Widescreen Gaming Forum

Recently I have come to the conclusion that I prefer playing MMOs in portrait mode. I find the extra height much better for capturing the landscapes in MMOs, especially since the FOV usually becomes distorted near the edges while playing in Landscape mode.

Upon testing portrait mode out, I find that my 24", which seem wide enough in Landscape, seem MUCH narrower while in portrait mode. So, I decided to upgrade to 27 inchers.

Now, because of my preference for wider monitors, I really don't want to go with a 16:9 solution, I want that extra width while playing in portrait.

My dilemma is as follows, ever since the Dell 2709w's have been discontinued, I dont really see a suitable 27inch 16:10 alternative.the U2711's are 16:9, I had purchased one but found it much too narrow.

Does anyone know of a good 16:10 27" LCD? I would prefer not to have to dish out the cash to move to 30".

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Now, because of my preference for wider monitors, I really don't want to go with a 16:9 solution, I want that extra width while playing in portrait.

16:10 is narrower than 16:9. It reads like you are implying the opposite.

A 16:10 display with the same diagonal as a 16:9 display will have a larger vertical viewing area and a smaller horizontal viewing area.

Based on my recent searching 27'' tends to be the realm of 16:9(1920x1080, +) while 26'' tends to be 16:10(1920x1200).

I want that extra width while playing in portrait.

Maybe the OP wants extra portrait width when the monitor is rotated to portrait mode. In portrait, 1200x1920 > 1080x1920.

Although not quite 27 inches in size, NEC makes two 26", 1920x1200 monitors. The second model, part of NEC's Professional line, is more expensive:

NEC EA261WM-BK:
http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=b2824707-0c2c-4c7a-83e7-c4dfb2e4b742

NEC LCD2690WUXi2-BK
http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=8899a96d-28dc-484f-a4de-14309a636738

Two more 26-inchers, 1920x1200, from Viewsonic:

VA2626WM
http://store.viewsonic.com/html/ibeCCtpItmDspRte.jsp?section=24509&item=2618646

VP2655WB
http://store.viewsonic.com/html/ibeCCtpItmDspRte.jsp?section=24509&item=2798645

[quote]I want that extra width while playing in portrait.

Maybe the OP wants extra portrait width when the monitor is rotated to portrait mode. In portrait, 1200x1920 > 1080x1920.

Although not quite 27 inches in size, NEC makes two 26", 1920x1200 monitors. The second model, part of NEC's Professional line, is more expensive:

NEC EA261WM-BK:
http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=b2824707-0c2c-4c7a-83e7-c4dfb2e4b742

NEC LCD2690WUXi2-BK
http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=8899a96d-28dc-484f-a4de-14309a636738

Two more 26-inchers, 1920x1200, from Viewsonic:

VA2626WM
http://store.viewsonic.com/html/ibeCCtpItmDspRte.jsp?section=24509&item=2618646

VP2655WB
http://store.viewsonic.com/html/ibeCCtpItmDspRte.jsp?section=24509&item=2798645

That is exactly what I meant by "wider", sorry I wasn't clear. I intend to use the monitors in Portrait, so I find the 16:9 monitors too narrow.

I will take a look at those options, thank you, I just have never been a fan of Viewsonic, and the NEC ones typically are more expensive than other manufacturers. Although NEC has really nice thin Bezels.

Any other suggestions much appreciated.

I get you now. The aspect ratio or resolution really doesn't matter as much as the actual vertical screen size. So a 26'' 16:10 will be about a half inch wider than a 27'' 16:9 display.

27'' 16:9
Width - 23.5
Height - 13.2

26'' 16:10
Width - 22.0
Height - 13.7

This may help you for comparing what you want and what you already have. You can type in 16:10 manually.

http://www.prinds.com/tools/screenDimensions.htm

EDIT - This assumes the extra height of a 16:9 in portrait isn't a problem for you.

Thank you for the suggestions.

I really am looking for a 27inch at 16:10.

The more I look at this, (I have scoured shopbot.ca) the more I think there is a serious gap in the marketplace. There is a serious lack of reasonably priced 27 inch 1920x1200 screens out there. Something in the 500-600 dollar range.

My guess would be that manufacturers are trying to push people to either purchase more profitable 16:9 screens or spend twice as much for a 30 incher. Damn I wish the 2709W was still around, input lag be damned.

Myself and others agree with your sentiments for the 16:10 format:
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=20624

My problem with 16:9 is that the way they get 16:9 is by cutting off resolution off of a 16:10 monitor. Now if they added more pixels (kinda like how they go from 1440x900 to 1600x900) that would be (in my mind) a better way to do things and would make me more inclined to by 16:9 panels. But alas this is what they do to get the following formats in the high end resolutions:

16:10 2560x1600
16:9 2560x1440
21:9 2560x1080

All I see is them hacking off resolution to go wider.

Along similar lines for 24-27 inch monitors:

16:10 1920x1200
16:9 1920x1080

Enthusiasts see the benefit of 120 more lines of resolution offered by 1920x1200.

Average consumers are so indoctrinated with the terms Full HD and 1080P that x1200 has dropped out of their awareness. They are ignorant of x1200 offering more to view than x1080, and the main market is aligning with this overwhelming yet short-sighted awareness.

For example, at HP.com 16:10 monitors are only found in the Small & Medium Business section, while every monitor in the Home & Small Office section is 16:9.

EDIT - NVM