Updated 5 hours ago

Should you make the jump to a 16:9 monitor?

In Depth: If you're into games, the answer is yes. Here's why

April 26th 2009 | Tell us what you think [ 1 comments ]

lcd-monitor

The 16:9 standard's origins can be traced back to 1980

First, there was widescreen. As we migrated to LCDs, between a fifth and a third more screen space was tacked on to the sides of our panels.

Even long-standing acronyms for pixel resolutions such as XGA were stretched out with a 'W' prefix to denote their extra girth.

Now an even wider format looms. The longer, lower 16:9 ratio of length to height, common for HDTV sets, is already the screen ratio of choice for netbooks and has been used by Sony laptop line-ups for years.

On one hand, wide-scale adoption of the standard could be enormously beneficial. As it stands, there are far too many screen resolutions and abbreviations. It's reckoned that fewer than one in five consumers can correctly choose between the 720p and 1080p standards so intensively marketed in the high street.

So, in the more obfuscatory world of computer monitors, what chance do they have? By encouraging a shift towards one aspect ratio, you're simplifying the options. From a technical point of view, content producers could then concentrate on one format without fear of black bars or scaling issues.

Ride this train of thought to its conclusion and you find economies of scale for manufacturing too, since similarly sized panels can be shared by monitor and TV product lines.

Counter argument

This, of course, raises the question of why the two standards have arisen in the first place. The most commonly quoted reason why computer monitors adopted 16:10 as the norm is that it's almost perfect for viewing two full A4 pages of text side by side.

There's a lot to be said for that – one of the key features in Windows 7 is quick resizing of documents to fill exactly half the screen, which Microsoft thinks is one of the most common tasks performed on a PC.

There are other more esoteric – and probably spurious – arguments, as well. For instance, 16:10 is close to the mathematical 'golden ratio', whereby the sum of the ratio divided by the larger part equals the larger number divided by the smallest. The ratio crops up regularly in art and is considered aesthetically pleasing because it matches the shape of the human field of vision.

The trade off

As for the 16:9 standard, its origins can be traced back to 1980 and a film engineer called Kerns H Powers, who worked for the standardisation board SMPTE. The year before, Woody Allen had insisted that the TV version of his film Manhattan shouldn't be cropped to fill the smaller screen format. Trying to shoe-horn movie prints on to TV screens proved a headache.

After looking into all the options, Powers adopted 16:9 as the screen ratio that best accommodated all the different frame sizes currently being shot for cinema.

Modern 16:9 monitors also handle games well. The extra width helps to fill the peripheral vision, aiding immersion in a game world. On the other hand, they're not so good at displaying documents. A 24in 16:9 panel stands as tall as a 22in 16:10 one, so it's less adept at making side-by-side comparisons of files in portrait format.

Even on a 30in 16:10 monitor, users naturally place their windows in the centre of the screen, so extending the sides is simply increasing the amount of mostly unused desktop space. Has the decision to standardise already been made, though?

Over the last six months nearly every major manufacturer has released a 16:9 laptop with Blu-ray viewers in mind. Dell, LG and Iiyama have refreshed their 16:9 desktop screens amid enough fanfare to suggest something is up.

In the end, it's likely economics will win – if it becomes more cost effective to standardise all TVs and monitors, that's how things will go.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First published in PC Plus Issue 281

Liked this? Then check out Everything you ever wanted to know about LCD monitors

Sign up for the free weekly TechRadar newsletter
Get tech news delivered straight to your inbox. Register for the free TechRadar newsletter and stay on top of the week's biggest stories and product releases. Sign up at http://www.techradar.com/register

Follow TechRadar on Twitter

 

Your comments (1) Click to add a new comment

areucrazy


November 10th 2011

1. Answer is HELL NO!!! 16:9 is **** unless your using monitors over 27 inches. I 100% disagree with your statement "The extra width helps to fill the peripheral vision"... You get absolutely no extra peripheral image over 16:10. I will clue you in ... 1920x1080 vs 1920x1200. I'm no rocket engineer but it looks like I still only see 1920 horizontal pixels in both aspect ratios. In fact, you will loose 1.5 inches of vertical view; actual gaming resolution pixels.

This is a manufacturing dream world/nightmare to make small TV and monitor the same resolution and are saving 5% material on top of it. It may be good for production costs. But it's **** for the consumer. We need to stick together and not buy these ridiculous displays.

Oh yeah, while I'm on a tangent.. Now we are stuck with Super Glossy displays for laptops.. this may be coming to regular monitors soon. Will the madness ever end. Who in the hell wants a laptop with a screen so glossy that it can blind people from across the street. "It's Super Clear" ummm OK 'IN PITCH BLACKNESS!'. You can't use it indoors for more than an hour without severe eye strain. I guess that's why Germany's workers are filing lawsuits against employers that supply them shinny displays.

I think common sense has skipped a generation. Who in the hell is making these decisions.

Bottom line 16:9 ok for TV's not for computers and especially not for GAMING!! ..

- end -

Alert a moderator

Tell us what you think

You need to Log in or register to post comments

By submitting this form you agree to our Terms of Use and so are legally responsible for anything you submit. DO NOT submit anything which may violate the Terms of Use or another person's rights including copyrighted or offensive materials.

Windows 8 offers options on lock screens and more, but loses the familiar Start menu

Hands on: Windows 8 review

Up close with the developer preview of Microsoft's new OS

Belkin's Wireless USB unit has long been discontinued

Whatever happened to Wireless USB & HDMI?

The Ultra Wideband tech we're still waiting for

We have benchmarked all the lastest components so you don't have to

The best PC upgrades for gamers

Top graphics cards, processors and more

There are fast cards, and there are slow cards - which one is right for you?

15 best graphics cards in the world today

AMD or Nvidia? Choose the best DX11 graphics card for you