I just figured it out--reduce the resolution! My frames were collapsing in cloudy or rainy weather after spanning on a 24" and a 20.1" LCD and my res was 3200x1200x32. So I reduced it to 2560x1024x32 and frames rose by 30-50% in all weathers and views. What a huge diff and really you cannot discern a degradation in imaging anywhere. Now I can fly through a t-storm to hand land the PMDG 744 using the VC all the way down without a stutter. I am really pleasantly amazed by this. I thought you HAD to have the highest possible res with large monitors, but not so. This is on my eVGA 7900 GTO card.Just in case it helps anybody else.JS

> hand land the PMDG 744 using the VC all the way down without a stutter.You're running the PMDG 744 in FSX?

what should i change my 24" dell at 1920 x 1200 too ?

No, FS9 !JS

You could try but it might not be necessary. If you are using ONLY the DELL 2405 or 2407 panel, you can easily keep it at 1920x1200 because it CAN handle that fine with a powerful card. But I "spanned" my 2405 across to a DELL 2001 FP and the res changed automatically in the nvidia control panel, and I was at 3.8 million pixels as a result of this. While it was very nice and clear, it was extremely taxing in bad weather and in the VC at dense airports, and it resulted in a lot of stuttering in heavy clouds. So I fiddled around with several other resolutions and found that 2560x1024 was a very good compromise for spanned mode without wrecking the visual clarity of things such as the gauges on the glass panels. If I revert back to single screen, I switch back to 1920x1200 on the 2405 panel. I spoze you could go down a notch and see how it looks at a lower res. You might be pleasantly surprised and find that performance is enhanced.JS

Hey JS,Do you have the Dell 2001FP and the 24" like one view? do they sync up good?This is as good as using the Matrox triple2go thingi. Right?Except.. I would have to give up on my second 19" touch screen monitor that I use for GPS and FMS and stuff.But it is intriguing.Manny

Manny:The sync up pretty well. It's just pure luck for me since I just happened to have both monitors already for FS9. I fiddled with height, side angles, etc. for some time but yeah it's a very good proxy for widescreen play. I am happy and impressed. The 2405 is brighter than the 2001 and I cannot brighten the FP any further without bleaching the colors. But if you stand 6 feet away and look at the PMDG 747-400 in BA colors, for e.g., you really don't observe a significant diff in the panels. And if you sit right in front of the monitors, using the 2405 as the Captain's seat and the 2001 as the FO, it really looks rather good. I matched the colors and contrast very well. The only significant visual challenge is lining everything up in terms of height at the dividing line where the bezels are. But I am close to perfect in certain views. You need to offset the center line with the hat switch to see the centerline nicely but it's a workable adjustment.I have been thinking more seriously about getting another big panel, the 2407, but am undecided. For now, the 2001 FP works pretty darn well. If you look close, you can of course see a diff, but it's not a huge diff and not a blight on the landscape by any means.I also thought about doing 3x2001 panels with Triplehead, but it's expensive. Triplehead adds up to about $1100-1300 if you do it properly and buy new 19 or 20 inch panels. A 2nd 24" DELL would cost be $640 (with their discount) and I am strongly tempted. Then I'd have a 744 that is 4 feet wide on just two screen, yeow !Stay tuned.JS

thats something i am considering as well,another 2405 or 2407 which will make it 2 and save money on the Tripleheadto2 and get dualheadtogo?

Dont you notice a pespective error with two monitors? Or are they set up to show the forward view only?I see the logic of three monitors - angled to represent the peripheral field of view, but I always thought two monitors would struggle to portray the width of field and the angular disparity at the same time?Allcott

Good question, Allcott, and my thoughts as well before I did this experiment. 3 monitors WOULD provide slightly more realistic forward and peripheral vision, espeically if the left and right mons were angled inward as opposed to just two big mons. But actually, it's all a clever illusion no matter how you place two or three mons. A second 24" LCD on my right will give me a total of about 140 degrees of vision forward and peripherally with two of these big panels and will look good.The ONLY significant challenge is the centerline because one must deflect the hat switch to see that and manage the marginally changed view carefully so as not to change heading on takeoff and final approach. But it is manageable so far....!JS

No need to get Dualhead if you have an nVidia card because of the HORIZONTAL SPAN functionality of the control panel inside nVidia. Saves another $300 !I am strongly inclined to order the 2407 FP panel later today and just go ahead with my big view plans for FS9. I can get a good deal with DELL and feel it's probably my best bet, especially now that I know 2560x1024 works as well as it does.The only two things that have held me back are that DELL has changed the electronics slightly of the 2407 as compared with the 2405 and also that the height is less adjustable than the 2405 panel.There's always something, isn't there....?!JS

hi JSsounds like a really good idea, yea same $300, but won't the performance be horrible because the poor GPU has to emit 3D in 2 24" monitors?

Good question, but shouldn't be. With the reduced res, the frames have risen 40% and the fluidity is stable. This is using the 24" + 20.1" together at this time. I imagine frames will probably fall again but hopefully by not much more than 15% with a 2nd 24" monitor at the current res.Once you've done FS like this, a single monitor is like having one eye put out ! JS

yes please report your findings here once you do get your second 24"i bet it would look superb!

> A second 24" LCD on my right>will give me a total of about 140 degrees of vision forward>and peripherally with two of these big panels and will look>good.>It may be 140 degrees physical span from your eyepoint to the outer screen edges, but I believe the external view as represented on the FS image will be limited to a maximum of 90 degrees even at minimum zoom. You can experiment on this by going into slew mode, rotating the aircraft to look at objects at either screen edge, and reading the heading of each from the Shift-Z line.--Bryn