Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This article lists computer monitor, television, digital film, and other graphics display resolutions that are in common use. Most of them use certain preferred numbers . Computer graphics
WSXGA+ displays were commonly used on Widescreen 20-, 21-, and 22-inch LCD monitors from numerous manufacturers (and a very small number of 19-inch widescreen monitors), as well as widescreen 15.4-inch and 17-inch laptop LCD screens like the Thinkpad T61p, the late 17" Apple PowerBook G4 and the unibody Apple 15" MacBook Pro.
This is the highest resolution that generally can be displayed on analog computer monitors (most CRTs), and the highest resolution that most analogue video cards and other display transmission hardware (cables, switch boxes, signal boosters) are rated for (at 60 Hz refresh). 24-bit colour requires 9 MB of video memory (and transmission ...
Initially intended for use by computer monitors and video cards, the standard made its way into consumer televisions. The parameters defined by standard include horizontal blanking and vertical blanking intervals, horizontal frequency and vertical frequency (collectively, pixel clock rate or video signal bandwidth), and horizontal/vertical sync ...
Early 1440p computer displays became commonly available in 2010. Dell's UltraSharp U2711 monitor was released in 2010 as WQHD, with a 1440p widescreen. [1] The 27-inch Apple LED Cinema Display released in 2010 also had a native resolution of 2560 × 1440, as did the Apple Thunderbolt Display which was sold from July 2011 to June 2016.
3840 × 1080 (3. 55:1 or 32:9); this resolution was first used in the Samsung C49HG70, a 49-inch (120 cm) curved gaming monitor released in 2017. This resolution is equivalent to dual 1080p displays (1920 × 1080) side-by-side, but with no border interrupting the image.
A 4:3 monitor. Until about 2003, most computer monitors used an aspect ratio of 4:3, and in some cases 5:4. For cathode ray tubes (CRTs) 4:3 was most common even in resolutions where this meant the pixels would not be square (e.g. 320×200 or 1280×1024 on a 4:3 display).
The lower cost of 16:9 computer displays was seen as a positive, along with their suitability for gaming and movies, as well as the convenience of having the same aspect ratio in different devices. [3] [9] On the other hand, there was criticism towards the lack of vertical screen real estate when compared to 16:10 displays of the same screen ...