common lcd panel resolutions pricelist

Find the native resolution of your monitor. Knowing the native resolution of your monitor will help you quickly get the clearest image. In Windows 7, 8, and most versions OS X, the recommended resolution will be labeled. Below are some common resolutions for monitors:

Desktop widescreen monitors are usually 1920 x 1080, though 2560 x 1440 and 3440 x 1440 are becoming more popular. Older 4:3 flat panels may be 1280 x 1024.

Change your resolution using the slider. Clicking the "Resolution" drop-down menu in Windows 7 and 8 will display the slider. Drag the slider to change the display resolution on your monitor. Resolutions other than the recommended one will result in a blurry, stretched, or squished image.

23.8" LED-backlit LCD monitor / FHD (1920x1080) resolution IPS display / 178° (H) 178° (V) viewing angle / 250 cd/m² brightness / 5ms (GTG) response time (in FAST mode) / 1xUSB‑C input (video/audio/60W charging capability), 1xDisplayPort (in), 1xDisplayPort (out) with MST, 1xHDMI, 1xUSB‑C output (data/15W charging capability), 3xSuperSpeed 10Gbps USB Type A ports / 1xDisplayPort, 1xUSB-C to USB Type A cable included / 3 year system/panel warranty

Generally speaking, LCD displays are the cheapest type of modern computer monitor. LED displays, which are based on the same technology as their LCD cousins, tend to be slightly more expensive while OLED displays are the most expensive of all. The latter being due to the high-priced components that make up the OLED technology.

Modern computer monitors can boast resolutions as high as 8K, offering stunning and true-to-life visuals and graphics. 8K, and even 4K, displays feature newly adopted technological advancements. As such, the higher the resolution, the costlier the monitor. If you are looking to snag a high-quality monitor on the cheap, go for an HD display with a 1080p resolution.

Our guide to the best monitors for PC gaming explains why those monitors are ideal for playing games at high resolutions and high framerates, but it doesn’t dig deep into the details of monitor technology. That’s what this guide is for: it breaks down what you need to know about modern displays: resolutions, aspect ratios, refresh rates, and the differences between panel types like IPS, VA, and TN.

While you might be inclined to go after the highest pixel count you can find or afford, this isn"t always the best strategy for finding an optimal display. Higher resolutions offer greater detail but require faster graphics cards for gaming purposes, and Windows" DPI scaling still isn"t perfect. How you use your PC as well as your hardware will help determine the ideal resolution and size for your next display.

LCD displays have a native resolution, and running games (or the desktop) below that resolution degrades image quality due to the scaling process of enlarging the image. Using lower resolution modes isn"t really a substitute for picking the right number of pixels in the first place.

1440p has become our recommendation as the best overall option. It"s great for office work, professional work, and gaming. You can still get higher refresh rate 144Hz panels (see below), plus G-Sync or FreeSync, and you can run at 100 percent scaling in Windows. For gaming purposes, however, you"ll want at least a GTX 1070/RTX 2060 or RX Vega 56 (or equivalent) graphics card.

Beyond 1440p, gaming gets dicey and expensive multi-GPU setups are often required for acceptable performance (though many games don"t even support multi-GPU, so that"s not always a viable solution). 4k displays are where most PCs top out, and while 5k and even 8k displays exist, those resolutions represent the bleeding edge of monitor design and generally aren"t useful for gaming purpose.

The most common and least expensive LCD panels are based on TN, or Twisted Nematic designs. Since TN screens are made on a vast scale and have been around a long time, they are very affordable. Online retailers stock an abundance of attractive 27-inch 1080p monitors(opens in new tab) with reasonable features starting at just $150. The price is nice, but the pixel density isn’t—and neither are the color quality or viewing angles, TN’s greatest weaknesses.

All TFT LCDs work by passing light, such as an LED, through a pair of polarized screens, a color filter, and liquid crystals that twist when current is applied to them. The more current applied, the more the liquid crystals twist and block light. Precise adjustments allow virtually any color or shade to be reproduced, but TN implementations have some limits.

Each pixel in an LCD display is made of red, green and blue subpixels. Colors are made by mixing varying brightness levels for these pixels, resulting in a perceived solid color to the user. The problem with TN is its widespread adoption of a 6-bit per channel model, instead of the 8-bit per channel used in better displays.

TN compensates for this shortcoming via FRC (Frame Rate Control), a pixel trick that uses alternating colors to produce a perceived third, but it"s a poor substitute for proper 24-bit color reproduction. When combined with the inversion and washout that comes from narrow viewing angles, TN"s elderly status in the LCD display world becomes clear.

IPS, short for In-Plane-Switching, was designed to overcome TN"s shortcomings as a display technology. IPS screens also use liquid crystals, polarized filters, and transmitters, but the arrangement is different, with the crystals aligned for better color visibility and less light distortion. Additionally, IPS panels typically use 8-bit depth per color instead of TN"s 6-bit, resulting in a full 256 shades to draw upon for each color.

The differences are pretty dramatic. While TN displays wash out at shallow angles and never truly "pop" with color no matter how well they are calibrated, IPS panels have rich, bright colors that don"t fade or shift when viewed from the sides. Moreover, pressing a finger on an IPS screen doesn"t cause trailing distortions, making them especially useful for touchscreen applications.

The complexity introduces additional overhead that reduces panel responsiveness. Most IPS displays clock in a few milliseconds slower than TN panels, with the best models managing 5ms grey-to-grey, and the more common 8ms panels can have noticeable blurring in gaming. Most IPS displays use a 60Hz refresh rate, though the best gaming displays now utilize IPS panels with 144Hz refresh rates, and a price to match.

A lot of research has been done with IPS and many variants exist, including Samsung"s popular PLS panels and AU Optronics AHVA (Advanced Hyper-Viewing Angle). The differences amount to subtle manufacturer variations or generational improvements on the technology, which has been around since 1996.

In between the high speed of TN and the color richness of IPS sits a compromise technology, the VA, or Vertically Aligned, panel. VA and its variants (PVA and MVA, but not AHVA) normally take the IPS approach with 8-bit color depth per channel and a crystal design that reproduces rich colors but retains some of the low latency and high refresh speed of TN. The result is a display that"s theoretically almost as colorful as IPS and almost as fast as TN.

VA panels have a few unique qualities, both positive and negative. They have superior contrast to both IPS and TN screens, often reaching a static 5000:1 ratio, and produce better black levels as a result. Advanced VA variants, such as the MVA panel used by Eizo in the Foris FG2421, support 120Hz officially and offer pixel latencies on par or better than IPS.

The flood of innovation in the display market shows no signs of abating, with TVs on one side and smartphones on the other driving new technologies such as curved screens and desktop-grade OLED panels that promise speeds, contrast and color beyond anything seen so far.

Most standard TFT-LCDs support a refresh rate of 60Hz, which means the screen is redrawn 60 times each second. While 60Hz may be sufficient for many desktop applications, higher refresh rates are desirable since they provide a smoother experience moving windows, watching video, and especially when gaming.

One method popular in gaming monitors is the inclusion of a strobed backlight, which disrupts eye tracking blur by cutting off the backlight for an instant, creating a CRT-like stable image. A strobed 120Hz display is more blur-free than a non-strobed 144Hz panel, but flickering the backlight understandably cuts down on the overall brightness of the image. Users with sensitive eyes can suffer from eyestrain and headaches induced from the flicker as well.

There"s a final, mostly hidden factor that affects display responsiveness: input latency. Latency stems from the delay caused by post-processing done to the video signal after it leaves the GPU but before it"s displayed on the monitor"s screen. Few if any manufacturers actually list this figure, stressing GTG numbers instead, as latency has been getting worse due to feature bloat. This makes determining latency difficult, but there"s a common sense guideline to selecting a display without excess input lag—more features mean more latency.

a line of extreme and ultra-narrow bezel LCD displays that provides a video wall solution for demanding requirements of 24x7 mission-critical applications and high ambient light environments

As graphic designer and enthusiast in computer history, I became curious how the monitor dimensions evolved over the years and analyzed which screen resolutions were most popular, so I created these Excel files:

First time I used W3Counter, then I found the highly-detailed StatCounter with its ability to download CSV, but I was not happy of historical coverage being 2009-present only, then I found NetMarketshare. I copied monthly data in an Excel table (the process took few hours) then I analyzed it, made charts about evolution of screen resolutions, etc. Then compiled the summarized table shown below in this page (most popular screen resolutions). I tried to find detailed statistics going back to 2003 at least to study the origins of widescreen bullshit, but no such thing is available.

I made this analysis in 2014, at the time I wanted to buy a new monitor to replace a 9-year old 17″ LCD. I updating monthly until January 2015. Lack of comments on this page and lack of positive chat messages from website visitors, gave me impression that nobody is interested in my analysis. I updated for last time in January 2016.

In 2017 StatCounter was redesigned and there is no longer possible to download full data in CSV format with one column for resolution and one row for each month, clicking “download CSV” show now only top 20 resolutions for whole period selected. NetMarketshare also removed screen resolution stats during 2017 or 2018. Even if I want to update above Excel files, I cannot do anymore, except W3Counter.

LCD monitors offer a sharp image only at native resolution, so they were produced with pixel size 0.25 – 0.30 mm. Making LCD with smaller pixels would make text too small and unreadable at native resolution, or blurry if you set a lower resolution.

During 1990s LCD displays were expensive so they were found only in laptops. Most people had CRT monitors and ran them in resolutions like VGA 640×480, SVGA 800×600, XGA 1024×768, but no exact statistics are available. Games like Age of Empires (1998), Midtown Madness (1999), The Sims (2000) had support only for these 3 resolutions. 1980s computers with CGA (320×200) and EGA (640×350) still existed, but they were not used to access internet to be tracked by statistics.

The popular widescreen format (16:10) appeared in 2004 originally in laptops (14″ / 15″ had 1280×800, 17″ had 1440×900), next year desktop monitors appeared in this format (19″ 1440×900, 22″ 1680×1050, 24″ 1920×1200) and high-end laptops received such resolutions. Widescreen monitors come with VGA and DVI ports, running 4:3 resolutions on VGA cable will make image stretching on full screen, while DVI cable maintain aspect ratio and display black bars.

Carmack coded Quake game on a 1920×1080 16:9 CRT monitor in 1995. Incredible but true, considering that widescreens (re)appeared in 2004 with 16:10 both CRT and LCD. Does anyone know who was the first inventor of 16:9?

While Internet Explorer and Chrome report Windows resolution and scaling, regardless of the browser zoom, Firefox browser report resolution based on the zoom you choose in browser. It cause webmasters to see a lot of odd resolutions.

If in Europe and USA 16:10 resolutions reached the peak in 2009, in Morocco, Egypt and Pakistan they are still growing as 2014, even 1280×1024. Probably this is the place where our old monitors go.

In early 2000s I had a 17″ CRT, in 2005 I bought a LCD 17″ 1280×1024 but I ran most of time at 1024×768. It started flickering in 2014 so I had to replace it, I started researching computer history and I wrote this article. I wanted a bigger 4:3 monitor and I was shocked to discover that they are no longer produced. Initially I rejected idea to buy an 1920×1080, my favorite game The Sims 2 support resolutions up to 1600×1200.

So, I bought a 20″ 1600×1200 with PVA panel from a shop selling used computers, it had a vertical line of pixels getting stuck randomly so I exchanged with a 24″ 1920×1200 also PVA panel. Shortly after this I realized that I can hack The Sims 2 settings and set any resolution I want. The 24″ 1920×1200 monitor broke after 1.5 years, luckily it was still in warranty and I got a replacement of same size but with shitty TN panel. I realized that should have purchased a new 1920×1080 from start.

If I was the person inventing computers, here are the resolutions I would have produced: square 17″ 1280×960, 20″ 1600×1200 and wide 20″ 1600×1000, 24″ 1920×1200, 30″ 2560×1600 and 3 laptop types: 12″ 1024×768, 14″ 1280×800, 17″ 1600×1000 (both 4:3 and 16:10, so people could choose, no 16:9 bullshit).

Only in 2014 I realized that screen resolutions are more often formed by multiply of 160 or 240 (example 640, 800, 1280, 1440, 1600, 1680, 1920) and that 1024×768 and 1366×768 are the ONLY screen resolutions that do not follow this rule, and strangely they are most popular.

If your screen resolution is too high, icons and texts may appear too small and your hardware may be put under additional strain as the monitor struggles to hit the high resolutions. But if your screen resolution is set too low, it can result in poor image quality that takes up too much workspace and can also harm the results of your work.

The higher the number of pixels a screen can show, the sharper and more detailed the image quality. But, the number of pixels that a screen can show isn"t the only factor involved when it comes to image quality. There"s also pixel density. Monitors come in all kinds of sizes, as well as resolutions. You"ll often find monitors of different sizes that have the same number of pixels, for example a 24-inch monitor and a 32-inch monitor both with a screen resolution of 1920 x 1080. The image quality on the smaller monitor can often look sharper and more vivid because of its pixel density. This is measured in PPI (Pixels Per Inch). The smaller screen will have a higher number of pixels per inch than the larger screen.

If you want to change the screen resolution, click the down arrow next to the resolution. This will show a list of all the other display resolutions your screen can handle. Click one, and the resolution will be applied – temporarily at least.

For people working with complex 3D models, such as architects, animators or game developers, going above 1920 x 1080 can begin to put a real strain on your machine"s GPU (Graphics Processing Unit). If you want to go for a higher resolution, make sure your hardware can handle it, otherwise you may find your PC performs very slowly when trying to render at those high resolutions.

For photographers, we"d recommend going for the highest resolution you can afford. Still images don"t require as much graphical grunt to display on high-resolution screens, and most photographs are taken at well above 1080p resolutions. For example, a camera that takes 21-megapixel photos is actually capturing images at 5,104 x 4,092 resolution. Even a 4K monitor won"t display that natively, but the higher the resolution of the screen, the better (and more accurately) your photos will appear.

The resolutions we mention above apply to standard widescreen monitors with a 16:9 aspect ratio. However, some devices have different aspect ratios – and therefore different display resolutions.

Other excellent laptops with high screen resolutions recommended for digital creatives include the Surface Book 2(opens in new tab) (with a 3,240 x 2,160 resolution), the Dell XPS 15(opens in new tab), which comes with either a 2,560 x 1,080 screen, or a 3,840 x 2,160 display.

LCD display doesn’t operate the same way as CRT displays , which fires electrons at a glass screen, a LCD display has individual pixels arranged in a rectangular grid. Each pixel has RGB(Red, Green, Blue) sub-pixel that can be turned on or off. When all of a pixel’s sub-pixels are turned off, it appears black. When all the sub-pixels are turned on 100%, it appears white. By adjusting the individual levels of red, green, and blue light, millions of color combinations are possible

The pixels of the LCD screen were made by circuitry and electrodes of the backplane. Each sub-pixel contains a TFT (Thin Film Transistor) element.  These structures are formed by depositing various materials (metals and silicon) on to the glass substrate that will become one part of the complete display “stack,” and then making them through photolithography. For more information about TFT LCDs, please refer to “

The etched pixels by photolith process are the Native Resolution. Actually, all the flat panel displays, LCD, OLED, Plasma etc.) have native resolution which are different from CRT monitors

Although we can define a LCD display with resolution, a Full HD resolution on screen size of a 15” monitor or a 27” monitor will show different. The screen “fineness” is very important for some application, like medical, or even our cell phone. If the display “fineness” is not enough, the display will look “pixelized” which is unable to show details.

But you see other lower resolution available, that is because video cards are doing the trick. A video card can display a lower LCD screen resolution than the LCD’s built-in native resolution. The video cards can combine the pixels and turn a higher resolution into lower resolution, or just use part of the full screen. But video cards can’t do the magic to exceed the native resolution.

The 4:3 aspect ratio was common in older television cathode ray tube (CRT) displays, which were not easily adaptable to a wider aspect ratio. When good quality alternate technologies (i.e., liquid crystal displays (LCDs) and plasma displays) became more available and less costly, around the year 2000, the common computer displays and entertainment products moved to a wider aspect ratio, first to the 16:10 ratio. The 16:10 ratio allowed some compromise between showing older 4:3 aspect ratio broadcast TV shows, but also allowing better viewing of widescreen movies. However, around the year 2005, home entertainment displays (i.e., TV sets) gradually moved from 16:10 to the 16:9 aspect ratio, for further improvement of viewing widescreen movies. By about 2007, virtually all mass-market entertainment displays were 16:9. In 2011, 1920 × 1080 (Full HD, the native resolution of Blu-ray) was the favored resolution in the most heavily marketed entertainment market displays. The next standard, 3840 × 2160 (4K UHD), was first sold in 2013.

Also in 2013, displays with 2560 × 1080 (aspect ratio 64:27 or 2.370, however commonly referred to as "21:9" for easy comparison with 16:9) appeared, which closely approximate the common CinemaScope movie standard aspect ratio of 2.35–2.40. In 2014, "21:9" screens with pixel dimensions of 3440 × 1440 (actual aspect ratio 43:18 or 2.38) became available as well.

The computer display industry maintained the 16:10 aspect ratio longer than the entertainment industry, but in the 2005–2010 period, computers were increasingly marketed as dual-use products, with uses in the traditional computer applications, but also as means of viewing entertainment content. In this time frame, with the notable exception of Apple, almost all desktop, laptop, and display manufacturers gradually moved to promoting only 16:9 aspect ratio displays. By 2011, the 16:10 aspect ratio had virtually disappeared from the Windows laptop display market (although Mac laptops are still mostly 16:10, including the 2880 × 1800 15" Retina MacBook Pro and the 2560 × 1600 13" Retina MacBook Pro). One consequence of this transition was that the highest available resolutions moved generally downward (i.e., the move from 1920 × 1200 laptop displays to 1920 × 1080 displays).

All standard HD resolutions share a 16∶9 aspect ratio, although some derived resolutions with smaller or larger ratios also exist. Most of the narrower resolutions are only used for storing, not for displaying videos.

One drawback of this resolution regarding encoding is that the number of lines is not an even multiple of 16, which is a common macroblock size for video codecs. Video frames encoded with 16×16 pixel macroblocks would be padded to 640 × 368 and the added pixels would be cropped away at playback. H.264 codecs have this padding and cropping ability built-in as standard. The same is true for qHD and 1080p but the relative amount of padding is more for lower resolutions such as nHD.

This resolution is often referred to as p (which stands for progressive scan and is important for transmission formats) is irrelevant for labeling digital display resolutions. When distinguishing 1280 × 720 from 1920 × 1080, the pair has sometimes been labeled HD1 or HD-1 and HD2 or HD-2, respectively.

In the mid-2000s, when the digital HD technology and standard debuted on the market, this type of resolution was often referred to by the branded name HDr for short, which had specified it as a minimum resolution for devices to qualify for the certification. However, few screens have been built that use this resolution natively. Most employ 16:9 panels with 768 lines instead (WXGA), which resulted in odd numbers of pixels per line, i.e. 13651/3 are rounded to 1360, 1364, 1366 or even 1376, the next multiple of 16.

QHD (Quad HD), WQHD (Wide Quad HD),1440p,2560 × 1440 pixels in a 16:9 aspect ratio. The name QHD reflects the fact that it has four times as many pixels as HD (720p). It is also commonly called WQHD, to emphasize it being a wide resolution, although that is technically unnecessary, since the HD resolutions are all wide. One advantage of using "WQHD" is avoiding confusion with qHD with a small q (960 × 540).

This resolution is equivalent to QHD (2560 × 1440) extended in width by 34%, giving it an aspect ratio of 43:18 (2.38:1, or 21.5:9; commonly marketed as simply "21:9"). The first monitor to support this resolution was the 34-inch LG 34UM95-P.UW-QHD to describe this resolution.

This resolution has a 12:5 aspect ratio (2.4:1, or 21.6:9; commonly marketed as simply "21:9"). It is equivalent to WQXGA (2560 × 1600) extended in width by 50%, or 4K UHD (3840 × 2160) reduced in height by 26%. This resolution is commonly encountered in cinematic 4K content that has been cropped vertically to a widescreen 2.4:1 aspect ratio. The first monitor to support this resolution was the 37.5-inch LG 38UC99-W. Other vendors followed, with Dell U3818DW, HP Z38c, and Acer XR382CQK. This resolution is referred to as UW4K, WQHD+,UWQHD+, or QHD+,

This resolution, sometimes referred to as 4K UHD or 4K×2K, has a 16:9 aspect ratio and 8,294,400 pixels. It is double the size of Full HD (1920 × 1080) in both dimensions for a total of four times as many pixels, and triple the size of HD (1280 × 720) in both dimensions for a total of nine times as many pixels. It is the lowest common multiple of the HDTV resolutions.

The first commercial displays capable of this resolution include an 82-inch LCD TV revealed by Samsung in early 2008,PPI 4K IPS monitor for medical purposes launched by Innolux in November 2010.Toshiba announced the REGZA 55x3,

This resolution is equivalent to 4K UHD (3840 × 2160) extended in width by 33%, giving it a 64:27 aspect ratio (2.370 or 21.3:9, commonly marketed as simply "21:9") and 11,059,200 total pixels. It is exactly double the size of 2560 × 1080 in both dimensions, for a total of four times as many pixels. The first displays to support this resolution were 105-inch televisions, the LG 105UC9 and the Samsung UN105S9W.5120 × 2160 monitor, the 34WK95U,5K2K WUHD.

This resolution, commonly referred to as 5K or 5K × 3K, has a 16:9 aspect ratio and 14,745,600 pixels. Although it is not established by any of the UHDTV standards, some manufacturers such as Dell have referred to it as UHD+.QHD (2560 × 1440) in both dimensions for a total of four times as many pixels, and is 33% larger than 4K UHD (3840 × 2160) in both dimensions for a total of 1.77 times as many pixels. The line count of 2880 is also the least common multiple of 480 and 576, the scanline count of NTSC and PAL, respectively. Such a resolution can vertically scale SD content to fit by natural numbers (6 for NTSC and 5 for PAL). Horizontal scaling of SD is always fractional (non-anamorphic: 5.33...5.47, anamorphic: 7.11...7.29).

Other resolution with the same 5120-pixel width, which is the lowest common multiple of popular 1024 and 1280, but a different aspect ratio have also been called "5K" and some nominal 5K resolutions are just 4800 pixels wide, which is the lowest common multiple of 960 and 800.

QVGA resolution is also used in digital video recording equipment as a low-resolution mode requiring less data storage capacity than higher resolutions, typically in still digital cameras with video recording capability, and some mobile phones. Each frame is an image of 320 × 240 pixels. QVGA video is typically recorded at 15 or 30 frames per second. QVGA mode describes the size of an image in pixels, commonly called the resolution; numerous video file formats support this resolution.

While QVGA is a lower resolution than VGA, at higher resolutions the "Q" prefix commonly means quad(ruple) or four times higher display resolution (e.g., QXGA is four times higher resolution than XGA). To distinguish quarter from quad, lowercase "q" is sometimes used for "quarter" and uppercase "Q" for "Quad", by analogy with SI prefixes like m/M and p/P, but this is not a consistent usage.

WQVGA resolutions were commonly used in touchscreen mobile phones, such as 400 × 240, 432 × 240, and 480 × 240. For example, the Hyundai MB 490i, Sony Ericsson Aino and the Samsung Instinct have WQVGA screen resolutions – 240 × 432. Other devices such as the Apple iPod Nano also use a WQVGA screen, 240 × 376 pixels.

Three-dimensional computer graphics common on television throughout the 1980s were mostly rendered at this resolution, causing objects to have jagged edges on the top and bottom when edges were not anti-aliased.

In the field of (NTSC) videos, the resolution of 640 × 480 is sometimes called Standard Definition (SD), in contrast to high-definition (HD) resolutions like 1280 × 720 and 1920 × 1080.

It is a common resolution among LCD projectors and later portable and hand-held internet-enabled devices (such as MID and Netbooks) as it is capable of rendering websites designed for an 800 wide window in full page-width. Examples of hand-held internet devices, without phone capability, with this resolution include: Spice stellar nhance mi-435, ASUS Eee PC 700 series, Dell XCD35, Nokia 770, N800, and N810.

FWVGA is an abbreviation for Full Wide Video Graphics Array which refers to a display resolution of 854 × 480 pixels. 854 × 480 is approximately the 16:9 aspect ratio of anamorphically "un-squeezed" NTSC DVD widescreen video and is considered a "safe" resolution that does not crop any of the image. It is called Full WVGA to distinguish it from other, narrower WVGA resolutions which require cropping 16:9 aspect ratio high-definition video (i.e. it is full width, albeit with a considerable reduction in size).

In 2010, mobile phones with FWVGA display resolution started to become more common. A list of mobile phones with FWVGA displays is available. In addition, the Wii U GamePad that comes with the Nintendo Wii U gaming console includes a 6.2-inch FWVGA display.

The marginally higher resolution 832 × 624 is the highest 4:3 resolution not greater than 219 pixels, with its horizontal dimension a multiple of 32 pixels. This enables it to fit within a framebuffer of 512KB (512 × 210 bytes), and the common multiple of 32 pixels constraint is related to alignment. For these reasons, this resolution was available on the Macintosh LC III and other systems.

The Extended Graphics Array (XGA) is an IBM display standard introduced in 1990. Later it became the most common appellation of the 1024 × 768 pixels display resolution, but the official definition is broader than that.

Wide XGA (WXGA) is a set of non-standard resolutions derived from the XGA display standard by widening it to a widescreen aspect ratio. WXGA is commonly used for low-end LCD TVs and LCD computer monitors for widescreen presentation. The exact resolution offered by a device described as "WXGA" can be somewhat variable owing to a proliferation of several closely related timings optimised for different uses and derived from different bases.

When referring to televisions and other monitors intended for consumer entertainment use, WXGA is generally understood to refer to a resolution of 1366 × 768,1024 × 768 pixels, 4:3 aspect) extended to give square pixels on the increasingly popular 16:9 widescreen display ratio without having to effect major signalling changes other than a faster pixel clock, or manufacturing changes other than extending panel width by one third. As 768 is not divisible by 9, the aspect ratio is not quite 16:9 – this would require a horizontal width of 13651⁄3 pixels. However, at only 0.05%, the resulting error is insignificant.

In 2006, 1366 × 768 was the most popular resolution for liquid crystal display televisions (versus XGA for Plasma TVs flat panel displays);1920 × 1080.

A common variant on this resolution is 1360 × 768, which confers several technical benefits, most significantly a reduction in memory requirements from just over to just under 1MB per 8-bit channel (1366 × 768 needs 1024.5KB per channel; 1360 × 768 needs 1020KB; 1MB is equal to 1024KB), which simplifies architecture and can significantly reduce the amount–and speed–of VRAM required with only a very minor change in available resolution, as memory chips are usually only available in fixed megabyte capacities. For example, at 32-bit color, a 1360 × 768 framebuffer would require only 4MB, whilst a 1366 × 768 one may need 5, 6 or even 8MB depending on the exact display circuitry architecture and available chip capacities. The 6-pixel reduction also means each line"s width is divisible by 8 pixels, simplifying numerous routines used in both computer and broadcast/theatrical video processing, which operate on 8-pixel blocks. Historically, many video cards also mandated screen widths divisible by 8 for their lower-color, planar modes to accelerate memory accesses and simplify pixel position calculations (e.g. fetching 4-bit pixels from 32-bit memory is much faster when performed 8 pixels at a time, and calculating exactly where a particular pixel is within a memory block is much easier when lines do not end partway through a memory word), and this convention persisted in low-end hardware even into the early days of widescreen, LCD HDTVs; thus, most 1366-width displays also quietly support display of 1360-width material, with a thin border of unused pixel columns at each side. This narrower mode is of course even further removed from the 16:9 ideal, but the error is still less than 0.5% (technically, the mode is either 15.94:9.00 or 16.00:9.04) and should be imperceptible.

When referring to laptop displays or independent displays and projectors intended primarily for use with computers, WXGA is also used to describe a resolution of 1280 × 800 pixels, with an aspect ratio of 16:10.both dimensions vs. the old standard (especially useful in portrait mode, or for displaying two standard pages of text side by side), a perceptibly "wider" appearance and the ability to display 720p HD video "native" with only very thin letterbox borders (usable for on-screen playback controls) and no stretching. Additionally, like 1360 × 768, it required only 1000KB (just under 1MB) of memory per 8-bit channel; thus, a typical double-buffered 32-bit colour screen could fit within 8MB, limiting everyday demands on the complexity (and cost, energy use) of integrated graphics chipsets and their shared use of typically sparse system memory (generally allocated to the video system in relatively large blocks), at least when only the internal display was in use (external monitors generally being supported in "extended desktop" mode to at least 1600 × 1200 resolution). 16:10 (or 8:5) is itself a rather "classic" computer aspect ratio, harking back to early 320 × 200 modes (and their derivatives) as seen in the Commodore 64, IBM CGA card and others. However, as of mid-2013, this standard is becoming increasingly rare, crowded out by the more standardised and thus more economical-to-produce 1366 × 768 panels, as its previously beneficial features become less important with improvements to hardware, gradual loss of general backwards software compatibility, and changes in interface layout. As of August 2013, the market availability of panels with 1280 × 800 native resolution had been generally relegated to data projectors or niche products such as convertible tablet PCs and LCD-based eBook readers.

First, the HDTV-standard 1280 × 720720p"), which offers an exact 16:9 aspect with square pixels; naturally, it displays standard 720p HD video material without stretching or letterboxing and 1080i/1080p with a simple 2:3 downscale. This resolution has found some use in tablets and modern, high-pixel-density mobile phones, as well as small-format "netbook" or "ultralight" laptop computers. However, its use is uncommon in larger, mainstream devices as it has an insufficient vertical resolution for the proper use of modern operating systems such as Windows 7 whose UI design assumes a minimum of 768 lines. For certain uses such as word processing, it can even be considered a slight downgrade (reducing the number of simultaneously visible lines of text without granting any significant benefit as even 640 pixels is sufficient horizontal resolution to legibly render a full page width, especially with the addition of subpixel anti-aliasing).

The second variant, 1280 × 768, can be seen as a compromise resolution that addressed this problem, as well as a halfway point between the older 1024 × 768 and 1280 × 1024 resolutions, and a stepping stone to 1366 × 768 (being one-quarter wider than 1024, not one-third) and 1280 × 800, that never quite caught on in the same way as either of its arguably derivative successors. Its square-pixel aspect ratio is 15:9, in contrast to HDTV"s 16:9 and 1280 × 800"s 16:10. It is also the lowest resolution that might be found in an "Ultrabook" standard laptop, as it satisfies the minimum horizontal and vertical pixel resolutions required to officially qualify for the designation.

Widespread availability of 1280 × 800 and 1366 × 768 pixel resolution LCDs for laptop monitors can be considered an OS-driven evolution from the formerly popular 1024 × 768 screen size, which has itself since seen UI design feedback in response to what could be considered disadvantages of the widescreen format when used with programs designed for "traditional" screens. In Microsoft Windows operating system specifically, the larger taskbar of Windows Vista and 7 occupies an additional 16-pixel lines by default, which may compromise the usability of programs that already demanded a full 1024 × 768 (instead of, e.g. 800 × 600) unless it is specifically set to use small icons; an "oddball" 784-line resolution would compensate for this, but 1280 × 800 has a simpler aspect and also gives the slight bonus of 16 more usable lines. Also, the Windows Sidebar in Windows Vista and 7 can use the additional 256 or 336 horizontal pixels to display informational "widgets" without compromising the display width of other programs, and Windows 8 is specifically designed around a "two-pane" concept where the full 16:9 or 16:10 screen is not required. Typically, this consists of a 4:3 main program area (typically 1024 × 768, 1000 × 800 or 1440 × 1080) plus a narrow sidebar running a second program, showing a toolbox for the main program or a pop-out OS shortcut panel taking up the remainder.

XGA+ stands for Extended Graphics Array Plus and is a computer display standard, usually understood to refer to the 1152 × 864 resolution with an aspect ratio of 4:3. Until the advent of widescreen LCDs, XGA+ was often used on 17-inch desktop CRT monitors. It is the highest 4:3 resolution not greater than 220 pixels (≈1.05 megapixels), with its horizontal dimension a multiple of 32 pixels. This enables it to fit closely into a video memory or framebuffer of 1MB (1 × 220 bytes), assuming the use of one byte per pixel. The common multiple of 32 pixels constraint is related to alignment.

Historically, the resolution also relates to the earlier standard of 1152 × 900 pixels, which was adopted by Sun Microsystems for the Sun-2 workstation in the early 1980s. A decade later, Apple Computer selected the resolution of 1152 × 870 for their 21-inch CRT monitors, intended for use as two-page displays on the Macintosh II computer. These resolutions are even closer to the limit of a 1MB framebuffer, but their aspect ratios differ slightly from the common 4:3.

WXGA+ (1440 × 900) resolution is common in 19-inch widescreen desktop monitors (a very small number of such monitors use WSXGA+), and is also optional, although less common, in laptop LCDs, in sizes ranging from 12.1 to 17 inches.

There is a less common 1280 × 960 resolution that preserves the common 4:3 aspect ratio. It is sometimes unofficially called SXGA− to avoid confusion with the "standard" SXGA. Elsewhere this 4:3 resolution was also called UVGA (Ultra VGA), or SXVGA (Super eXtended VGA): Since both sides are doubled from VGA the term Quad VGA would be a systematic one, but it is hardly ever used because its initialism QVGA is strongly associated with the alternate meaning Quarter VGA (320 × 240).

SXGA is the most common native resolution of 17-inch and 19-inch LCD monitors. An LCD monitor with SXGA native resolution will typically have a physical 5:4 aspect ratio, preserving a 1:1 pixel aspect ratio.

SXGA is also a popular resolution for cell phone cameras, such as the Motorola Razr and most Samsung and LG phones. Although being taken over by newer UXGA (2.0-megapixel) cameras, the 1.3-megapixel was the most common around 2007.

Any CRT that can run 1280 × 1024 can also run 1280 × 960, which has the standard 4:3 ratio. A flat panel TFT screen, including one designed for 1280 × 1024, will show stretching distortion when set to display any resolution other than its native one, as the image needs to be interpolated to fit in the fixed grid display. Some TFT displays do not allow a user to disable this, and will prevent the upper and lower portions of the screen from being used forcing a "letterbox" format when set to a 4:3 ratio.

SXGA+ stands for Super Extended Graphics Array Plus and is a computer display standard. An SXGA+ display is commonly used on 14-inch or 15-inch laptop LCD screens with a resolution of 1400 × 1050 pixels. An SXGA+ display is used on a few 12-inch laptop screens such as the ThinkPad X60 and X61 (both only as tablet) as well as the Toshiba Portégé M200 and M400, but those are far less common. At 14.1 inches, Dell offered SXGA+ on many of the Latitude C-Series laptops, such as the C640, and IBM since the ThinkPad T21. Sony also used SXGA+ in their Z1 series, but no longer produce them as widescreen has become more predominant.

In desktop LCDs, SXGA+ is used on some low-end 20-inch monitors, whereas most of the 20-inch LCDs use UXGA (standard screen ratio), or WSXGA+ (widescreen ratio).

WSXGA+ stands for Widescreen Super Extended Graphics Array Plus. 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. The resolution is 1680 × 1050 pixels (1,764,000 pixels) with a 16:10 aspect ratio.

UXGA or UGA is an abbreviation for Ultra Extended Graphics Array referring to a standard monitor resolution of 1600 × 1200 pixels (totaling 1,920,000 pixels), which is exactly four times the default image resolution of #SVGA (800×600) (800 × 600) (totaling 480,000 pixels). Dell Inc. refers to the same resolution of 1,920,000 pixels as UGA. It is generally considered to be the next step above SXGA (1280 × 960 or 1280 × 1024), but some resolutions (such as the unnamed 1366 × 1024 and SXGA+ at 1400 × 1050) fit between the two.

UXGA has been the native resolution of many fullscreen monitors of 15 inches or more, including laptop LCDs such as the ones in the IBM ThinkPad A21p, A30p, A31p, T42p, T43p, T60p, Dell Inspiron 8000/8100/8200 and Latitude/Precision equivalents; some Panasonic Toughbook CF-51 models; and the original Alienware Area 51M gaming laptop. However, in more recent times, UXGA is not used in laptops at all but rather in desktop UXGA monitors that have been made in sizes of 20 inches and 21.3 inches. Some 14-inch laptop LCDs with UXGA have also existed (such as the Dell Inspiron 4100), but these are very rare.

The next lower standard resolution (for widescreen) before it is WSXGA+, which is 1680 × 1050 pixels (1,764,000 pixels, or 30.61% fewer than WUXGA); the next higher resolution widescreen is an unnamed 2304 × 1440 resolution (supported by the above GDM-FW900 and A7217A) and then the more common WQXGA, which has 2560 × 1600 pixels (4,096,000 pixels, or 77.78% more than WUXGA).

The QXGA, or Quad Extended Graphics Array, display standard is a resolution standard in display technology. Some examples of LCD monitors that have pixel counts at these levels are the Dell 3008WFP, the Apple Cinema Display, the Apple iMac (27-inch 2009–present), the iPad (3rd generation), the iPad Mini 2, and the MacBook Pro (3rd generation). Many standard 21–22-inch CRT monitors and some of the highest-end 19-inch CRTs also support this resolution.

QWXGA (Quad Wide Extended Graphics Array) is a display resolution of 2048 × 1152 pixels with a 16:9 aspect ratio. A few QWXGA LCD monitors were available in 2009 with 23- and 27-inch displays, such as the Acer B233HU (23-inch) and B273HU (27-inch), the Dell SP2309W, and the Samsung 2343BWX. As of 2011, most 2048 × 1152 monitors have been discontinued, and as of 2013, no major manufacturer produces monitors with this resolution.

QXGA (Quad Extended Graphics Array) is a display resolution of 2048 × 1536 pixels with a 4:3 aspect ratio. The name comes from it having four times as many pixels as an XGA display. Examples of LCDs with this resolution are the IBM T210 and the Eizo G33 and R31 screens, but in CRT monitors this resolution is much more common; some examples include the Sony F520, ViewSonic G225fB, NEC FP2141SB or Mitsubishi DP2070SB, Iiyama Vision Master Pro 514, and Dell and HP P1230. Of these monitors, none are still in production. A related display size is WQXGA, which is a widescreen version. CRTs offer a way to achieve QXGA cheaply. Models like the Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2045U and IBM ThinkVision C220P retailed for around US$200, and even higher performance ones like the ViewSonic PerfectFlat P220fB remained under $500. At one time, many off-lease P1230s could be found on eBay for under $150. The LCDs with WQXGA or QXGA resolution typically cost four to five times more for the same resolution. IDTech manufactured a 15-inch QXGA IPS panel, used in the IBM ThinkPad R50p. NEC sold laptops with QXGA screens in 2002–05 for the Japanese market.iPad (starting from 3rd generation and Mini 2) also has a QXGA display.

To obtain a vertical refresh rate higher than 40Hz with DVI, this resolution requires dual-link DVI cables and devices. To avoid cable problems monitors are sometimes shipped with an appropriate dual link cable already plugged in. Many video cards support this resolution. One feature that is currently unique to the 30-inch WQXGA monitors is the ability to function as the centerpiece and main display of a three-monitor array of complementary aspect ratios, with two UXGA (1600 × 1200) 20-inch monitors turned vertically on either side. The resolutions are equal, and the size of the 1600 resolution edges (if the manufacturer is honest) is within a tenth of an inch (16-inch vs. 15.89999"), presenting a "picture window view" without the extreme lateral dimensions, small central panel, asymmetry, resolution differences, or dimensional difference of other three-monitor combinations. The resulting 4960 × 1600 composite image has a 3.1:1 aspect ratio. This also means one UXGA 20-inch monitor in portrait orientation can also be flanked by two 30-inch WQXGA monitors for a 6320 × 1600 composite image with an 11.85:3 (79:20, 3.95:1) aspect ratio. Some WQXGA medical displays (such as the Barco Coronis 4MP or the Eizo SX3031W) can also be configured as two virtual 1200 × 1600 or 1280 × 1600 seamless displays by using both DVI ports at the same time.

An early consumer WQXGA monitor was the 30-inch Apple Cinema Display, unveiled by Apple in June 2004. At the time, dual-link DVI was uncommon on consumer hardware, so Apple partnered with Nvidia to develop a special graphics card that had two dual-link DVI ports, allowing simultaneous use of two 30-inch Apple Cinema Displays. The nature of this graphics card, being an add-in AGP card, meant that the monitors could only be used in a desktop computer, like the Power Mac G5, that could have the add-in card installed, and could not be immediately used with laptop computers that lacked this expansion capability.

In 2010, WQXGA made its debut in a handful of home theater projectors targeted at the Constant Height Screen application market. Both Digital Projection Inc and projectiondesign released models based on a Texas Instruments DLP chip with a native WQXGA resolution, alleviating the need for an anamorphic lens to achieve 1:2.35 image projection. Many manufacturers have 27–30-inch models that are capable of WQXGA, albeit at a much higher price than lower resolution monitors of the same size. Several mainstream WQXGA monitors are or were available with 30-inch displays, such as the Dell 3007WFP-HC, 3008WFP, U3011, U3014, UP3017, the Hewlett-Packard LP3065, the Gateway XHD3000, LG W3000H, and the Samsung 305T. Specialist manufacturers like NEC, Eizo, Planar Systems, Barco (LC-3001), and possibly others offer similar models. As of 2016, LG Display make a 10-bit 30-inch AH-IPS panel, with wide color gamut, used in monitors from Dell, NEC, HP, Lenovo and Iiyama.

Recent medical displays such as Barco Coronis Fusion 10MP or NDS Dome S10 have a native panel resolution of 4096 × 2560. These are driven by two dual-link DVI or DisplayPort outputs. They can be considered to be two seamless virtual QSXGA displays as they have to be driven simultaneously by both dual-link DVI or DisplayPort since one dual-link DVI or DisplayPort cannot single-handedly display 10 megapixels. A similar resolution of 2560 × 1920 (4:3) was supported by a small number of CRT displays via VGA such as the Viewsonic P225f when paired with the right graphics card.

Most display cards with a DVI connector are capable of supporting the 3840 × 2400 resolution. However, the maximum refresh rate will be limited by the number of DVI links connected to the monitor. 1, 2, or 4 DVI connectors are used to drive the monitor using various tile configurations. Only the IBM T221-DG5 and IDTech MD22292B5 support the use of dual-link DVI ports through an external converter box. Many systems using these monitors use at least two DVI connectors to send video to the monitor. These DVI connectors can be from the same graphics card, different graphics cards, or even different computers. Motion across the tile boundary(ies) can show tearing if the DVI links are not synchronized. The display panel can be updated at a speed between 0Hz and 41Hz (48Hz for the IBM T221-DG5, -DGP, and IDTech MD22292B5). The refresh rate of the video signal can be higher than 41Hz (or 48Hz) but the monitor will not update the display any faster even if graphics card(s) do so.

In June 2001, WQUXGA was introduced in the IBM T220 LCD monitor using a LCD panel built by IDTech. LCD displays that support WQUXGA resolution include: IBM T220, IBM T221, Iiyama AQU5611DTBK, ViewSonic VP2290,Hz and 48Hz, made them less attractive for many applications.

After having used VGA-based 3:2 resolutions HVGA (480 × 320) and Retina DVGA (960 × 640) for several years in their iPhone and iPod products with a screen diagonal of 9 cm or 3.5 inches, Apple started using more exotic variants when they adopted the 16:9 aspect ratio to provide a consistent pixel density across screen sizes: first 1136 × 640 (rarely: WDVGA) with the iPhone 5, 5C, 5S and SE 1st for 10-cm or 4-inch screens, and later 1334 × 750 with the iPhone 6, 6S, 7, 8, SE 2nd and SE 3rd for 12-cm or 4.7-inch screens, while devices with 14-cm or 5.5-inch screens used standard 1920 × 1080 with the iPhone 6 Plus, 6S Plus, 7 Plus and 8 Plus. The iPhone X, XS and 11 Pro introduced a 2436 × 1125 resolution for 15-cm or 5.8-inch screens, while the iPhone XS Max and 11 Pro Max introduced a 2688 × 1242 resolution for 17-cm or 6.5-inch screens (with a notch) all at an aspect ratio of roughly 13:6 or, for marketing, 19.5:9.

Other manufacturers have also introduced phones with irregular display resolutions and aspect ratios, e.g. Samsung"s various Infinity displays with 37:18 = 18+1/2:9 (Galaxy S8/S9 and A8/A9), i.e. 2960 × 1440 (Quad HD+, WQHD+) or 2220 × 1080 (Full HD+), and 19:9 (S10) aspect ratios: 3040 × 1440 and 2280 × 1080 (S10e).

Some air traffic control monitors use displays with a resolution of 2048 x 2048, with an aspect ratio of 1:1,Eizo is major supplier of panels and monitors in this aspect ratio. Also in 2022, a 16:18 monitor (in 2560x2880 resolution, named SDQHD) was released for general productivity work by LG Electronics.

VESA CVT 1.2 from 2003 recommends only 4:3, 16:9 and 16:10 (8:5) aspect ratios for newly introduced display resolutions. The discouraged legacy aspect ratios 5:4 and 15:9 (5:3) are only kept for SXGA and WXGA. VESA CVT 1.2

"CMO showcases latest "green" and "innovative" LCD panels". Chi Mei Optoelectronics. 24 October 2008. Archived from the original on 2010-03-13. Retrieved 2008-10-26.

Shin, Min-Seok; Choi, Jung-Whan; Kim, Yong-Jae; Kim, Kyong-Rok; Lee, Inhwan; Kwon, Oh-Kyong (2007). "Accurate Power Estimation of LCD Panels for Notebook Design of Low-Cost 2.2-inch qVGA LTPS TFT-LCD Panel". SID 2007 Digest. 38 (1): 260–263. doi:10.1889/1.2785279.

"SPWG Notebook Panel Specification" (PDF). Standard Panels Working Group. 14 March 2007. p. 18. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-04-24. Retrieved 2013-05-22.

"ViewSonic Brings World"s Highest Resolution Monitor To Its LCD Lineup" (Press release). ViewSonic. 25 June 2002. Archived from the original on 2002-12-07. Retrieved 2013-05-22.

The predominant display aspect ratio on today’s PC market, including laptops, 2-in-1 hybrids, tablets, and monitors, is 16:9. Also referred to as widescreen aspect ratio, it is suitable for movies and YouTube videos. Narrower screens such as those on Microsoft Surface devices with 3:2 aspect ratio are better optimized for productivity. The latter are closer to aspect ratios of paper documents and have ability to display more rows of text than the comparable 16:9 panels. Another widescreen aspect ratio you can find on mobile computers today is 16:10, but it is used on small number of devices. Primarily on compact 2-in-1 laptop / tablet PC hybrids.

Resolution refers to number of pixels that make up the image on a screen. A higher pixel count on a screen means sharper pictures, movies and text. It also means more space for displaying web pages and applications and side-by-side program use. Display resolution is expressed using horizontal and vertical pixel counts. The most frequently used resolutions on laptop and 2-in-1 PCs nowadays are 1366-by-768 (also known as HD) and 1920-by-1080 (Full HD or 1080p). 1920-by-1080 is the most appropriate screen resolution for laptops, in our opinion. Many of the affordable notebooks come with 1366-by-768 panels, which provide usable but not so sharp picture. However, inclusion of a Full HD display means a higher overall cost of a device and a somewhat greater power consumption. On the other hand, on smaller notebooks such as the popular low-priced 11.6-inchers, 1366×768 provides acceptable crispiness due to higher pixel per square inch (PPI) value.

Some high-end notebooks, regardless of their screen sizes, come with above-1080p resolutions, such as 3200×1800 and 3840×2160, popularly known as QHD+ 3K and Ultra HD (UHD) 4K. They have 3 and 4 times more pixels respectively than Full HD. 3K and 4K deliver breathtaking sharpness of displayed content, but there are some of disadvantages, too. First of all, user interface elements of Windows and programs appear by default very small on 3K and 4K resolutions. In order to make them better visible, users must use Windows’ built-in scaling functionality, allowing enlargement of UI elements. But, not all programs and parts of Windows itself respond well to scaling, which results in blurry fonts, menus, buttons, and dialog boxes. Another way is to decrease the native resolution using Screen Resolution settings in Windows’ Control Panel, but that makes investments in expensive high-res screens absurd and Windows environment may still look blurry. Furthermore, displays with huge number of pixels require more graphics computing resources and tend to consume more power, thus reducing battery life.

How good viewing angles on a display are, depends on panel technology. Two most common types are IPS (In Plane Switching) and TN (Twisted Nematic). IPS provides great viewing angles, close to 180 degrees, so picture on IPS displays looks good from any angle. Older and cheaper TN panels have problematic horizontal viewing angles. If you look at a TN display from a low perspective, color inversion will occur. For instance, black color will look gray, as shown on the first image below. Also, if you look at a TN display from a high perspective, content will appear washed-out.

There are two types of LCD panel coating: anti-glare or matte and glare-type or glossy. The former does a good job of preventing light reflections which are present in bright environments, such as well-lit offices and outdoors. Anti-glare displays, however, tend to show less vibrant colors than their glossy counterparts. The former are usually found on business-class notebooks, while the latter are used on consumer-oriented and touchscreen machines, with a few exceptions. What can help with outdoor usability is good display brightness, preferably above 300 cd/m². Many mainstream and budget laptops, 2-in-1s, and tablets have brightness of around 250 cd/m² and sometimes even as low as 200 cd/m².

A special kind of touch panels are those with active digitizer technology, supporting pressure-sensitive pen input. An example of pen-enabled devices is the Microsoft Surface series.

To sum things up, a high quality laptop display in our opinion has at least Full HD resolution for sharp picture and IPS technology to enable wide viewing angles as bare minimums. Lower resolutions are acceptable only on devices with small screens. Getting premium-priced PC devices with 3K or 4K resolutions doesn’t make much sense currently, due to a noticeably greater power consumption and the aforementioned scaling problem. Folks planning to use their computers outdoors should additionally require a high-brightness screen and anti-glare coating. Imaging professionals and multimedia enthusiasts, should be interested in the rest of the specs, primarily color gamut, accuracy, and contrast, but also willing to spend more money since notebooks with top-quality displays wear hefty price tags. As for gamers who want the best gaming experience possible, they should pay attention to the screen refresh rate which greatly affects smoothness of gameplays.