itsjust games being mainly made for 16:9 so you might run into an issue with the occasional shitty port. Also 16:9 just has more options to pick from (especially 144hz and stuff) but playing on a 16:10 is perfectly fine too. Yeh I've encountered the odd shitty port that only works with 16:9. Really sucks.
However16:9 is better for gaming in my opinion. 16:10 is good if you just read news websites and stuff or emails or other basic tasks. 16:9 or 21:9 is good for watching movies or playing games. just because 16:10 has more pixels than 16:9 resolutions, doesn't always mean it's better for everything. I have a multi-monitor setup,
169 vs 21:9 Dilemma. I’m in a dilemma and It’s getting harder as I don’t have experience with monitors. I am currently using the LG and I’m liking it to so far but I prefer the better option. Both monitors are on sale but I am getting a pretty good deal on the LG for $370 ($280 off). The Gigabyte is on sale too for $500 ($100 Off).
Advantages FPS: My PC has a Radeon RX 580, i5 6600k and 16 gigs of RAM and I find the game to feel MUCH smoother on 4:3 than on 16:9. In fact, the only game that gets even close to the smoothness of CSGO on 4:3 is Quake Live, another ancient competitive FPS. While 16:9 gives me more than adequate FPS as well, 4:3 is just in a league of it's
Thereare some specs shared by both laptops, including 100% coverage of the DCI-P3 color gamut, a 16:10 aspect ratio, and 89% screen-to-body ratios thanks to their
. 181 201 4 89 290 27 313 100
16 9 vs 16 10 gaming
