11-10-2013 03:31 PM
11-10-2013 04:01 PM
I run 2048x1152. 90% of all desktop applications are unusable under 3200x1800. Even destkop steam games have problem displaying properly initially at that resolution. The performance for 3d 'metro' games is also horrible at that resolution (example, aslphalt 7). In my opinion, text is generally too small in 'metro' apps in that resolution too. 2048x1152 looks pretty good and its more than enough res.
11-10-2013 04:09 PM
I'm still tweaking my setup and have yet to find the sweet spot across all apps. The resolution is phenomenal when it works though - text is rendered perfectly and high resolution pictures look fantastic ("almost 3D" - quote from my technophobe wife).
As I understand it the update to Windows 8.1 brought much better support for high density displays and added additional scaling options.
Applications that have been written with "absolute" sizing and positioning of UI elements or use low resolution images and textures don't scale or scale badly on this laptop in it's native resolution (e.g. the toolbar buttons in eclipse are hard to see because they are so small).
My current settings:
11-10-2013 04:43 PM
I like 207% zoom because then my favorite Access Form sizes perfectly. The point is you can set zoom to anything.
Of course the problem you run into is projecting to an extended monitor where 200+% zoom will look a bit comical. For some reason, Microsoft with their thousands of PhD's have not figured a way to allow users to set zoom for extended monitors independently. For instance, if I could have my Y2P at 200% and my extended monitor at 125%, that would be perfect, yet surprisingly Microsoft has made no effort to make this happen.
And it's not like users haven't been begging Microsoft for this. They have. Microsoft simple does not care. They gave us some sort of weird solution that is suppposed to make things look the same on different res screens but it doesn't address the problem. Typical MS, they solve a problem no one had and ignore a problem everyone has. Of all the companies I have encountered, Microsoft has the worst "listening" problem.
11-10-2013 04:54 PM
Is there a "one click" type of scaling and resolution change function. I saw the profiles in the display, but that's still not "one click". The laptop would be for my wife and she has a docking station A/B switch box setup fpr home (between her home PC and work laptop...looking to replace the home PC with a laptop). While she does not do the "dual monitor" bit, she does use an external monitor all the time.
11-17-2013 09:22 PM
I set mine at 1920 x 1080 resolution, after trying just about all of the other options. Any kind of "scaling" would work on some programs and not with others -- it was just frustrating and generally unusable. Everything seems to be ultra-clear and razor-sharp at 1920 x 1080, so I'm happy.
11-18-2013 04:46 AM
2048 x 125% zoom is roughly equivalent in screen usage to a 22 inch 1080p monitor at 125% zoom. This is a benefit as apps take up the same space on your Y2P as they do on your external monitor and you can still enjoy 1080p + resolution on your Y2P.
11-18-2013 07:06 AM
I was running at 1920x1080 with 125% scaling for a while, but I kept finding things that didn't look right with some sort of scaling. Especially in Chrome, and I've tried all the tweaks I can find. I feel like the Chrome HiDPI mode isn't ready for primetime. At the moment I'm running 1600x900, because 1080p without any scaling is too small for me.
11-18-2013 07:53 AM
When I can I will run the default native 3200x1800 and 200% scaling which works well for a lot of things. Even at 200% there are things that don't scale up enough, though often that' just click-through screens and stuff I don't care about.
I'd really like to be able to set the scaling per-application, since there are some that I want to be primarily readable for text (larger) and some I'd actually like to be able to get more data on the screen (Reason) and would be happy to deal with smaller text.
For gaming and generally good overall ease of use and few size issues, I have found 1600x900 to be good. It's an integer scaling multiple (haven't really experiemented to see how much difference it makes with this display though) and games seem to be able to handle this pretty well.
Games don't generally offer me the same resolution options that the Intel drivers do (no 1600x900, no 1920x1080) and they also seem to be incapable of changing the actual LCD resolution, so I find so far that I need to change the system to 1600x900, then tell the game to run in windowed-full-screen to get it to then use that resolution. With that setup on "Good" quality I get a smooth playable 30fps in WoW for example.
Some games clearly have a bug where they find out the underlying physical screen resolution and then use that to center windows so the windows open up centered on the lower-right corner of the screen for example. There's a lot of weirdness when it comes to getting DirectX windows to fill the screen properly. Often after running a game for hte first time and exiting you'll get a notice that "compatability setting have been applied" and then if you launch it again things will be different in terms of where the windows go and sscale in different modes (fullscreen, etc.) So far I've gotten everything to work that I've wanted to, but sometimes it takes a lot of experimentation with in-game and Intel driver video resolution settings to get something that works well.