Sign in to follow this  
Sesquashtoo

Save your dollars...and TRULY upgrade your computer system!

Recommended Posts

I'm just pausing on a flight South of VOZ's 1.5 Melbourne. I'm not sure of the lake and countryside I am flying over right now in the Mooney, but will Google it later.I keep getting blown away in what the Samsung wide view 245BW gives you in a PANORAMIC VIEW of the flight world around you. I keep trying to communicate the most poignant for the reader, and I think I have it down pat, now. The FS9 world on a 24 inch-wide wide view monitor displayed at 1920x1200 resolution is the most NATURAL view scape I have ever seen simulated to date.As you pan around your cockpit, no matter what window you settle your gaze upon, you STILL need to move your head back and forth along the left/right axes of this monitor as WELL as move your eyes, also. This SO contributes to the effect of REALISM in what you are viewing, and your interaction (emotional response) to being there.I put my 19 inch Samsung 931 BF (attached to the other VDI output of my vid card) and had the two exact scenes rendered in real time. Folks, a 19 inch monitor set at the maximum reso of 1280x1050 just, and I'm sorry to say---just doesn't cut it! It so severely limits your breath of view-scape and the ensuing sense of reality and truly being there, flying over the landscape. It is practically crippling in the A/B comparison.Also, does stepping up from 1680x1050 reso to a 24 inch native reso of 1920x1200 make a TRUE difference? YOU BET IT DOES! YOU BET IT DOES! Because I can downgrade my resolution to that of a 22 inch monitor, I can certainly say with authority, that the difference is truly stunning between the two. I might step on some toes here, but would it be worth stepping up from a 22 inch wide view to a 24 inch? For the extra two inches of diagonal...perhaps not. But...that would NOT be the reason in my mind to do so. It would be so you could have the OPTION of running at this magnificent level of 1920x1200 resolution. Simply---it gives you a choice!I now run my desktop at 1680x1050 and run all my simulations and games at 1920x1200.I originally bought a 22 inch Samsung, but in thinking about what my new vid card could put out---decided while I had the window of opportunity, to take it back and upgrade to the 24 inch model.One more thing, After having the 24 inch on my desktop, I feel that in having gone to the 27 inch, that would NOT have increased my level of max resolution passed 1920x1200...it would have truly been too big to view at only 18-24 inches or so away from my eyes. A 24 inch wide view (any manufacturer) at 1920x1200 is the ULTIMATE Human interface component for home flight simulation to date.You get max reso, at a reasonable view distance and desktop footprint. It looks just right, and not too big upon your desktop.Is it worth replacing your present less-than 24 inch monitor, either CRT or LCD? ABSOLUTELY! ABSOLUTELY! It will probably be the best purchase you have made to further your enjoyment of this great hobby.Let's face it---we all strive for 'as real' as we can make it. Spend $500.00 US/Can and be in visual bliss from then on...you might not even want to bother to upgrade to a new vid card or system in total. It is that good!P.S. This is important if you ARE running VOZ 1.5 You need to have the following folders found in your ADDON Scenery folder INSTALLED in the SCENERY LIBRARY in the EXACT following order, or you will NOT see everything there is to this fabulous package. Here is the order you must have, and not think about having, lol.1. VOZ EZ-Library2. VOZ Scenery3. VOZ Matts Dry Custom Landclass4. VOZ Matts Custom Landclass5. VOZ LandclassThe above order is really important for all aspects to display as needed and properly within the VOZ scenery!Please remember, reader,...just having them in your ADDON Scenery folder in FS9 and NOT you, the user physically installing them in your Scenery Library does NOT mean that they are being picked up by FS9! This was for those new to this 'sport' and the workings of FS9. For you already old-hands, this is not news. :)Cheers!Mitch, and back to that lake just south of Melbourne (VOZ 1.5) in that hot-rod Mooney Bravo. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

"1. VOZ EZ-Library2. VOZ Scenery3. VOZ Matts Dry Custom Landclass4. VOZ Matts Custom Landclass5. VOZ Landclass"Hey Mitch, thanks for that! I missed that one.On checking my Addon Scenery folder the two 'VOZ Matts' were there, but not in the Scenery library. They are now and in the order you have specified.I confess I still have my reservations about the 24". Currently my X1950 Pro 512MB seems to do a great job for both FS9 and FSX at 1680x1050x32. As we all know, FSX is a very different animal and the X1950 Pro may struggle a bit to display at decent frame rates at 1920x1200x32. Of course I could easily be wrong, but it would be interesting to hear from anyone who has tried it successfully.As I stated in my earlier post in this thread, my gut feeling is that the 22" may turn out to be the 'sweet' spot if you are running BOTH FS9 and FSX with the X1950 Pro. However, I do appreciate that your enthusiastic remarks relate to experience with FS9 and not FSX.Cheers!Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike, hello!Mike a tip...in FSX, turn down your Global Textures slider to MID or MEDUIM. Put auto-gen at Normal to Dense.Then go out for a VFR flight at 2200 to 3500 feet. You will be amazed.....trust me...No blurries..and REALLY, really good crisp textures. My friend down the street now owes me a dinner...lolGet back to me on that...Mitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mitch- great report! Thanks. Now I'll up the ante. Have you considered adding 2 more 24" monitors, all three placed side by side in a slight arc, displaying views LFwd,Fwd,RFwd to produce a synched 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

January, how about a pic of the setup? Is it one video card and that splitter 2 go thing?JimCYWG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Mike a tip...in FSX, turn down your Global Textures slider to>MID or MEDUIM. Put auto-gen at Normal to Dense.>>Then go out for a VFR flight at 2200 to 3500 feet. You will be>amazed.....trust me...>>No blurries..and REALLY, really good crisp textures. My friend>down the street now owes me a dinner...lol>>Get back to me on that...>Even though I have experimented before, I figured it would be no permanent loss to try these settings.:7 Usually I'm full global, and no auto-gen for FSX. My sim flying is usually over city scapes near the foothills of swiftly rising mountain terrain; as well as mountain flying itself.Well.................I didn't like it. I still think autogen subdivisions look phony in FSX and destroy the look of photo like city scape textures. And, unless you have hundreds of thousands of trees, not even the mountains look that great with dense autogen, unless you're at very low altitudes.In the end, I dump frame rates from the high 20's, to mid teens when throwing FSX autogen at dense. I'd just as soon, do without it! With FS9, it's just kind of mandatory, as the textures and resolution are quite different. I do use autogen and GE Pro for FS9.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jim- Wish I could post pics- for some weird reason I cannot, even though text posts are OK like this one. AVSIM doesn't know why- I have a suspicion it may be the way MY PICTURES stores multi mon screenies. (shots are JPeg- well below 150KB limit for AVSIM)I can send 'em by Email and Jim Cooper recently posted one I had sent him. Search FSX/Hardware Discussion for topic "Kneeboard Brightness". On Aug 13 there is a screenie Jim put up of my DreamFleet Baron which pretty much shows the triple view/triple mon setup.There is no TripleHead2Go- simply 3 videocards to drive 3 monitors.My system is a near museum piece- AMD XP2200 1.8GHz with an AGP dual head GeForceFx5200 card and a same type PCI card. As Bugs Bunny says- Th-th-that's all folks! Pretty simple.FS9 settings are mid range and I get comfortable/very stable FPS.This arrangement allows you to display a true 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yup, high res is the way to go for FS9....i'm running FS9 at 2560x1600 on the apple 30" cinema display, with instruments on a 23" apple, 1920x1200...man, it's so big i actually get motion sick sometimes...the instruments in the VC are almost live size at this res..-feng

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Larry,Actually the hot tip is the **medium Global Texture setting**. It seems that at 512, most vid cards can handle the update to the screen in real time and therefore dispense with the blurries.My friend is now ecstatic in that he can whip around VFR and IFR commercial and have subdivisions, houses, trees, that LOOK like it.Cheers,Mitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alex...that sounds like a plan...EXCEPT..for the desk-top real estate. I have one 24", ROTFLMBO...and it barely fits..lol.You go guy! You must be having a blast with that setup. :)Mitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Actually the hot tip is the **medium Global Texture setting**. It seems that at 512, most vid cards can handle the update to the screen in real time and therefore dispense with the blurries."Yes, there is no doubt that reducing the TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD value to 512 or even 256 produces better performance..... but, I just can't do it!! I guess, having seen the results with a value of 1024, I can't persuade myself to settle for less ;) I know there has to be a trade off in terms of a drop in the numbers, but what the heck. If you've gone to the trouble and expense of a)purchasing a superb widescreen monitor and :( shelling out for a dedicated pair of specs to help those aging eyes see everything pin sharp on said superlative monitor, then a Global texture resolution setting of less than 'Very high' just ain't an option...LOL!Sorry!Cheers,Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>"Actually the hot tip is the **medium Global Texture>setting**. It seems that at 512, most vid cards can handle the>update to the screen in real time and therefore dispense with>the blurries.">>Yes, there is no doubt that reducing the>TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD value to 512 or even 256 produces>better performance..... but, I just can't do it!! I guess,>having seen the results with a value of 1024, I can't persuade>myself to settle for less ;) I know there has to be a trade>off in terms of a drop in the numbers, but what the heck. >>If you've gone to the trouble and expense of>a)purchasing a superb widescreen monitor and :(>shelling out for a dedicated pair of specs to help those aging>eyes see everything pin sharp on said superlative monitor,>then a Global texture resolution setting of less than>'Very high' just ain't an option...LOL!>>Sorry!>>Cheers,>Mike--------------------------------------------LOL! :)Actually Mike,----I didn't really see a major diff on the visual and actual texture at 1024 over 512. What happened though was that they were coming in **razor sharp** at full motion...and THAT produced more gratification and sense of realism, than blurried at the higher setting.;)But..this is something my bud has to worry about, or not. FS9 doesn't seem to suffer that problem of ground textures blurred to death. At mid on the Global...he no longer has the blurriness.. :) In the poor vernacular---"They be done..." Mitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mitch- Hope I didn't leave the impression that I have 3 Samsung 24s. I'm still working on 7 year old 19" CRTs !! That's all old age pensioners can afford. What's kind of interesting though, is that the wide 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to build a system that has 3 Samsung 245BW 24inch monitors in a system like: "This arrangement allows you to display a true 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again Mitch- EUREKA ! I've been pondering why we BOTH see such spectacular imaging- you with a single 24" monitor at 1920 x 1200 res and me with triple mons at only 1024x768 in a 48" pic.Then, while on a misty morning seaside walk, it hit me! Couldn't wait to get back to my trusty calculator!Single mon - 1920 x 1200 = 2,304,000 pixelsTriple mon - 3 x 1024 x 768= 2,359,296 pixelsThe image pixel count is the same for both setups!!! (with bezel compensation mine is effectively a single image) Is 2,000,000+ pixels some kind of magic number?It seems that a high enough number of pixels creates a new and remarkably real level of perception.Any neuro/vision professionals out there care to comment?Now I REALLY wonder what triple 24" Samsungs might achieve.Alex Reid CYYJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jerry- My tech knowledge is pretty limited- perhaps Jim Cooper could comment on System/horsepower & hardware to drive 3- 24" mons at high res.I would expect that recent processors and video cards could do it nicely.My old AMD 1.8 GHz pushes out 2.3 million pixels in a very viewable 3 mon display. For high res/triple mons, you need a system perhaps three times as powerful- I think well within the capabilities of current hardware. The limiting factor is likely money!!There's nothing magical about triple monitors- quite common now in business /publishing where multiple sources of data/text are being viewed & worked together.Alex Reid CYYJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lordy...I think that you would need a divorce lawyer--and FAST!ROTFLMBO!~Alex, I read your post about 'combined' pixels, but after considering, I don't think it 'compiles' the same scene density.Let me explain---if you have on either one, or any given amount of monitors---a sustained pixel count---it will be the SPACE, or how many pixels (DENSITY)are grouped together in any GIVEN SQUARE INCH.What I see---and how much 'information' ----live pixels contributing to what is actually seen---will be always greater on my ONE monitor than your ONE monitor count for count. I will have more of a 'viewed' scene on any one monitor than you have as yours is displaying 1024x768.If I were to put 3 Samsung 245BW's in the same view field as you have, I would have that much MORE of the virtual world displayed than you presently see.BUT....BUT...in the 'realism' count---YOU WIN! You can merely look left, right, straight ahead---and it would be MUCH MORE NATURAL, than my ONE frontal view set-up, where I have to still press a button to CHANGE my view left, or right, etc.If I had the money--and/or desk space---and could truly afford that setup---I'd certainly go your way of things!So, a higher resolution---is still that---no matter how many monitors you have. It doesn't (multi monitors)'combine' the pixel count to increase the resolution as to be equal to that of ONE monitor displayed at any higher resolution.What you have...is MORE REALISM of body movement and human perception, rather than more 'world' being displayed on each, or one.You ALSO have 'arrived'---but by another path. No matter how, though---you have increased your level of realism---to the stratosphere. Enjoy every moment, and flight!!!!Mitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mitch- First class analysis. I think what we are both saying is that believability hinges on sufficient detail (or pixels) being available- whether in single or multi mon configs. Topic closed!Alex Reid CYYJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jerry...jeez...just the three 245BW's alone would run you with tax near $1,800.00 !!!!!Trust me...having one, and flicking a button for the left and right view still gives ya a thrill---especially with all the eye-candy one sees on a 245BW at 1920x1200.:)Mitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I could say that I finally have all of this nailed down, but I'm NOT sure. I ONLY want three monitors (of any size) if they can give me THREE differant views on three differant monitors. I do not want to see ONE view split between three monitors. Do I understand that to Hhave three differant views that I have to have more than one computer in a network and use that WIDE VIEW program? jerrycwo4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jerry- NO, you do NOT need networked multiprocessors to have 3 DIFFERENT views on 3 monitors. (Views LFwd,Fwd,RFwd). You do need 3 video cards on your (single) processor- perhaps only two if one of them can drive two monitors. Then with Control Panel/Display/Settings- activate them so that the "desktop" spreads across all 3 mons- so you can then drag the mouse cursor straight across all 3, from extreme left to far right as if it was a single monitor. Setting up FS with multi views is not difficult & has been covered a fair bit in recent months- do an (advanced)search of the forums for Author "january". You should find what you need there, including synchronizing the 3 horizons.Regards Alex Reid CYYJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go. 1 computer, 1 AGP card, 1 PCI, 4 monitors. The top three are about 50 some inches wide as I remember. 1440x900 I think for the top three. Monitors were about $150 each. Paid maybe $10=15 for the wood, but if you are still flying from a desktop, you wont need wood.24"? ha, not ever again.http://www.eecherrors.homestead.com/pit17.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this