Eva01Master,
Thank you for input.
I have never seen benchmark results done that included 1360x768, and I doubt that benchmarks will ever be provided at that resolution.
The thrust of my comment was that 1280x1024 benchmarks were included in the above review, many reviews from other sites do not include 1280x1024 [leaving low resolution folks in the dark], and again, it is very unlikely that 1360x768 benchmarks will be compiled and provided online.
For whatever game a person plays, given the proper CPU GHz, data throughput, and video card, there will be very little real world differences between benchmarks run at 1280x1024 and 1360x768, except that the latter should run slightly faster if video drivers are optimized.
I have found that my computer does very well when gaming. The only reason I have run benchmarks on my machine is to see how many frames per second I get in the games I play. There are only a couple of games that I have [and currently do not play, they are not even installed] that would drop frame rates below 60. Most of my games bottom out around 100fps or so. I doubt that few people can tell the difference between 60fps and 120fps minimum frame rate.
My statement was not primarily for myself, but, for all those people that use HDTVs as a computer monitor. 1280x1024 will get them in the "ball park" for benchmark results. Yes, there will be a few fps difference, however, the two resolutions are close enough, in my mind, to let people interpolate and determine a fairly good picture as to how computers will perform using screens running at 1360x768 resolution.
Once again, thank you for your comment.
Must be far cheaper to use the chip they are using now.
