Are higher resolutions bad for the eyes?
Home | Reviews and Features | Special Reports | Forums |

Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Are higher resolutions bad for the eyes?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    27

    Are higher resolutions bad for the eyes?

    Although they may look better is it true that the higher your resolution the worse they are for your eyes?

    For example, is playing a game at say 640*480 better on your eyes than say playing at 1280*1024, both at say 75Hz?

    Especially considering any text within the game usually shrinks playing at higher resolution

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    225
    It all depends on the size of your monitor:
    15" - 640x480=blocky, 800x600=good, 1024x720 max. Anything above is too tiny to see.
    17" and 800x600 becomes blocky.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Location
    Grand Haven, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    11,332
    Refresh rate is the big thing. The smaller resolution is only a big deal if you are constantly looking closer at the screan at smaller details, like looking at or for a target a long ways away.

    ------------------
    AthlonXP 1600+ @1.5Ghz
    FOP32-1 Mod w/80mm (30db)
    Epox 8KHA+ KT266A
    256MB Crucial DDR266
    GeForce2 GTS (210/410)
    Sound Blaster Audigy
    Antec SX-630 Case (mod'd)
    TTGI TT-350-SS 370w PS
    AMD Phenom II x4 945 3Ghz | ASUS M4A77TD | 2X WD 1TB SATA 2 hard drive | 2x2GB Corsair XMS3 | nVidia GeForce 8800 GTS | ATI TV Wonder Theater Pro 550 | Antec P-160 case | Antec 650w Earth Watts | LG Blu-ray Super Drive | LG DVD RW | Windows 7 Pro

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    893
    I think 1024x768 is fine on any monitor, there shouldnt be any reason you need to go higher than that even for gaming in my opinion. Plus that resolution doesnt hurt your eyes. I've had my monitor on 1280x1024 for about a week before and my eyes were constantly hurting (and im young, im only 15). However, everyone has there own preferences towards the resolution they like.

    ------------------
    Athy 700@800 1.65v
    Abit KA7
    128meg PC133 7.5ns can do 160@CAS3
    Asus V7700 Pure 32meg (215+?/366+?)
    IBM 75GXP 45gb
    WD 10.2GB 7200rpm ATA66
    Turtle Beach Santa Cruz
    Toshiba SD-M1402 (12x dvd/40x cd)
    Plextor 8/4/32 CD-RW
    3COM 56k hardware modem (just incase)
    SMC 10mpbs ISA NIC (for DSL)
    Intel P4C 3.0Ghz
    Asus P4P800-E Deluxe
    2x256mb Corsair Value Select PC3200
    eVGA e-GeForce 6800
    WD 120gb SE
    IBM 60GXP 60gb
    Creative Labs Audigy (free)
    Toshiba SD-M1402 (12x dvd/40x cd)
    Lite-On 52x24x52 ($15 retail )
    Pioneer A06 DVD+/-RW
    ThermalTake Silent Purepower 420W PSU

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Posts
    1,978
    1024x768 is the sweet spot, it looks good. I have a 17" monitor and i have used 1024x768 resolution for ages now and my eyes never hurt.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Posts
    1,978
    By the way, the lower the Hz the more eye strain you will get. I personally have mine set to 85Hz @ 1024x768.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    27,273
    Resolution is more or less, a matter of choice.
    Refresh rate, higher the better. Just don't exceed the capabilities of the video card or the monitor.

    ------------------
    "I know nothing."
    Cheers.
    "I know nothing."
    Cheers.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Crawley, West Sussex, England
    Posts
    50
    I tend to have my Res at 1600x1200@32 with no problems or irritations to my eyes.

    ------------------
    Athlon AXIA 1200
    ECS K7s5a Mobo
    512Mb DDR
    Geforce2 MX400 64MB TV/O
    20Gb HDD + 10Gb HDD
    52x CdRom
    16x DVDRom
    17" Sony Trinitron
    Win XP Pro
    Pentium 4 2.8 Ghz
    512Mb PC800
    Geforce4 Ti 4200 64MB TV/O
    Sound Blaster Audigy Platinum
    40Gb HDD + 80Gb HDD
    Samsung CdRw
    Sony DVD
    19" Sony Monitor
    Win XP Pro

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,390
    Yea... 1024 * 768 is the best for me
    I dont know... I just dont.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,990
    In my opinion, it is only bad if the resulting image forces you to squint your eyes or strain too hard to see it. The bottom line is: if you can see the image comfortably than it is not bad for you.

    Note: I am not an opthomologist so I do not know this for certain.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •