Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Multiple monitors....

Recommended Posts

Guest

I am running XP and FS2002.Having read previous posts, it confirmed the results I got when I tried 2 monitors (I just slotted in an old PCI video card to work with my AGG radion 64mb card.) The framerates died and basically made the program unusable I was, of course trying to run full screen on 2nd monitor with external views!I realize now that probably the only answer is multiple PC's and Wideview?Here is my question:I would like to run 4 monitors in total.Can anyon please tell me If the following scenario is achievable using Wideview.Main PC: monitor 1 showing full screen outside viewMain PC: Monitor 2 showing full screen panel view.2nd PC: Monitor 1 Showing full screen outside view2nd PC: Monitor 2 Showing full screen outside view. Also what would be the minimum specs for the 2nd PCThanks for any adviceNorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I am running XP and FS2002. >Having read previous posts, it confirmed the results I got >when I tried 2 monitors (I just slotted in an old PCI video >card to work with my AGG radion 64mb card.) The >framerates died and basically made the program unusable >I was, of course trying to run full screen on 2nd monitor >with external views! I think one computer can reasonably run two videocards, where one is for the 3D view and the other(s) are for 2D instrument panels. That should work fine, unless you have complex stuff.. Someone had the Garmin 530 and the other "weather radar" thingy that are separate programs running on the second screen, and this slowed things down considerably. But I bet the Garmin does require somewhat CPU power.But I myself run a Geforce for 3D scenery view and a Matrox Mystique PCI (those cards from 1996 or so :-) on a 15" screen that I put inside a "panel" box. It shows a custom fullscreen instrument panel that is aligned to the panel gauge holes. That works great.I think you can get some of those "dualhead" NVidia cards to do a "stretched" 3D view accross two monitors, and there is the Matrox Parhelia that does 3-monitor wide view, but I guess putting several "normal" videocards for 3D views in one computer is too much. At least Windows 2000 does not even accelerate anything but the primary video card, so it is out of question for me. XP might let you accelerate more at once, dunno. But many PCI 3D-cards you can get are not really that fast and great anymore.>I realize now that probably the only answer is multiple PC's >and Wideview? Seems to be the case, unless you go for Parhelia and one or two instrument panel monitors on PCI cards. But Parhelia resolution max. for fs2002 is 1920x480 (640x480 x 3)>Here is my question: >>I would like to run 4 monitors in total. >>Can anyon please tell me If the following scenario is >achievable using Wideview. > >>Main PC: monitor 1 showing full screen outside view >Main PC: Monitor 2 showing full screen panel view. This should work okay.>2nd PC: Monitor 1 Showing full screen outside view >2nd PC: Monitor 2 Showing full screen outside view. This works if the card is "dualhead" that can do acceleration on both "heads" at once.>Also what would be the minimum specs for the 2nd PC I guess the 3d view generator PC should be the fast one. So as fast as you can afford, since it is to do the 3D rendering.Hmm.. Now, if there was free hardware available, imagine 2 PCs with Parhelias, totalling 6 monitors for about 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Thank you so much for your helpI went out today and bought a Gforce 2 (440?). I just plugged this into my AGP slot and tried to run 2 monitors.All was ok till I tried to have an outside view on the 2nd screen. Once again the frames dropped to about 2FPS even with this power video card installed. Needless to say, I returned it and resumed using my Radeon 9000. Incidentally, also with the new card, the graphics in FS2002 were no better than with my old card. Kinda tells me that FS2002 doesn't really utilize the benefits of a powerfull gaming card? Maybe I'm wrong but that's the impression it gave me ?After I re-installed my old card and, with only one monitor running, I checked the frames with an outside view opened. I was surprised to see them drop again from 32 to about 8FPS. (I had never checked this before)It has certainly been a learning experience and I am quite convinced now that, in order to have extra outside views, additional CPU's and Wideview software is a necessity.Thanks againNorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Once again the frames dropped to about 2FPS even with this >power video card installed. Yea, you can reasonably run one 3D view per CPU, unless you have those special dualhead cards that have special drivers and have two or more outputs in the same card -> Someone said some NVidia cards can "stretch" the whole display accross two monitors, so your FS will automatically fill both displays. But that is a special driver, you cannot do two monitors 3D view using 2 cards, it seems too much for the CPU.> Incidentally, also with the new card, the graphics in >FS2002 were no better than with my old card. Kinda tells me >that FS2002 doesn't really utilize the benefits of a >powerfull gaming card? Maybe I'm wrong but that's the >impression it gave me ? Geforce2 is not exactly a "new powerful gaming card" these days, but FS2002 utilizes a Geforce2 as far as I know, any new tricks on newer cards are not being used since fs2002 does not have code to do those. But new cards are of course faster.>After I re-installed my old card and, with only one >monitor running, I checked the frames with an outside view >opened. I was surprised to see them drop again from 32 to >about 8FPS. (I had never checked this before) You mean a second "window" with a spot plane view or something?>>It has certainly been a learning experience and I am quite >convinced now that, in order to have extra outside views, >additional CPU's and Wideview software is a necessity. Yea. Extra videocards are awesome for a setup where you have one computer, and want the instruments on separate monitor (that you can hide inside a panel for example) while your main view is on the one screen, maybe on a projector or behind a big fresnel lens. Or maybe a Parhelia can do a reasonable front wide angle view while a PCI card drives the instruments.Tuomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Thanks again Tuomas"You mean a second "window" with a spot plane view or something?"Yes that's it. Even in 1 monitor mode, if I open up a 2nd window as above the frames drop right down to rally low. It is still usable though.>"that you can hide inside a panel for example"I've neve heard or seen of anyone putting a monitor inside a panel.Do you have any links that will show me that?Do you personally use Wideview and is it difficult to set up?THanks againNorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Hi Norm,I used to run my 1.5 mgz ATHELON with 2 video cards.Gforce 420 single monitor for front viewGforce 440 dual monitor for panel view,indocked,(dragged panel down to bottom)monitors and then resized to fit.It worked great for me.Also i had 512 SDRAM also.I had to make sure my 420 card was my primary.RegardsJames

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Thanks JamesI think I may be forced to go out and upgrade my CPU from its present 800mhz/256 ram and re-think the situation."I used to run my 1.5 mgz ATHELON with 2 video cardsDid you ever check your framerates when both windows were opened?Norm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Yes i used to get 19-23 fs most of my scenery displayed med-highJames

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

"Yes i used to get 19-23 fs most of my scenery displayed med-high"That's assuring, it kinda seems that i'm pushing it with only 800 MHZ?thanks again, James.Norm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Yes that's it. Even in 1 monitor mode, if I open up a 2nd >window as above the frames drop right down to rally low. It >is still usable though. Yea, it's probably just too much for the CPU. It has to handle 2 views of the same world from two different locations, meaning it does the same work twice. The "multihead" videocard special drivers do it by stretching the same window accross the two screens, that is only "one view" but just bigger resoliution when you think in terms of FS2002. So that is probably faster and I guess that would be possible. But yeah, your CPU probably needs an upgrade as well if you want to do that kind of stuff. The "one screen for outside view and another screen on a PCI videocard for instruments" is probably usable, I had this kind of a setup on my AMD Duron 800MHz as well, and it was OK. It actually increased the FPS by a few, since it did not have to "mask" the instrument panel above the 3D view.>I've neve heard or seen of anyone putting a monitor inside a >panel. >>Do you have any links that will show me that? Sure. I it turned a lot better than what I expected, I think adding the paint did the trick :-)I have posted this a few weeks ago as well, but this series of photos shows pretty well how the thing was made.http://tigert.gimp.org/vatsim/cockpit-stuf...topconsole1.jpghttp://tigert.gimp.org/vatsim/cockpit-stuf...topconsole3.jpghttp://tigert.gimp.org/vatsim/cockpit-stuf...topconsole4.jpghttp://tigert.gimp.org/vatsim/cockpit-stuf...topconsole7.jpghttp://tigert.gimp.org/vatsim/cockpit-stuf...topconsole9.jpgIt's basically a "mask" around the monitor that has the holes exactly where the instruments are (I have a custom panel that is full screen that contains just instruments and nothing more)The switches are driven with FSBUS (www.fsbus.de)>Do you personally use Wideview and is it difficult to set >up? I have just one computer with the extra PCI Matrox card so there is no WideFS needed. One needs widefs and maybe wideview to link many computers together.Tuomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Looks really good Tuomas, maybe that will be my next experiment.Thank you again for your help. My next step is the cpu upgrade. I am going to an AMD 2100MHZ so we will see what difference that makes.I will let you knowBest wishesNorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Looks really good Tuomas, maybe that will be my next >experiment. Just remember ventilation!Monitors make a lot of heat, and putting them inside a box is sure a fire hazard or something if the heat has no way out. At least it does not do good to the screens..Tuomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Hi, I too am involved in a project cockpit, a 747-400 and am going to be using Project Magenta with the Matrox Parhelia so I can display my PFD/ND both pilot & First officeers plus my Eicas display, instead of building a bunch of PC's, I will have 4 pc's networked but that is still better than the 7 I would have needed without Matro. It's not the best card for games, but to handle 3 seperate screens running Open Gl it will do a great job, I'll no for sure in about a month (around 20 Feb 2003), good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience thus far on the subject of multiple monitors has been thus:1. With two video cards or a dual-head card, one monitor for 3D view and one for 2D panels works even on my old 500 MHz Celeron. No problem.2. Two monitors with a separate 3D view on each (i.e. two cockpit windows) will yield 6-8 frames per second even on a 2.4 GHz Pentium 4.3. I've read that two monitors with a stretched 3D view spanning the monitors works well (e.g. 800x1200: each monitor at 800x600, FS at 800x1200). I haven't tried it as the only dual-head card I have is a Matrox G400 Dual Head that still suffers slowdown even when stretching the view because it can't really draw one 3D view across both screens. The Matrox Parhelia can but I don't have one.4. I've read that FS uses the same field of view even if you have a stretched window across monitors. If that's the case, the doing multiple monitors this way doesn't really gain you much perspective. It's still better to use Wideview.5. Opening multiple 3D windows on one monitor on my 2.4 GHz doesn't seem to make much of an impact on the frame rate.6. Opening three VC windows, tiling them horizontally across one monitor, and then panning the left and right windows to create a complete view makes for a pretty nice widescreen effect. It truly provides the wider field of view. The only drawback is that you have to sit really close to the screen to eliminate the "fish eye" effect.7. Opening a second 3D view on the second monitor can be done with a reasonable framerate by keeping the window small. The smaller it is, the higher your overall framerate.So, the best solution seems to be Wideview with one PC per 3D view. All the panels can still run on the main system. I'm considering using low-end systems for the left and right views and just set them to lower detail since detail isn't that critical for getting the feel.Hope this info is helpful in your quest to see more in your cockpit.Peter http://bfu.avsim.net/sigpics/PeterR.gifBFU Forums Moderator[table border=2 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=1][tr][td][table border=0 cellpadding=8 cellspacing=0][tr][td bgcolor=#540000]http://bfu.avsim.net/sigpics/logo75t.gif[/td][td align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFF6]Bush Flying Unlimited"At home in the wild"Looking for adventure? Come join us! * [link:bfu.avsim.net|Web Site] * [link:www.cafepress.com/bfu,bfu2,bfu3,bfu4|BFU Store] * [link:bfu.avsim.net/join.htm]Join!][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Thank you Peter, that was most informative.Interesting to hear that even with a 2.4 gig, frames drop significantly when using 2 X 3d views.I am really close to upgrading cpu from 800 to 2.4 gig but now i'm wondering if I really will gain very much in FS2000?I notice that now, if I have a main 3d window and 2 side 3d views open, my frames drop to about 8. This does not cause me any major problems as I fly heavies mainly (767 PIC) and they are sluggish anyway As a matter of interest, what do you consider the minimum requrements for client PC's...500 or ??Thanks again for your inputNorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I am really close to upgrading cpu from 800 to 2.4 gig but >now i'm wondering if I really will gain very much in FS2000? Gosh, get FS2002! It looks so much better, and some reviews say it is somewhat faster than fs2000 on same hardware, though I have no personal experience so I cannot say much more. Maybe someone else can verify this?But anyway, if you aim for realism in the cockpit, you definitely want fs2002 for the visual, since everything looks a lot better in it.Tuomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I'm considering using low-end systems for the left and right >views and just set them to lower detail since detail isn't >that critical for getting the feel. Yea, you mainly want the side views for the feeling of immersion, plus the important practical thing is so that you see the runway on the traffic circuit - you know when to start lowering flaps etc on downwind and when to turn in for the final during base leg. On those as well all you need to see is the runway itself. Everything else is "nice to have" but not really important for the flying itself.>Hope this info is helpful in your quest to see more in your >cockpit. Yeah, nice look at the alternatives. Thanks.Tuomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

" I am really close to upgrading cpu from 800 to 2.4 gig but now i'm wondering if I really will gain very much in FS2000"Sorry that was a typo..I am, of course, using FS2002...Thanks again Tuomas.Norm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For client PCs, I'm going to try to get a couple of 1 GHz. They should be almost throwaways now. But anything over 500 MHz should be okay. It all depends how much detail you want.When I was flying on a 500 MHz, I had autogen set to sparse, mesh detail to 50%, and no water relections to get 12-15 fps at 1280x1024x32. With a 2.4 GHz, I can have autogen at normal or dense (not extreme), mesh at 78% and nice water effects and maintain 15-20 fps at 1280x1024x32. All that power didn't make an earth-shattering improvement in frame rates (at the same old settings, I could get 25-30 fps) but at least I can see more trees now since I fly bush planes.I suspect that I may now have more CPU power than the video card can take advantage of. The two need to be closely matched. A really fast video card with a slow CPU or vice versa doesn't give you the best performace. However, I've also heard that there may not be significantly more that can be squeezed out of FS2k2 as far as video hardware improvements. Maybe FS2k4.Note that by removing all panels from the cockpit window, you will gain a few fps. If you have only one monitor, get out of full-screen mode (press Alt+Enter), size the 3D view to fill the upper-half of the screen, then undock the panel, radio, gps, etc. and place them in the space below the 3D window.Peter http://bfu.avsim.net/sigpics/PeterR.gifBFU Forums Moderator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tuomas,I saw a photo of your CRT panel before and thank you for the additional "under construction" photos. I've been contemplating a similar project for some time and was pleasantly surprised when I saw your first post with it. You really did a good job.One day, I hope to build physical gauges like what Mike's making. Until then, masking a CRT or LCD with a custom panel is the way to go.Peter http://bfu.avsim.net/sigpics/PeterR.gifBFU Forums Moderator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Hi Tuomas, >>I saw a photo of your CRT panel before and thank you for the >additional "under construction" photos. I've been >contemplating a similar project for some time and was >pleasantly surprised when I saw your first post with it. You >really did a good job. Yeah, the paint really made it stand apart from the rest of the "protos" :-) Now I just need to build a base for it so it is at correct height (it's too tall for tabletop) and I need a yoke and pedals.. sucks currently since I dont really like to fly with a joystick..Attached a pic of the design draft I had in my mind (did that with QCad btw, pretty nice piece of free software - www.qcad.org) - though the car seat will have to change to a office chair removed from the rotating base and stuck on a box made from plywood.>One day, I hope to build physical gauges like what Mike's >making. Until then, masking a CRT or LCD with a custom panel >is the way to go. Yea, "real" gauges would be cool, but on the other hand, the monitor behind panel -approach is more flexible, it is easy to do different panels for different aircraft, say, Cessna panel for that PPL training use (the one I posted pics of), Cessna Caravan or King Air for some IFR flying on VATSIM etc.. maybe some business jet with a special front panel section (it is removable) with just 2 large square holes for "glass cockpit" etc.. I am not interested in making a scale model of any real-world plane, but rather a setup that enchanges my simulator flying and training experience and teaches me correct things (Flaps is that little lever there, not "F7") etc. So in that sense having a flexible simulator setup is a plus. Though I can definitely understand the satisfaction in making something look "as real as it gets"..Tuomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Yea, "real" gauges would be cool, but on the other hand, the monitor >behind panel -approach is more flexibleYes, I've been thinking about that too. Since I fly several kinds of bush planes as well as choppers, the flexibility of the glass instruments is definitely appealing. Of course, the panel mask is the key to the "real thing" look. An open monitor just isn't the same.Peter http://bfu.avsim.net/sigpics/PeterR.gifBFU Forums Moderator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>Yea, "real" gauges would be cool, but on the other hand, the monitor >>behind panel -approach is more flexible>>Yes, I've been thinking about that too. Since I fly several >kinds of bush planes as well as choppers, the flexibility of >the glass instruments is definitely appealing. Of course, >the panel mask is the key to the "real thing" look. An open >monitor just isn't the same. Yep, the mask "does the trick" really. Once the thing is closer to be finished (are those ever?? :) I am thinking of putting small fake screws around the instruments to imitate the fastening screws. But it does look very good even now.The front panel requires some handwork unless you have a LCD display (too expensive for me at this point) since there is a gap between the panel and the monitor glass. So you need to put something to block light from the neighboring instruments, it looks really lame if those show through :) Black cardboard works fine, one just needs scissors, patience and glue..http://tigert.gimp.org/vatsim/cockpit-stuf...opconsole10.jpgAnd since the monitor I have is not totally flat, I am using slightly wider paper tubes on the side columns and shorter ones in the center instruments to take the glass curvature into account.Tuomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Hi Tuomas"It's basically a "mask" around the monitor that has the holes exactly where the instruments are (I have a custom panel that is full screen that contains just instruments and nothing moreA couple of questions for you, please.1) What material (and how thick) did you use to make the faceplate for the monitor box?2) What tool did you use to cut the holes?3) How did you cut the circles out from cardboard..did you just use scissors? Thank youNorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...