The Official PC building thread - 4th Edition [page 65/301]

AfterDawn Addict

4 product reviews

30. March 2011 @ 10:03

Link to this message

Deadrum: I figured, but the last time that happened they actually didn't know, so it pays to check!
Russ: If it's a 16:9 monitor, it wouldn't be able to display the full 16:10 resolution, as that's more pixels than the panel will actually have. The 16:10 resolution it will have been producing must have been lower than the full 16:9 resolution (for example, 1680x1050 instead of 1920x1080, or 1440x900 instead of 1600x900)

Afterdawn Addict // Silent PC enthusiast // PC Build advisor // LANGamer Alias:Ratmanscoop
PC Specs page -- http://my.afterdawn.com/sammorris/blog_entry.cfm/11247
updated 10-Dec-13

Senior Member

30. March 2011 @ 10:17

Link to this message

Originally posted by sammorris:
Deadrum: I figured, but the last time that happened they actually didn't know, so it pays to check!
Russ: If it's a 16:9 monitor, it wouldn't be able to display the full 16:10 resolution, as that's more pixels than the panel will actually have. The 16:10 resolution it will have been producing must have been lower than the full 16:9 resolution (for example, 1680x1050 instead of 1920x1080, or 1440x900 instead of 1600x900)

I think you meant 16:10 higher resolutions Sam, as you stated to began with.

Monitor Aspect Ratio for (16/10 format) Standard

==============================================

1024x 640

1280x 800    WXGA

1440x 900    WXGA, WXGA+, WSXGA

1680x1050    WSXGA+

1920x1200    WUXGA

2560x1600    WQXGA

3200x2048    WQSXGA

3840x2400    WQUXGA

5120x3200    WHXGA

6400x4096    WHSXGA

7680x4800    WHUXGA





Monitor Aspect Ratio for (16/9 format) Standard

==============================================

1280x 720    WXGA

1366x 768    HDVGA

1440x 810

1600x 900

1920x1080    HDTV

2048x1152    QWXGA

2560x1440    WQHD

AfterDawn Addict

4 product reviews

30. March 2011 @ 10:20

Link to this message

Well no, because as I say, a monitor can display fewer pixels than it has, but not more, for obvious reasons. Thereby, a 16:9 resolution monitor displaying a 16:10 picture must be displaying a lower resolution than its maximum.

Afterdawn Addict // Silent PC enthusiast // PC Build advisor // LANGamer Alias:Ratmanscoop
PC Specs page -- http://my.afterdawn.com/sammorris/blog_entry.cfm/11247
updated 10-Dec-13

Senior Member

30. March 2011 @ 10:50

Link to this message

Kind of a confusing way to say it just can't display the full 16:10 image I'd say?

theonejrs

AfterDawn Addict

30. March 2011 @ 21:27

Link to this message

Originally posted by sammorris:
It's been a problem for years with several CM designs, if they're aware they probably don't intend to do anything about it. CM don't really like listening to customers, they just expect you to buy replacement parts instead.

Sam,

I don't know as to whether CM actually sells the parts at all. Then there's the problem of needing a Pop Rivet gun, or replacing the Pop Rivets with screws!

Russ

GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor

theonejrs

AfterDawn Addict

31. March 2011 @ 05:21

Link to this message

Originally posted by sammorris:
Deadrum: I figured, but the last time that happened they actually didn't know, so it pays to check!
Russ: If it's a 16:9 monitor, it wouldn't be able to display the full 16:10 resolution, as that's more pixels than the panel will actually have. The 16:10 resolution it will have been producing must have been lower than the full 16:9 resolution (for example, 1680x1050 instead of 1920x1080, or 1440x900 instead of 1600x900)

Sam,

I am well aware of that. Then again it's mostly 16:9 today for just about everything. I am going to have to learn how to burn DL media though. DVDRB/CCE seems to be time limited, rather than how many GB you are compressing. DVDRB handles up to about 140 minutes worth of video on a DVD 5 without issue, but I just got done processing the Extended Edition of Avatar, which is 178 minutes, and the picture just falls apart on a DVD 5, while as a DL, it looks fabulous. I'll have to get with Fred though, as he knows what he is doing in the DL department, better than anyone I know.

Russ

AfterDawn Addict

4 product reviews

31. March 2011 @ 07:13

Link to this message

http://www.coolermaster.nl/shop/ - Where I went, after CM ignored all my support requests.
When burning as an actual DVD, 178 minutes is going to be too long for a standard DVD5, you should definitely be using dual layers for that. I haven't used real DVDs for a very long time, so I can't give much personal experience, but I wouldn't really expect 140 mins to turn out that great either, the standard bitrate allows for up to 120 minutes at respectable quality.

Afterdawn Addict // Silent PC enthusiast // PC Build advisor // LANGamer Alias:Ratmanscoop
PC Specs page -- http://my.afterdawn.com/sammorris/blog_entry.cfm/11247
updated 10-Dec-13

Senior Member

31. March 2011 @ 10:55

Link to this message

I've used DVD-RB a lot, however not in quite some time since I live in the Blu-ray world now. I've done many 2.5 to 3 hour movies and had no problem making a good quality DVD5 from it. It takes 12 to 24 hours, with a dual core or better, to transcode them as I go for the highest quality. I use CCE sometimes but typically use ProCoder as I've tested both and ProCoder 2-3 was better than CCE at the time. The new version of CCE is better than the one I was using back then so it may be as good, or even better now, however it was pretty close even back a couple of years ago. Your problem may be that you are doing a complete backup instead of Movie Only and how you are transcoding the extra's, but that is just a shot in the dark as I don't know exactly what you are doing in your setup.

AfterDawn Addict

7 product reviews

31. March 2011 @ 13:06

Link to this message

I stilled the menu's with Menushrink, and ran 3 passes on Avatar. It's respectable on my 50" 720P plasma :p 3 Passes helps when Bitrates drop below 3,000 - 2,500. I think it's quite funny that I see people doing 6 - 9 passes. Overkill much? LOL!!!!!!!
But I of course own the dvd and Blu Ray. I bought the DVD - BD combo pack. So my backup won't get too much use. The BD is nothing short of epic! I also converted the BD straight to DVD-5 with Bd rebuilder. It looked considerably better. At this point in time, it's the best movie I've ever bought. However, I can't wait for the Extended BD's of Lord Of The Rings xD
Russ, Imgburn is generally automatic with DVD DL media. It'll offer you a few locations to make the layer break. (where there could be a brief pause). I like it when it happens at a scene change ;)

To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question!

Senior Member

31. March 2011 @ 14:07

Link to this message

I do 9 passes typically and you can tell the difference between that and 2-3 passes, there is more pop (crispness)to the video so I'll spend the extra time and it is even more important on larger files where more compression is required. It is that little difference which is the same difference so they say when comparing CCE to ProCoder. I have a friend who is kind of a bone head when it comes to this stuff and he can see the difference too.

That?s funny because you couldn?t pay me to watch either of those movies, but this is why we keep getting crap these days, it is just a new age I guess. It is also due to that why I normally only watch classics these days with rare exception.

Estuansis

AfterDawn Addict

15 product reviews

31. March 2011 @ 14:08

Link to this message

I do happen to have a low bitrate 1080p version of Lord of the Rings Extended. Not the greatest quality but better than the DVDs. And it looks better on my 32" HDTV than on my monitor which helps quite a bit.

Also do have a high bitrate copy of Avatar Extended in 1080p. Will agree that the image quality for Avatar is awesome in general :)

AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388

AfterDawn Addict

7 product reviews

31. March 2011 @ 14:20

Link to this message

Originally posted by Estuansis:
I do happen to have a low bitrate 1080p version of Lord of the Rings Extended. Not the greatest quality but better than the DVDs. And it looks better on my 32" HDTV than on my monitor which helps quite a bit.

Also do have a high bitrate copy of Avatar Extended in 1080p. Will agree that the image quality for Avatar is awesome in general :)

Agreed. Avatar is awesome in every way. To those who don't like it, they must simply have particular interests. Or CGI simply doesn't wow them like it does countless millions. To each his/her own. We all have our own opinions.

To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question!

Moderator

31. March 2011 @ 14:28

Link to this message

I can always tell when i won't like a film as much as others, if half the planet raves about it, i can tell it's not going to be that engaging. Avatar & District 9 are the last two examples that spring to mind, i knew they wouldn't (to me) be classic films. There's great effects in Avatar to be sure, but not a great deal of substance; i've been the same since i was a teen, never been one to be wowed by the latest craze. That's one reason why my PC's and other kit last so long, i'm a salesman's nightmare. As to movies, i don't bother encoding my own anymore, though i do still use ConvertXtoDVD (version 2, don't need anything newer) to convert any movies for the kids. I let the experts 'out there' do any other encoding now, 720p BRRip/BDRip are more than crisp enough for my tastes. Any one of the Harry Potter movies (all are watched often by me and by the kids and the G/F) wipes the floor with the likes of Avatar i'm afraid, i'm all for plot/substance over prettiness :)

Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules ***

This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 31. March 2011 @ 14:31

AfterDawn Addict

4 product reviews

31. March 2011 @ 14:33

Link to this message

I've still not watched Avatar if you can believe it, I do want to at some point, but it's allocating the time for it :P
I know exactly what creaky means about enormous hype and its negative correlation with my enjoyment of films, but for District 9 at least, I actually quite enjoyed it, it was a fairly familiar premise, yet with a slightly different spin on it, and I thought the fi;m itself was rather good, personally.

Afterdawn Addict // Silent PC enthusiast // PC Build advisor // LANGamer Alias:Ratmanscoop
PC Specs page -- http://my.afterdawn.com/sammorris/blog_entry.cfm/11247
updated 10-Dec-13

AfterDawn Addict

7 product reviews

31. March 2011 @ 14:34

Link to this message

I thought there was plenty of substance. District 9 on the other hand...Meh. It was ok. I wouldn't compare those two...

Sorry about off subject.

To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question!

Moderator

31. March 2011 @ 14:36

Link to this message

Don't get me wrong, i do enjoy both those films, they just don't get me excited, i'm not easily pleased nor overy fussy, i just don't get the hype, and if something is hyped to that extent i know it's going to be watched once or twice and no more. Each to their own, as i always say though.
And back to PC's (gotta bring us back on topic i guess!), my Q6600 is still more than quick enough for my needs, can't believe i've had it for 4 years now.

This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 31. March 2011 @ 14:37

AfterDawn Addict

7 product reviews

31. March 2011 @ 14:50

Link to this message

LOL! I'm probably gonna sell my Phenom II 965. I should be able to get 130 - 150USD eh?
Although I see newegg is selling it for 139.99. I'd like to collect some money, so I can buy the 1090t :D

To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question!

Moderator

31. March 2011 @ 14:55

Link to this message

I still ponder whether or not to get another Q6600 as i still have the MSI P35 Platinum board that i bought in '07 and had RMA'd. All i'd need is a CPU, cooler and a PSU. Trouble is i haven't a need for another Quad, never mind nowhere to put it!. Q6600's go for about £80, i'd probably use a stock cooler instead of another Zalman, and i'd probably only buy a 400W CPU. I have spare RAM that was RMA'd (yep, half of the original 4GB Crucial Ballistix i bought in '07 - or am i running on the RMA'd pair, can't remember). So not expensive but i probably still splurge the cash as i'd feel like i was looking for an excuse to simply build a machine around a spare motherboard

This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 31. March 2011 @ 14:57

AfterDawn Addict

4 product reviews

31. March 2011 @ 15:01

Link to this message

£80's a lot for a Q6600 when there are dual cores for that sort of money that are just as fast nowadays, albeit granted without the requisite motherboard/RAM. If you wanted to reuse the system, I'd try and find something dirt cheap like an E6300/4300 or E5200/7200.

Afterdawn Addict // Silent PC enthusiast // PC Build advisor // LANGamer Alias:Ratmanscoop
PC Specs page -- http://my.afterdawn.com/sammorris/blog_entry.cfm/11247
updated 10-Dec-13

Moderator

31. March 2011 @ 15:05

Link to this message

Yeah, and then i come full circle to not needing another machine. I could just keep the board as a spare i suppose, though (touch wood) the Gigabyte is still going strong

Estuansis

AfterDawn Addict

15 product reviews

31. March 2011 @ 15:12

Link to this message

For the record I LOVED District 9 and thought it was actually under-hyped for how good it was. To me at least, it's jampacked with REAL substance. Avatar not so much, more like a redeux of Pocahontas. Ofc if you want to get exacting my favorite movie of all time is a little known animated featured called Porco Rosso or "The Crimson Pig." It's about a cursed Italian World War 1 pilot facing the ghosts of his past. Very good movie.

Also, to keep it OT I still have my Q6600 and it still holds 3.7Ghz problem-free :P

This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 31. March 2011 @ 15:13

AfterDawn Addict

7 product reviews

31. March 2011 @ 15:20

Link to this message

Both of my brothers machines are dual cores. While they keep up with the times, I do notice sometimes, that they are considerably slower than my quads :p Any build I do, I recommend Quads. That way they are semi future proof. Dual cores days may be numbered. And I say this with a great deal of respect toward the Athlon 5200's that my brother employs.
I may just sell the 965 to my brother. I do have to pay off the 1996 Ford explorer I bought from him...

Eek! That's right. I only have 1 quad now :S

To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question!

This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 31. March 2011 @ 15:21

Red_Maw

Senior Member

31. March 2011 @ 16:03

Link to this message

Originally posted by Estuansis:
Ofc if you want to get exacting my favorite movie of all time is a little known animated featured called Porco Rosso or "The Crimson Pig." It's about a cursed Italian World War 1 pilot facing the ghosts of his past. Very good movie.

wow, many years ago I saw the first ~10 minutes of that movie but never knew what it was; going to have to see if I can find it now.

AfterDawn Addict

7 product reviews

31. March 2011 @ 16:07

Link to this message

Netflix has it...