Quote Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post
More than you would think. 1600*2560 monitors are still pretty expensive at 1200 dollars+. But I do agree, they do need to test at both resolutions. I guess it is somewhat understandable that they only tested at one because of the amount of games.

Are 5970 still 700 dollars in romania?
wow wtf??? 30" prices went up by 30%??? when did that happen?
and what happened to the 27" 1600 panels?
but there are 13" 1600x900 panels for laptops... the disp industry is weird lol

Quote Originally Posted by Manicdan View Post
i looked at all the average fps, quite a few were way past 60 average, but a decent chunk still were under or around 60, meaning 1920 is still very stressable.
well with 8aa...

monstru, your right... good research!
i didnt notice that 1600 panels were almost dead... i really wonder what happened...

<200$ 1080
300$ 1200
>3500$ 1536
1200$ 1600



so the only thing above 1080/1200 is basically dual 1080/1200?
but that sucks for most games... 3 displays is much better than 2... but it still sucks and its so many pixels it will be hard to feed again...

sigh... this shows how disconnected videocard makers and the display makers are... or could it be that this is some weird transition phase and we will have very cheap 1600 panels soon?

both nvidia and ati really need that, cause a 580 really doesnt make much sense for 1080/1200... and neither will a 6900 or 5970 make sense...