List of True 16:9 Resolutions

125 thoughts on “List of True 16:9 Resolutions”

1. This is very much appreciated, cheers!

2. Thanks you
   This is wonderful post.

3. This is a fantastic list! very nice of you to mark the resolutions divisible by 8. I couldn’t have asked for more as I am trying many neat things with my custom x264 encoding script. Knowing what divides by 8 will make it much easier to control macroblocking not only on the output, but now I can optimize my source material as well. Thanks for doing the math for us! saved me a heck of a lot of time 🙂

4. This is a fantastic explanation Pacoup!

   The explanation of the “divisible by 8 rule” is buried in the comments but it really helps in understanding the math of TRUE 16:9 resolution.

5. Just want to thank you for this list.
   Very helpfull.

6. Missing 3200×1800

7. There you go. I’ve added in every resolution leading up to 8K.

8. Great stuff. Do more ratios! 🙂

9. COOL LIST

10. I’m looking to design for a 64 in screen. Could you advise on pixel dimensions for it? Thanks!

11. That’s entirely dependent on the screen’s technology, but usually, 64″ is usually 1080p or 4K these days, so either 1920 x 1080, or 3840 x 2160.

12. You skipped 1600×900… nice tty though.

13. Did not. 900 is not divisible by 8.

14. Hey Pacoup, great list you’ve put together man! And also, thanks for the clarification on why certain 16:9 resolutions are more desirable than others (divisible by 8 — would have never known!), I do have a question though if you wouldn’t mind. Back in 2006 I believe, I purchased what would become my favorite monitor for general computer use that I’ve ever had the pleasure of using. It was a BenQ 24″ that had a native 16:10 (1920:1200) resolution. What I’ve never been able to nail down is, why exactly, was 16:9 chosen to be the standard as opposed to, in our case, 16:10? Thanks!

15. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:9#History

    As for 16:10, I’m not sure there is a documented reason, but I once heard that it was done to enable someone to view a full 16:9 video and still see a toolbar, presumably for video editors.

    The switch to 16:9, however, was economic. Since TV panels are manufactured in 16:9 ratios, it was cheaper for manufacturers to only manufacture 16:9 panels instead of both 16:9 and 16:10.

    I do miss them though. 16:10 was a great ratio for computing.

16. Hi, this may be a silly question, but I’m not used to making things for on-screen presentation, just for print usually, so I work in mm!

    I am setting up a presentation document (for projection), and I’m working in In-design. I want to make the presentation high resolution. Should I set the document unit settings to mm, pixels or points?

    Another way of putting this might be; What unit measurement is your list of ratios in? or does it not matter? If I wanted to make a 4k UHDTV presentation, would I use 3840 px x 2160px?

17. It’s in pixels. If designing for digital projection, you definitely want to work in pixels instead of mm or points. This is important for effects to render at the appropriate resolution in InDesign and Illustrator. Working in pixels gives you a direct one to one representation.

    And yes, if you wanted to make a 4K UHDTV presentation, you would use 3840px x 2160px. Even if you’re doing HD, it may be a good idea to go for 4K anyway, to future proof it. The equivalent ratio should make your 4K presentation good for exporting to any 16:9 media.

18. Very helpful for resizing HTML5 videos to non-standard heights, thanks!

19. many thanks. 1792×1008 is fine resolution in bluestacks android emulator for 1920×1080 screen /win10 – i can see both win toolbar and emulator with this resolution

20. This’s very helpful man
    I really wanna thank u for this effort

21. I just came across your listing. Thank you for the explanation above. I was trying to setup my Hitachi 32″ TV as a monitor and it appears that it operates best at 1366 x 768. Why is that resolution not included in the listing.
    Thanks,

22. Because 1366 x 768 is not a true 16:9 resolution.

    Before widescreen displays became popular, the overwhelming majority of displays manufactured for PCs were XGA; i.e. 1024 x 768.

    Presumably to reduce manufacturing costs, manufacturers created a derived version of this standard called WXGA, using the same amount of vertical lines, but simply extending them to 1360 or 1366 pixels wide, giving a 16:9 panel within 0.05% accuracy.

    It was also used to create the first cheap HDTVs, as the panel could technically be qualified as 720p, and therefore, HD. Some manufacturers, if I remember correctly, even stretched the image past the frame, such that the panel would actually be 768p, but would only show 720p to the user.

    The amount of variations for WXGA is high. It’s not a standard: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_display_resolution#WXGA_.281366x768_and_similar.29

    For example, you have 1280 x 800, which is actually 16:10, which is referred to as WXGA for PC displays.

    As for your Hitachi TV, there is a possibility as mentioned that it actually does not display the full image, so you may have to scale your picture via video card options or options on the TV itself.

23. Pacoup, hi and how are you? This is just mind blowing! I’m really grateful for your time to do this. I just finished doing some film footage and I’d like to use the 4k resolution. The footage is about an hour in length. Just wondering why does it take so long for 4k resolution to download? And if you have an idea of the download time I’m looking at before the footage finish processing? Thanks.

24. At the very least, because we’re talking about a surface area, 4K UHD requires at least four times the bandwidth of 1080p HD:

    1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600
    3840 x 2160 = 8,294,400

    So, right off the bat, supposing you have a highly compressed HD video with a bandwidth of 6 Mb/s encoded in H.264, you’re looking at 24 Mb/s for the UHD version with the same codec. This is not taking into account audio, which in typical UHD settings will also use more bandwidth, and HDR, which may require 10 bit color for HDR 10 or 12 bit color for Dolby Vision, versus 8 bit color for regular HD, further impacting required bandwidth to match perceptual quality.

    So, for a one hour movie encoded as mentioned, we’re looking at the following file size for the video:

    1080p HD = 2.7 GB
    4K UHD = 10.8 GB

    However, using the newer H.265 codec, which is what Netflix and 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray use, bandwidth requirements are approximately halved, but you need devices capable of playing back the newer codec, and such devices aren’t currently widespread.

    Accounting for HDR, this is how Netflix is able to offer 4K with only ~2.3x the bandwidth instead of 4x.

    Unfortunately, this alone won’t help you determine download time, as download time will vary according to both the capabilities of the server and network serving the file, and the computer and network receiving the file.

    For example, in optimal conditions, the aforementioned one hour video will take the following time to download with the following connection speeds:

    60 minutes 1080p HD @ 15 Mb/s Internet = 24 minutes
    60 minutes 4K UHD @ 15 Mb/s Internet = 1 hour 36 minutes

    60 minutes 1080p @30 Mb/s Internet = 12 minutes
    60 minutes 4K UHD @30 Mb/s Internet = 48 minutes

    60 minutes 1080p HD @60 Mb/s Internet = 6 minutes
    60 minutes 4K UHD @60 Mb/s Internet = 24 minutes

    Of course, this is just an example. You’ll have to do the math yourself for your own videos. Some video editing suites will also have useful presets to help you if you’re not an expert. These presets should mention expected bandwidth somewhere, but if you’re not sure, you can always encode your file and check its final size once the encoding is done.

25. Do you know what software could possibly export an mp4 larger at 5400×1920 or larger? Here’s what doesn’t work: After Effects, Adobe Media Encoder, Premiere, Handbrake, Mpeg Streamclip, Quicktime Pro.

26. This is probably not related to software itself but the codec. It is theoretically impossible to create a valid mp4 with a resolution larger than 4,096 × 2,304:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Levels

    You will need H.265 to output more than ~4K (or another codec that supports as much, like Apple’s ProRes, but I’m presuming here you’re looking for a high compression encoding scheme designed for distribution, not an intermediate format):
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding#Tiers_and_levels

27. Fantastic. Thanks a lot. I’m planning to buy a new PC monitor and was confused how to select. Your explanation showed me the right path.
    In a reply you said that you too are missing 16:10 resolution.
    May I know what do you mean? Is it good for me to pick 16:10 resolution computer monitor (if available) to 16:9?

28. How to calculate inches (for screen size) from your data?
    for example, what is the least size monitor that can display true 16:9 resolution? (without stretching or trimming)

29. @sandepp

    If you think you’d benefit from the extra height, e.g. you do professional photo editing, then yes. Most 16:10 panels nowadays are targeted at photo professionals anyway and are quite expensive for this reason : https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Monitor+Resolution_2560+x+1600&ci=25766&N=3878805756+4294949014

    However, it goes without saying that if you’re doing professional photo or movie editing in 2016, I don’t what you’re doing with a standard resolution 16:10 panel. Go with a 16:9 5K panel with support for 4K color space like DCI-P3. The latest 5K iMac will get you that.

    In terms of bang for your buck, especially if you’re a gamer and seek special displays with higher refresh rates, stick to 16:9.

    Unfortunately, it’s impossible to calculate the screen size from my data. There is no such thing as a standard pixel density. For example, it’s entirely possible to get a 5.5 inch 1080p display (iPhone Plus) and 22 inch 1080p display (common PC monitors).

    As a rule of thumb however, here are a few common resolutions for regular low density “non-Retina” displays:

    22″: 1680 x 1050 (16:10)
    22″ or 23″: 1920 x 1080 (16:9)
    24″: 1920 x 1200 (16:10)
    27″: 2560 x 1440 (16:9)
    30″: 2560 x 1600 (16:10)

    Here are some common high density “Retina” desktop display sizes and resolutions:

    24″ to 32″: 3840 x 2160 (16:9 – 4K)
    27″: 5120 x 2280 (16:9 – 5K)

    4K panels are unusually large in terms of density; i.e. if you want to get the equivalent in density of a 27″ 5K panel, your 4K panel, which is double 1080p, would have to be about the same size as a 1080p panel, i.e. ~23 inches. These are not very common, so if you’re not getting a iMac (the 21.5 inch iMac has a rather unique and very dense 4096 x 2304 16:9 4K resolution display which allows it to show full DCI 4K clips at 4096 x 2160), you may wish to get a 5K panel instead. A 27 inch 5K panel with proper scaling technologies will also play games at a more feasible 1440p resolution with reasonable sharpness since it’s literally half 5K. However, this is mostly a compromise, and if you wish to play in fullscreen 4K, no luck, 4K doesn’t fit very well into 5K when it comes to modern game rendering technologies (fitting 4K video into 5K, however, is mostly a non-issue). So if you’re really buying for gaming, it’s probably a better idea to go for either for 23 inch 1080p, 27 inch 1440p, or 4K in your preferred size. Windows 10 has gotten pretty good at scaling fonts and UI elements, so if you’re going 4K, the size itself doesn’t matter as much as the quality of the panel and desired pixel density.

30. Hi, I know this is an old post, but, I wanted to inform you that there is a mistake with one of the resolution sizes. On the chart, you have 1152 x 648, which is incorrect, the correct widescreen resolution for that is 1152 x 864. I should know, because one of my games has 1152 x 864 as widescreen. The game I am referring to, is Deus Ex: Human Revolution.

31. 1152 x 864 is not even 16:9. 1152 x 648 is. There are no mistakes in this chart. It is a list of _true_ 16:9 ratios, i.e. they must equal 1.77:1 (where there are an infinite number of 7s, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:9 for the proper notation which is not representable with the font here).

    “Widescreen” doesn’t mean anything precise (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widescreen). This is a list of strictly 16:9 aspect ratios, not necessarily all widescreen resolutions or standard 16:9 resolutions. For standard display resolutions you have Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_display_resolution

    1152 x 864 is not actually widescreen if we’re talking square pixels. Traditionally-speaking, it’s known as XGA+, which is a 4:3 ratio. Not sure why Deus Ex: Human Revolution is listing it as widescreen on your computer, but FYI, it’s not because it’s in a game that it’s correct.

32. I just take the larger number (say 1280) and divide it by 16, then multiply by 9 and I get 720.

33. Fantastic List. Thank you for publishing it.

34. where is the w – 2715 h – 1527 ?

35. I am rocking with 960 x 540 on my second large plasma monitor.. looks fine..

36. 1366 x 768 is missing too

37. 1366 x 768 is not true 16:9 but is a lot used by monitor producers

38. This is a list of true 16:9 resolutions, not display resolutions.

    2715 x 1527 is not a true 16:9 resolution.
    True 16:9 –> 1920 / 1080 = 1.7777777777777777777777777777777~
    Not true 16:9 –> 2715 / 1527 = 1.7779960707269155206286836935167

39. Excellent list! Saved me loads of time trying to work out which resolutions to use in my new edit softwear for my videos for TV viewing, a new youtube video series, and burning to disk. Many thanks!

40. Hi,

    For a LED Wall, the spec as image: JPG in RGB colour mode and Actual Pixel: 1456 x 562. How come converted in JPG then still blur? Thanks

41. Will you add 16K too? Some PC games already allow you to super-sample to that resolution.

42. Here would be a future-proofed list… https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-tUxPsS69eaWURNVmlZQmZfMlk/view?usp=sharing

43. 768 x 432…video broadcasting
    thanks

44. My Facebook memories post ‘On This Day’ 4 years ago, brought me back here. Glad I found it again! We live in a widescreen world (unless you are an iPhone idiot and post vertical videos) and yet more and more eyewitness videos presented on the news are vertical videos. Sony Xperia cell phones have a dedicated camera shutter button which is located so that you have to hold the phone like a camera to use the button. YAY! I wish all phones did!
    Modern history replayed for generations will look moronic on widescreen 4K TV’s. Imagine what an eyewitness video of the Hindenburg disaster would look like if it were to happen today. Don’t you know newsroom editors do an eye-roll with every iPhone video submitted. Don’t be an idiot, turn your phone for important pictures and always for videos. (Better yet, get the Horizon video app, which automatically orients your videos in landscape mode, even when the phone is rotated while video-ing.) Because your name will be on your lame vertical video of a significant historical event, perhaps for generations. Don’t shame your family name. THINK WIDESCREEN. #LANDSCAPEMODE

45. Thx for list 😛

46. Thank you for sharing this! We have so many enquiries from photography enthusiasts who are not quite sure about the ideal dimensions for their images. This site is a real boon for us and we point everyone who asks this way to ensure they get the right information.
    Very Grateful for you effort on this!
    Sincerely,
    Lens

47. very useful, comming from time to time to check this website.

48. I found this super useful.

    I made a Google Sheet with more info on it.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10Ta8nt709B7T2rw074hHcmhqX27MusivgRSJGgZzkP0/edit?usp=sharing

    Maybe this should become a calculator with good visuals and info? Or at least add more sheets.

    This article has been around for a loooooong time. 🙂

49. Thank you so much, even 8 years later, it’s still helpful.
    You’re the best 🙂

50. Avdshare Video Converter is just one professional video aspect ratio converter which supports to convert any video from any source with 4:3 aspect ratio to 16:9 widescreen aspect ratio.