How the screen resolution of a monitor affects image quality

Regardless of the tasks that the user performs at one time or another with the computer, he is almost always in eye contact with the monitor. And the selection of the correct monitor that meets your needs, and physiological and medical standards, you need to pay close attention.

One of the most important characteristics that you need to pay attention to is the screen resolution of the monitor. A lot depends on it: both the comfort of work, and the level of eye fatigue after a fairly long work, and, consequently, the degree of influence of the monitor on vision, and the speed of the computer in resource-intensive tasks.

The times of cathode-ray tubes, when the screen resolution of the monitor was, for example, 640 by 480 pixels, are in the past. Now such screens can only come up for phones. Now for devices with a diagonal of over 20 inches, the de-facto standard is the resolution of the monitor screen at least the FullHD level, i.e. 1920x1080 points. But is this always a plus?

Already a whole generation of computer users has grown up, which either know only by hearsay, or very vaguely remember the monitors based on cathode-ray tubes. With all its shortcomings (cumbersomeness, power consumption, small diagonals and resolutions), this class of devices also had its pluses. In particular, the resolution of the monitor screen in certain limits could be set to any (of course, from the standard). At the same time, the quality of the image did not suffer in any way.

Monitors based on the technology of liquid crystals, regardless of the type of matrix, have a common disadvantage - they have the same resolution, which is for them "native". All other resolutions (smaller than "native") can be used by the user only in exchange for deterioration in the quality of the image. The device, in fact, has to interpolate the current resolution to the size of the "native".

The user for certain will ask: what for to change the permission of the screen of the monitor on obviously the worst? There may be several reasons. First, try to ask the feelings of those people who had to work, for example, in front of a monitor with a screen diagonal, say, 22 inches, in FullHD, and they did not have the opportunity to place the monitor closer than 50 cm from their eyes. The details on the monitor are so small that, say, working with small print turns into a total torment. Yes, if you take a monitor with a larger diagonal or sit down more closely, and the problems disappear, but if there is no such possibility?

The second reason for the problems with a large monitor resolution is related to games. The higher the resolution of the monitor screen used in the game, the higher the load on the video card, because It is this component responsible for image processing in the game after the CPU calculates "physics". The user, seeing the "brakes" in the "native" resolution, will probably try to reduce it, but will immediately come across a problem of deterioration of the picture. In a dynamic 3D shooter, this is most likely not to catch your eye, but in a less dynamic game - quite.

How to determine the resolution of the monitor, which is optimal for it? There are several options. The first is from the documentation. The second option - manufacturers often put on their products promotional stickers, including indicating whether this monitor, such as HD Ready or FullHD. The third option: right-click on any part of the desktop that is not occupied by shortcuts, select the menu item "Screen Properties" or "Screen Resolution" (respectively, in Windows XP or Windows Vista / Seven) and see what the maximum resolution is available for selection . This will be the same "native", the best picture size for this device.

Perhaps the problem outlined in the article is far-fetched, and many users would not pay attention to it, but maybe before you adjust the monitor resolution, it's better to think about whether to do it?