>16:9 beat 16:10
vhs beats betamax
>>55360844
16:9 is better though.
16:10 beat 4:3
nvidia beats amd
>>55360943
Only if all you do is watch media made in the last decade
>>55360844
Ribbon cables.
Fucking hate working with those flimsy autistic fucks
>intel being the anti-consumer jew
>1366x768
1.778:1 is better than 1.6:1 though.
hdmi has drm
>>55360943
At <=1080p, I disagree.
However, at 1440p or higher, it doesn't really matter anymore (assuming not using HiDPI modes).
I loved 1920x1200 compared to 1920x1080
though since I moved up to 2560x1440 I don't mind it anymore
>>55361564
It was fine for 32" tvs. Fucking 15.4" laptop screens with the cheapo tn panels and crappy blue tinted backlights though jesus
>>55361639
I'm still in love with 1200p personally.
Does anyone know any good new 16:10 monitors? I'm in the market for one for my new build.
>>55360844
LCD beat SED/FED out of development.
>>55363079
All of my this
4:3 (Exactly Pythagorean Triple) >>>>>>>>>
16:10 (Approximate Golden Ratio) >= 16:9 (4^2:3^2)
>>55363832
>three triple greater-than signs
>proper order
>ruined by 'or equal to'
I trusted you.
still a bit buttblasted by all the glossy monitors
