:-) Folks,I have recently been following the forum discussions on the pro and con of LCD vs CRT, and especially the use of the newer 16 to 9 aspect ratio widescreen LCD for FS9, and later FSX. I decided to go ahead an replace my trusty 19" Compaq Pro CRT with a ViewSonic VX2025wm on sale for $329. The results are excellent and overall performance is unexpectedly improved despite operating at higher resolution.My system could JUST manage 1280 x 1024 x 32 locked at 20 FPS target with the CRT. I had good balanced operation with no stutters, but FPS could get down to ~10 FPS at the worst airports. I also occasionaly got a lock-up/FS9 or CTD when panning the view too rapidly in demanding airport situations on the ground. Surprisingly, the LCD using the DVI/digital connection is much more stable and execptionally smooth in VC and outside view modes. Howerver, switching views in the 2D cockpit produces a slight delay (1/10 sec or so) to load the distant texture squares. Perhaps it is something about the superposition of foreground 2D cockpit windows/panels over the outside view (just speculating). Anyway, the tough airports and situations are actually much improved for reasons that I don't fully understand but I am not going to "look a gift horse in the mouth", I will take the improvement and be glad for it.Anyway, the ViewSonic is basic LCD with good imaging but low on features (no USB, tilt adjust only). There is just the slightest color banding visible in the night/day sky transitions. Sharpness and detail is astounding, and I am seeing things I was entirely missing before.I noted the prior forum discussions about the need to use LCD native mode resolution to get the best results, and this is the case for my new wide LCD. It works much better at the 1680 x 1050 native resolution and the XP desktop and Office applications seem to automatically use this resolution to good effect. The wide view in the FS9 (a legacy application) VC and external views is wonderful, however the 2D instrument panels are unrealistically strectched. This is handled nicely by selecting (in FS9) to use the 1360 x 1024 x 32 mode. The resulting 2D panel aspect ratio is perfect and a nice black/dark frame surrounds the sides the FS9 "Full Screen" mode display. Perfect! You end up yielding up a little bit of screen area in exchange for backward compatibility with 2D. Reportedly, FSX will be able to maintain the proper aspect ratio in both VC and 2D modes.I just wanted to share my experience, and note that I am looking forward to FSX.ToddPennsylvania, USA---------------------------------------------------------Dell 8300, P4/3.0 HT/800FSB, 2GB DDR2, SATA RAID 0 array, ATI X800 Pro/256MB, SB Audigy.FS9 locked at 20 FPS target, FS Genesis DEM/LOD 21 - 76M World/38M USA/10M West Coast+Hawaii, FSG Landclass, Airport Environment, Active Sky 6, Ground Environment Pro, Ultimate Traffic @ 80%, Ultimate Terrain USA and Europe, many airport add-ons and PSS/PMDG/LVL-D/other high-end aircraft models.

FS9 can maintain them too... when the screen is using a proper aspect ratio:1280x1024 is not a standard 4:3, as you discoverd, 1360x1024 is :),As for the panels, they are easy to fix. I am reworkig my own project so my 2D will stretch across all 2560x1024 on my rig.I will never go back to a CRT again. I love my twin Sony LCD's. They are far more pantone (color) balanced than any CRT I have ever used, and what I see on my screen is what gets printed on a good printer.I have yet to see an LCD that does not require a lot of adjusting to pantone match, though (if you know a graphic artist, borrow his cards). You can reduce the banding on the monitor a bit by adjusting the "temperature" and reducing the brightness and backlighting. They are way overbright (esp on ViewSonic) and even though it might seem dim when you turn them down, once you get used to it (within an hour) your eyes will feel more relaxed and colors will appear more natural.What I love about all this is that at that crazy res of 2560, the sim takes no hit in perf what-so-ever, none (neither does Half Life BTW). This goes a long way toward demonstrating just how important a fast MB and CPU are to the sim (and Half Life).CheersShad

Thanks Shad, you appear to be technically well founded in this FS hobby.I did go look at your Vista Beta review and it certainly looks like Microsoft and the various HW device driver sources have a long way to go in matching, and hopefully surpassing, the support that XP provides to FS2004.What is your feeling about the Vista and FSX support/use_of 64 bit and Dual Core technology?Back to the widescreen LCD I am baffled by how smoothly everything works in VC and external views. It does not seem to matter what resolution is selected, it is fast and smooth at any setting. It was not like that when driving my CRT via the VGA connection. However, When I switch to a 2D intrument panel view with superimposed aircraft structure in the foreground of the side-views the loading of the detailed texture maps seems to slow down and get somewhat jerky compared with the identical view in VC mode. I wonder why?I will try reducing the brightness control as you suggested to minimize banding. It have it at 60% now; it came set at 90% and was far to bright; especially for night flight.Thanks again,Todd

>Thanks Shad, you appear to be technically well founded in>this FS hobby.>>I did go look at your Vista Beta review and it certainly looks>like Microsoft and the various HW device driver sources have a>long way to go in matching, and hopefully surpassing, the>support that XP provides to FS2004.Mit Danke.>What is your feeling about the Vista and FSX support/use_of 64>bit and Dual Core technology?I can't wait. I went back to 32bit in XP recently after running through the trial of x64 and...well I miss it. It was way more stable than 32... I had forgotten how many little problems there are.As for dual core, I have been waiting a bit, but I plan on buying a 4gig DC within a few weeks (before the back to school rush). Time will tell how well Vista and FSX perform... as it stands I am hopeful but cautious it will work OK. I say hopeful as so far 64bit enabled games have not been stellar. Half Life is much worse in 64 bit mode than in 32.>Back to the widescreen LCD I am baffled by how smoothly>everything works in VC and external views. It does not seem to>matter what resolution is selected, it is fast and smooth at>any setting. It was not like that when driving my CRT via the>VGA connection. However, When I switch to a 2D intrument panel>view with superimposed aircraft structure in the foreground of>the side-views the loading of the detailed texture maps seems>to slow down and get somewhat jerky compared with the>identical view in VC mode. I wonder why?Not sure. There could be a variety of reasons for this, one being the load of gauges in the 2d panel, esp if XML. The other could be the size of the background texture used in the 2d panel. It could also be due to the bus width of the vid cards memory controler. If its only 128bbit, then there may be some jerkyness when switching views and mixing 2D and 3D... the list goes on. Do other things cause slowdowns? Getting close to certain objects and so on?EDIT: Nope, you have a 256bit dac, so the only issue may be that the x800 pro is AGP? Perhaps a bottleneck on the motherboard.CheersShad

I've got a Widescreen 21" Gateway and have a question for you guru's.Should I purchase the DVI cable to hook it up with? I'm currently in VGA mode and was wondering if you pick up better frame rates. And also, should I be running in 1360 X 1024 mode to get the 16:9 ratio that you were discussing in the above posts.I've only got a Dell 2.4 megz 1 gig of ram and a Radeon ATI 9700 TX graphics card. The reason for the above questions is that I'm getting around 10 -14 fps using a lower resolution but thought if the DVI cable makes any difference, I will buy it and go to the 1360 res. if you think that would help me.Regards,jack

Jack,While I am not a hardware guru, I can tell you from my own experience and experimentation (I have both VGA and DVI cables hooked up) that the DVI connection is much, much better.Some of the advantages are:1. No need to fiddle with size and position adjustments2. Slightly faster resolution switching (no auto VGA adjusts needed)3. Smoother FS2004 performance, expecially in VC and external viewsThis last point is a combination of observation/impression more than a quantified measurement, but it seems as if the FPS is unaffected as you increase the resolution. With the VGA connection in use each increase in resolution seems to tax the CPU/VPU combo more and slows down overall display performance (i.e. FPS and smoothness).The VGA output is included on the video boards for backward compatibility with older displays. I recommend getting a DVI-D cable, I think you will be much better off.As for the resolution, for best 2D compatibility try the resolution you LCD supports that is thes closet to an exact 4:3 ratio. Also have to you display driver configured to "window" application resolutions less than the full "native mode" into a centered display with a black surround/filler. This works very nicely for me.Good luck,Todd

Jack,I see Todd has given you a full and detailed reply. There is one other reason to use DVI over VGA and that's because it carries a digital signal and requires no conversion. VGA being analogue requires converting and will never appear as sharp.So where you have the option choose DVI. You won't get any better frame rates but the image should appear significantly sharper especially on larger displays.Cheers,

Thanks Ray & Todd. I'm going to purchase the DVI cable interface today. My Gateway is 1680X1050 resolution. Are you telling me that I should set it to that resolution and if so, should I also go into my Control panel and adjust it to what? I don't think I have a 1680 X 1050 !!Regards & thanks again.jack

Jack,Your monitor probably came with a CD. You should run the program on it and it will tell your system which resolutions it can use.Any 16:10 ratio resolution will work but the native (highest) resolution will give you the sharpest picture. The 1680*1050 will be available once Windows knows the spec of your monitor. Without that info it doesn't know you have a widescreen display.Cheers,

Todd,One more thing: What does this mean?"Also have to you display driver configured to "window" application resolutions less than the full "native mode" into a centered display with a black surround/filler. This works very nicely for me."Do I go into Display under Drivers and configure something in there or what?Thanks for any help..Regards again,jack

Thanks Ray,How do I get Windows to know the spec of my monitor. I have the monitor now set to 1680 X 1050, but don't know how to tell Windows that I do..if that makes any sense!!Regards,jack

Jack,Purchase and install a DVI-D cable. Upon reboot you will begin to see a differences that allow you to access all of the display modes mutually supported by your video card and display. Second, go to the ATI website to download and install a recent version of the ATI Radeon video driver and Catalyst Control application. The ATI Catalyst program is key to managing advanced settings that are needed to get the best performance for FS2004.You should now be able to change screen resolutions and color depth (bits/pixel) by right clicking on an open area of the desktop, selecting "properties" from the menu. If you then push the "Advanced" button in the lower right it will take you to a series of selectable tabs of various ATI setting. Altenatively, you may invoke the ATI Catalyst from your start menu or by right clicking on the desktop and selecting the ATI Catalyst option from the pop-up menu. You should select the highest "native" mode resolution x 32 bit/pixel that you monitor supports. There will also be section that allows you to specify how applications running at less than "native" resolution should be treated. This will offer the choice of scaling or centering with borders, select the latter.Reboot, and then then start FS2004 go to settings, display and you should now see all of the resolutions. Pick the highest that has a nearly 4:3 ratio, done.Once you get this far let me know and I can provide some optimal settings for the ATI. My prior card was an ATI 9800/128MB so I have been there and done that as far as FS2004 tuning is concerned.Good luck,Todd

Jack,That info is help on the CD that came with the monitor. Are you saying you don't have one?

Thanks guys. Ray, I got a disk with the Gateway 21" Widescreen that says EZ-tune and it took 45 megs and slowed my computer frame rates down substantually. I removed it from my computer.I don't know where to go from here, but the EZ tune wasn't the course I wanted to follow..Any ideas?Regards,jack

Jack,Does the CD have a sub-folder named drivers? If so have a look in there for an INF file. These are recognised by Windows as information files that tell the system the specification of the monitor.You certainly don't ned to install 45Mg of data for the system to know about your monitor. It's a bit difficult to help via email but try this.Right-click on My Computer and choose Manage. Then select Device Manager and open the Monitors section. You will see one or two 'Default Monitor' entries but you should also see an entry for the Gateway monitor. If you have that then everything is configured okay.If you only see 'Plug and play monitor' then Windows is seeing your display as a generic one and won't be able to take full advantage of the various 16:10 display formats.Hope that helps. Time for bed on this side of the pond but I'll read any replies tomorrow at work.Cheers,