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

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

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. :)

[Cruachan 705]

"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

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

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

[january 19]

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

[jagabom 21]

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

[JSkorna 137]

The 2 Go splitters will not handle these resolutions across 3 screens.Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-community-sigbanner.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/

[LAdamson 240]

>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

[january 19]

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

[Guest FengZ]

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

[RobdeVries 28]

"My 19 inch Samsung 931 BF" It sounds almost like an advertisement... ;)Rob "Holland&Holland" de Vries http://fool.exler.ru/sm/fly2.gif"To go up, pull the stick back. To go down, pull the stick back harder"

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

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

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

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

[Cruachan 705]

"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

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

>"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

[january 19]

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