM, as you adjust the (browser) page zoom level.

Native resolution can work for some programs, others, it is just too small.

This board looks basically OK, but the font in this reply window is extremely fine (like a fine point pen).

When native resolution doesn't work, then we're back to changing from native, adjust in particular programs, when available, or using Windows (display) "Zoom" features.


As I'm testing, I'm using a "foreign" computer so that makes things more difficult, as "my" stuff isn't there. (And it has Win10, which seems like utter crap. Maybe crap in the way we the user is "treated", things forced upon us, rather then actual failings of the OS itself.)


So all in all, I'm not particularly pleased with what I'm seeing, even when the monitor is able to reach its potential.

I kind of expected more, like "really stunning", oh, I don't know what, but if you played a movie, something where you'd say, "wow, that looks really nice". But instead its more, "oh, its a monitor, & its OK.

--------------------------------------
BANK OF AMERICA.COM ONLINE BANKING SUCKS IN THE HUGEST WAY IMAGINABLE

Newegg.com's new image gallery layout sucks in the hugest way imaginable too !
And now they're using JavaScript to "turn" pages to boot ! SUCKS

(I've purposely broken the links, better opened in individual
tabs, I'd think. So copy & paste.)


Tiny desktop icons
https://s25.postimg.org/fpq7ls2vx/qhd-1-desktop.png


Tiny reply, fine point reply text
https://s25.postimg.org/3nutrn1d9/qhd-2-reply.png


A shot of this thread, native resolution, not bad
Note that my screen capture is not working correctly
& not sure why? The machine/graphics, the resolution?
Never saw anything like this on my machine.
https://s25.postimg.org/5fnsmjsfx/qhd-3-thread-native_resolution.png


A shot of this thread, native resolution, Windows Zoom @ 125%
https://s25.postimg.org/dl5ukpoel/qhd-4-thread-native-zoomed-125.png


A shot of this thread, 1920x1080, Windows Zoom back at 100%
https://s25.postimg.org/n5ph7llgd/qhd-5-1920-1080-no_zoom.png

--------------------------------------
BANK OF AMERICA.COM ONLINE BANKING SUCKS IN THE HUGEST WAY IMAGINABLE

Newegg.com's new image gallery layout sucks in the hugest way imaginable too !
And now they're using JavaScript to "turn" pages to boot ! SUCKS

The first shot, again, hotlinked.

--------------------------------------
BANK OF AMERICA.COM ONLINE BANKING SUCKS IN THE HUGEST WAY IMAGINABLE

Newegg.com's new image gallery layout sucks in the hugest way imaginable too !
And now they're using JavaScript to "turn" pages to boot ! SUCKS

Ah, I screwed them all up.
In all cases, above, my browser was (already) set to 133% zoom & I didn't realize.

So one more.
Native resolution, 2560x1440, no Windows Zoom, no browser zoom.
And, this particular screenshot got really screwed up.

h ttps://s25.postimg.org/4q50a8271/qhd-6-native-no_zoom-anywhere.png

Anyhow, like this, things are quite small.

--------------------------------------
BANK OF AMERICA.COM ONLINE BANKING SUCKS IN THE HUGEST WAY IMAGINABLE

Newegg.com's new image gallery layout sucks in the hugest way imaginable too !
And now they're using JavaScript to "turn" pages to boot ! SUCKS

One other thing I forgot to mention, is that the look of a
site may change markedly depending on whether I allow
JavaScript to run on a site or whether I block it.

URL:
http://www.marylandgasprices.com/index.aspx?fuel=D&area=Westminster&dl=Y&intro=Y

https://s25.postimg.org/4qe71aojx/qhd-7-javascript_OFF_vs_ON.png

On the left, I have blocked JavaScript, & it looks pretty
decent.
On the right, JavaScript is allowed, & it looks washed
out?

I certainly can understand some change based on the allowance
or blockage of JavaScript, but here its to an extreme?


(I'll check later, on a different machine, to confirm that
there is either no or only very little difference outside of
the machine I'm on now.  I have never seen such a change like
that on my computer, not this work computer, when running a
1920x1080 monitor.)

--------------------------------------
BANK OF AMERICA.COM ONLINE BANKING SUCKS IN THE HUGEST WAY IMAGINABLE

Newegg.com's new image gallery layout sucks in the hugest way imaginable too !
And now they're using JavaScript to "turn" pages to boot ! SUCKS

This is on a 1280x1024 "square" monitor.

There is some difference with JavaScript Off / On, but not
nearly to the extent as with the 2560x1440 monitor.

https://s25.postimg.org/6jh3pwk3x/qhd-8-_JS_on_vs_off-1280-1024-square.png

--------------------------------------
BANK OF AMERICA.COM ONLINE BANKING SUCKS IN THE HUGEST WAY IMAGINABLE

Newegg.com's new image gallery layout sucks in the hugest way imaginable too !
And now they're using JavaScript to "turn" pages to boot ! SUCKS

A good article.

Confused about HiDPI and Retina display? ― Understanding pixel density in the age of 4K


I say that as I'm back on my 27 @ 1920x1080 - that ordinarily I'd be running at 1600x900.

I'll switch back to the 32, later.

--------------------------------------
BANK OF AMERICA.COM ONLINE BANKING SUCKS IN THE HUGEST WAY IMAGINABLE

Newegg.com's new image gallery layout sucks in the hugest way imaginable too !
And now they're using JavaScript to "turn" pages to boot ! SUCKS