RH- Can't say for sure since I don't have TH2GO- but I expect there is no framerate impact. It displays only what you see on a single monitor- just blown up and spread across either 2 or 3 monitors. So the CPU is only having to compute for a single view. (View Fwd - 45

RH- Can't say for sure since I don't have TH2GO- but I expect there is no framerate impact. It displays only what you see on a single monitor- just blown up and spread across either 2 or 3 monitors. So the CPU is only having to compute for a single view. (View Fwd - 45

AlexI believe you are misunderstanding what TH2go accomplishes - it does not spread the view of one monitor across three. For example, one screen at 1280x1024 resolution, with the corresponding FOV, would still be 1280x1024, same FOV, spread across three screens from what you are describing.While TH2go does several resolutions, for this example, the 1280x1024 goes to 3840x1024, with a corresponding increase in FOV. And yes, there is a minor impact to FPS, as the CPU and GPU have to display more scenery and pixels. There's no free lunch with FS, albeit I would emphasize that the impact, at least at 3804x1024, is minimal.It's important to set the screen resolutions in Windows, and FSX (or FS9) to match.I realize that you don't own a Matrox unit, and no doubt didn't intend to post misinformation. I've noticed in several posts you've cited the TH2go unit as producing a 45 degree FOV. This is simply not true, and I feel it's worthwhile to clarify this for others who might be reading this. And no, I don't work for Matrox. :-)Noel W

Noel- When I refer to Field of View- it is to describe the view(s) being generated by Flight Sim. Each FS view spans 45

Noel- When I refer to Field of View- it is to describe the view(s) being generated by Flight Sim. Each FS view spans 45

Hello Alex,I'm assuming you are using 2D views, but how about a Virtual cockpit view spread across three monitors? In my opinion VC is the most realist flight experience and by looking at third party add on software (i.e. PMDG J41) it's the way of the future. How can you get an expanded FOV in VC? If you open separate VC windows and drag them onto the two other monitors the frame hit is impossible, even with my i7 920 oc'd to 3.6. Also you can not link the view panning function for the monitors using only one PC even with a registered copy of Wideview FS. The only way I see of expanding the field of view in virtual cockpit view is to:1) network three computers together using Wideview FS and have each computer controll one view, with panning all synched thru the Wideview FS software.2) Use triple head2go and spread one VC view (albeit zoomed out) across three monitors or3) buy 1 ATI 5000 series video card using eyefinity or two Nvidia cards linked with SLI and use their latest drivers supporting "surround vision"Do you agree? I don't use any of the above at the moment but any trying to decide which way to go for best overall performance and most realistic appearance.thanks,Jim

Jim:Yes- agreed! As far as I can tell, Virtual is impossible utilizing 3 different views driven by multiple video cards on a single processor. I've spent many hours trying this- no luck.I think the reason is, that Virtual is essentially a single monitor system- and that is why it works so well with TH2GO doing the spreading over three mons.I use 2 ancient nvidia GeForce FX5200 cards (AGP & PCI) - really old stuff but works perfectly- even the drivers are 3 years old!!!!I have a strong preference for 2D panels & popups-. There is NO panning or zooming involved- everything is in exactly the same spot each time you glance at the panel AND the view out the windscreen with 3 mons is always 146

In the case of TH2Go, I believe it displays only View Forward- stretched across the 3 monitors. By Zoomoing out, this 45

Hi AlexHave a look at these screenshots. All are taken at 100% zoom.In this first image from the default C-172, the image reflects FSX displayed on one 1280x1024 screen.In this second image, it's the same airplane, same location, but now on TH2go's three screens at 3840x1024. Notice the increased FOV? And here's another example from an earlier post on this subject. The first photo is looking out the window, again, at 100% zoom. (Different airplane, different location on the runway.)The second photo shows a top down view, of the same airplane, in the same location. Here one can actually measure the FOV. It comes out to ~105 degrees.Hopefully this makes it more clear. Anytime you add more horizontal pixels, you're going to increase the FOV as well, at the same zoom setting. TH2go essentially 'creates' a 3840x1024 single monitor, at least that's how the computer and FSX sees it. You can always have a look at the Matrox site; they have a lot more info, naturally. Note that with 22" monitors at 1650x1050, TH2go makes that 5040x1050. Yet more FOV. That's my next investment...along with more horsepower to run the whole setup!Noel W

Excellent post Noel, I was going to ask someone with triplehead2go or eyefinity to post screen shots from the same vantage point at the same view scale. If you have the time can you post comparison shots showing a VC cockpit view looking forward with some instruments showing? I'm curious as to if the instrument panel looks stretched or hard to read compared to the exterior view.thanksJim V.

Hi AlexHave a look at these screenshots. All are taken at 100% zoom.In this first image from the default C-172, the image reflects FSX displayed on one 1280x1024 screen.In this second image, it's the same airplane, same location, but now on TH2go's three screens at 3840x1024. Notice the increased FOV? And here's another example from an earlier post on this subject. The first photo is looking out the window, again, at 100% zoom. (Different airplane, different location on the runway.)The second photo shows a top down view, of the same airplane, in the same location. Here one can actually measure the FOV. It comes out to ~105 degrees.Hopefully this makes it more clear. Anytime you add more horizontal pixels, you're going to increase the FOV as well, at the same zoom setting. TH2go essentially 'creates' a 3840x1024 single monitor, at least that's how the computer and FSX sees it. You can always have a look at the Matrox site; they have a lot more info, naturally. Note that with 22" monitors at 1650x1050, TH2go makes that 5040x1050. Yet more FOV. That's my next investment...along with more horsepower to run the whole setup!Noel W

Noel- thanks for the pics- great screenshots of KSEA. Yes- setting a wide resolution WILL compute a much wider Field of View as your screenies show. But computing a wide view is NOT the same as displaying a wide view. For that you also need a display system (monitor/s) capable of wide format. Simply specifying wide format will not do the trick UNLESS you also have a wide monitor. (Or multiple monitors each having its own access to a video/GPU output.) A screen shot shows only the computed image and is not necessarily the same as what actually gets displayed on the monitor(s).Unfortunately, TH2GO is not wide format- it takes a 4:3 ratio image and stretches it across three monitors- in the process, it shears off the top and bottom to fit the wide format generated by 3 monitors.Here is your TH2GO pic- It is quite different in horizontal FOV from your screenshot of KSEA- it appears here (in Triple Head) as a conventional 4:3 image with top/bottom reduced to fit the wider format.For comparison, here is a shot of 3 different views LFwd,Fwd,RFwd - a resolution of 3072x768) at Seattle R34- note the very wide FOV- considerably wider than your TH2GO screenie above, even with your resolution set to 3840x1024 but displaying much less horizontally.Compare the location of the tower in both- the FOV in TH2GO above, is same as in my single View Forward. TH gives a very desirable triple wide visual perspective, but only a single wide FS view.Regards Alex Reid

AlexI believe the point made, was that TH2go takes a single monitor's 45 degree FOV, and simply stretches it across three monitors, with no actual increase in FOV. I trust that the illustrations provided help to show that the FOV does indeed increase - heck, Matrox wouldn't be selling any of 'em if that wasn't the case! I have no interest in comparing TH2go to separate 3D views, or WideView, or which technique is superior. FS allows many possibilities for enjoyment - credit to Microsoft and others. But your comments about TH2go are inaccurate - heck, you don't even have one - and others may read what's written and be mislead. That would be a disservice to the community.My apologies to the original poster and other readers for this thread creep.Noel W

AlexI believe the point made, was that TH2go takes a single monitor's 45 degree FOV, and simply stretches it across three monitors, with no actual increase in FOV. I trust that the illustrations provided help to show that the FOV does indeed increase - heck, Matrox wouldn't be selling any of 'em if that wasn't the case! I have no interest in comparing TH2go to separate 3D views, or WideView, or which technique is superior. FS allows many possibilities for enjoyment - credit to Microsoft and others. But your comments about TH2go are inaccurate - heck, you don't even have one - and others may read what's written and be mislead. That would be a disservice to the community.My apologies to the original poster and other readers for this thread creep.Noel W

Noel- compare the far right edge of your TH2Go rightmost view above, with the right edge of my middle (Fwd) view- they are the same. Your 3 TH views have the same 45

AlexSurely you're not comparing this photo from another thread. (??)You realize, that's from FS2004...in a different airplane...from a different location on the runway, right?In any sensible comparison, it's important to compare apples to apples, as they say. I provided that previously, but here it is again.In looking at the single screen image, compared to the TH2go image, do you still believe that the TH2go unit takes that single screen image and stretches it across three screens...no increase in FOV? Heck, I can't see where "...it shears off the top and bottom to fit the wide format generated by 3 monitors."Are you sure you don't suffer from 'tunnel vision'? (Sorry, couldn't resist.)Take it easy, Alex, and let's all enjoy the art of flying, albeit virtually.Noel W

AlexSurely you're not comparing this photo from another thread. (??)You realize, that's from FS2004...in a different airplane...from a different location on the runway, right?In any sensible comparison, it's important to compare apples to apples, as they say. I provided that previously, but here it is again.In looking at the single screen image, compared to the TH2go image, do you still believe that the TH2go unit takes that single screen image and stretches it across three screens...no increase in FOV? Heck, I can't see where "...it shears off the top and bottom to fit the wide format generated by 3 monitors."Are you sure you don't suffer from 'tunnel vision'? (Sorry, couldn't resist.)Take it easy, Alex, and let's all enjoy the art of flying, albeit virtually.Noel W

Noel- Those last two pics you posted are screenshots of a single view forward. Screenshots have no direct connection with what is actually displayed on the screen- that depends on the specs of the monitor(s) (or the display system in the case of TH2GO). What's needed are photos for comparison.But let's just agree to disagree! An interesting discussion!(Tunnel vision is why it's so important to have a wide field of view- with triple views (146

Those last two pics you posted are screenshots of a single view forward. Screenshots have no direct connection with what is actually displayed on the screen- that depends on the specs of the monitor(s) (or the display system in the case of TH2GO). What's needed are photos for comparison.First off, I've never heard anyone say that "...Screenshots have no direct connection with what is actually displayed on the screen..." I can understand differences in coloring.If I'm following your final reply, you'd concede that my previous screenshots do indeed show an increased FOV - single versus three screens, but, you don't believe that's an actual representation of what's displayed on the monitors. Connecting all of the dots, you'd still stick by the assertion that the TH2go takes the ~45 forward view, and simply spreads that single view across three screens with no increase in FOV. The only way TH2go users actually increase their FOV, is by zooming out, at the expense of distortion.You want photos for comparison. No problem, "seeing is believing"...and we can finally put this to rest.Here's the first screenshot, using one screen. Here's that 45 degrees FOV you are talking about. All images are at 100% zoom.And here's a screenshot, same airplane, location, zoom etc., with TH2go. One can't possibly help but notice the increased FOV...but......since a screenshot could be deceptive, and an actual photo of the screens themselves in needed to convince you....Here's an actual photo taken just after the above screenshot.Nuff said?Noel W

Noel- Excellent pics- thanks for posting! What Airport & Rwy?Alex Reid

If you have the time can you post comparison shots showing a VC cockpit view looking forward with some instruments showing? I'm curious as to if the instrument panel looks stretched or hard to read compared to the exterior view.thanksJim V.

Hi JimSorry for the delayed response. Here's a screenshot of the PMDG JS4100 on TH2go. Most VC users use TrackIR, so you can 'move in' to see the instruments better as needed. This PMDG aircraft's VC is a work of art, and stays sharp even at close range.Here's what it actually looks like on my screens. Note that my side screens are angled back, as I normally use them for outside scenery only, and the wrap around of the screens looks correct...in fact, it mimicks the flight deck windows of an airplane like an MD-80. Some users have all three screens flat, in the same plane (not "airplane"). The photo is also taken with a wide angle lens.Here's an alternate method using 2 3D windows - the 'main' FSX window, with the main VC view and panel, is spread across the DH2go screens below (2880x900), and an extra 3D outside view is spread across the TH2go screens. This opens up the outside viewing, and also allows the lower screen(s) real estate to be dedicated to just the panel views. TrackIR is keyed to the lower screen, so a person can still 'look around' the flight deck.Another advantage for me, is that my lower screens are touch screens, allowing me to manipulate various controls without the mouse.There is a framerate hit from adding the second 3D window. It's flyable, but not nearly as smooth as a single 3D VC window (or airplanes with a collection of 2D panels). I've even created a third 3D window and focused the view on the overhead panel, and moved it to an upper screen I have, which completes the flightdeck. "Slideshow" may be a bit strong, but "stuttering" would surely describe the performance. I didn't enjoy flying it.Note that my computer is long in the tooth, and ripe for upgrade. (C2D [email protected] / 8800GTX / GT9600 / 4Gb / Vista64)I prefer airplanes with 2D panels for my setup. I'm able to see everything I need, and the outside world is unobstructed. But more and more addons are only VC, so I've found ways to make them work on my system. Once I upgrade, I think the 2 3D window setup will work OK.I'm not trying sell anyone on using DH2go...just providing food for thought and another way to skin the cat. FSX is really quite flexible, allowing us to come up with so many ways to view the panels and the outside world. Then throw in all the excellent addons with detailed VC and 2D panels, TrackIR, TH2go, touch screens...Good luck on your multi monitor quest. It is so worth it.Noel W