Would you recommend me to buy a 21.5 or 24" monitor for FS? Either the Benq G2420HDBL 24", or G2222HDL 21.5". Both are 1920x1080.Now I have a 19", 1440x900.Is 24" too big when having the screen on the desktop? I have a 22" LCD TV now in my small apartement, maybe I will feel my TV becoming smaller if sitting so close to a bigger screen for my computer...I can afford the bigger one, it's just about a 40 euro difference, so the price doesn't matter.

Is 24 too big? Well I have an expensive HP 24" and wish it was a 30" so to answer your question, it's never too big :)Go with the biggest and lowest response time plus highest resolution

Get the biggest (LED) monitor you can afford, and 1920 x 1200 is better than 1920 x 1080. You will not be sorry!Cheers,- jahman.

If the resolution is the same, and all other things being equal, the smaller panel will offer the sharper picture.Bigger is not always better.On a side note, and if possible, look at each panel in person before making a decision. Also, ask over at HardOCP in the "Displays" section of the forums. There is a wealth of information over there.

I have both; an EIZO S2100 (21"), (4:3 S-PVA panel), and NEC 2490WUXI2 ( 16:10 IPS panel, 1920X1200). For multimedia, and other things, the 24" is fantastic.IMO , for FS world, i prefer the 21". I know ,it´s very strange, but, I like it much more.I must say that both monitors are superb in terms of quality. The bad news are that 21" monitors are very expensive ( and very difficult to find) in these days , compared to 24" good quality displays.Regards.Miquel.

If the resolution is the same, and all other things being equal, the smaller panel will offer the sharper picture.Bigger is not always better....

The smaller panel will also make you sit closer to the screen (you may want this or you may not). In VC mode, at same resolution the larger panel will render VC objects larger and closer to the objects' physical size in a real cockpit. This is usually deemed desirable by simmers as less mental effort is required to "imagine" a simmed cockpit as real.Cheers,- jahman.

I've been using a Samsung 24" at 1920x1280. Perfect for simming and makes it easy to have multiple windows open for other apps. Pick up one from a retailer with a good return policy. Try it for a week. If you don't like it, bring it back. You'll probably keep it.

The smaller panel will also make you sit closer to the screen (you may want this or you may not). In VC mode, at same resolution the larger panel will render VC objects larger and closer to the objects' physical size in a real cockpit. This is usually deemed desirable by simmers as less mental effort is required to "imagine" a simmed cockpit as real.Cheers,- jahman.

Unless somebody is gaming in the living room, the usual distance most people will sit from their panel is 2-4 feet. Sitting closer to a large panel makes the image look "less than ideal". 1920x1080 on anything above 27-32 inches really makes the pixels stand out, IMO.Larger screens may show larger objects, but they also lessen the amount of clarity of said objects. I have a 23" sitting next to my 30" Dell and I much prefer the 23" in terms of clarity and sharpness of picture despite the Dell's color accuracy and great viewing angles (IPS display).I have personally used FSX on a 23", 24", 28", 30", 32", 37", and 52" display, all of which were in my office (I also tested in the living room). Of all of them, the 52" looked the absolute worst, with the image getting better as the screen gets smaller. With regards to 1920x1080, if I had to use a large screen HDTV, I would never go above 37" and I would never get one with a higher refresh rate then 60hz.Some folks love large screen panels for gaming, I just didn't take to it too well. Is a large screen more immersive? Yes, to an extent, but it comes at the cost of visual quality. I wish I could get into it, but I plan to go multi-monitor soon and being surrounded by 3x 37" panels would be a little crazy. lol :)I have considered going the 37" route and just getting used to it, but that is a big purchase for something I did not like too much to begin with. We will see though.

Pixel size is important: That's why I got the 1920 x 1200 26" LCD rather than the 1900 x 1080, and personally I would have gone larger if I could have afforded it, as for some reason pixels are not visible to me to the point of being bothersome.So I see a large single monitor as an alternative to multi-monitor which I deem an unacceptable solution for VC, as I get two sets of vertical bars: The aircraft windscreen edges and the monitor edges. Would drive me nuts, I think! (Anyone care to comment?) So until NULL-edged monitors appear, a single large monitor in VC mode with TrackIR (plus a small monitor to the side for undocked avionics panels) is the way to go for me.Cheers,- jahman.

Pixel size is important: That's why I got the 1920 x 1200 26" LCD rather than the 1900 x 1080, and personally I would have gone larger if I could have afforded it, as for some reason pixels are not visible to me to the point of being bothersome.So I see a large single monitor as an alternative to multi-monitor which I deem an unacceptable solution for VC, as I get two sets of vertical bars: The aircraft windscreen edges and the monitor edges. Would drive me nuts, I think! (Anyone care to comment?) So until NULL-edged monitors appear, a single large monitor in VC mode with TrackIR (plus a small monitor to the side for undocked avionics panels) is the way to go for me.Cheers,- jahman.

jahman- for many years I used triple monitors to display triple views for a 145º Field of View WITHOUT Zooming or panning. And when you adjust the angle of the outer views to accurately compensate for your specific monitor bezels, your eyes and brain are fooled into seeing only ONE very wide pic.I never liked virtual because of the panning and zooming necessary and the resulting panel where the position of every gauge and switch changes as you pan. Give me a fixed size & position for the panel. It's my understanding that the FAA agrees, in that Flight Training Devices using virtual panning will not be approved.Plus lower monitor resolutions with smaller monitors means you can get away with less computer horsepower.Here is a pic on my ancient 1.8 GHz system!Alex Reid Britsh Columbia Mountains up close, beautiful & dangerous! The monitors are a 19" CRT and two 17" LCDs providing a 45" wide integrated image! At 26" from my eyes, with the outer mons angled toward me in an arc, the FS world spans my entire peripheral vision!

jahman- for many years I used triple monitors to display triple views for a 145º Field of View WITHOUT Zooming or panning. And when you adjust the angle of the outer views to accurately compensate for your specific monitor bezels, your eyes and brain are fooled into seeing only ONE very wide pic.

Indeed, and your screenie looks very nice! Just wondering, how did you get to hide the bezels of the the CRT and LCDs? Your screenie shows the monitors almost completely edge-to-edge! Fantastic!

I never liked virtual because of the panning and zooming necessary and the resulting panel where the position of every gauge and switch changes as you pan. Give me a fixed size & position for the panel. It's my understanding that the FAA agrees, in that Flight Training Devices using virtual panning will not be approved.

I used to think like you do until I went for VC plus TrackIR: You don't pan or zoom anymore, you just turn your head or move your head forward or back. You can't imagine the feeling when your engine cowl or fuselage nose is blocking your view of the taxiway and you move your head to the side or up and presto! View is restored. You can't do that with your setup, unless you install collimating fresnel lenses or entirely switch your monitors for projectors, plus add a real-life cockpit to sit in to get the windscreen frame. Another "Aha!" moment with VC and TrackIR is when turning off a taxiway onto the runway: You keep your eyes fixed on the runway (as you would in a real cockpit) and you see the entire VC Swivel around you. I was quite taken by the VC experience after this. Again, Track IR is a must for VC to make sense. There is one housekeeping detail to take care of when using VC: Resetting the viewpoint (head position in the VC's 3D space) and freezing panning/zooming momentarily to click on an instrument panel knob/switch: I do this by assigning these two functions to two switches ni the left of my CH Products Yoke.

Plus lower monitor resolutions with smaller monitors means you can get away with less computer horsepower.

Yes, that is a factor as pixel count directly affects frame rate, whether on a large single monitor or smaller multiple monitors.

Here is a pic on my ancient 1.8 GHz system!Alex Reid Britsh Columbia Mountains up close, beautiful & dangerous! The monitors are a 19" CRT and two 17" LCDs providing a 45" wide integrated image! At 26" from my eyes, with the outer mons angled toward me in an arc, the FS world spans my entire peripheral vision!

And that's the drawback of VC: No peripheral vision...Cheers,- jahman.

Indeed, and your screenie looks very nice! Just wondering, how did you get to hide the bezels of the the CRT and LCDs? Your screenie shows the monitors almost completely edge-to-edge! Fantastic!------------------------And that's the drawback of VC: No peripheral vision...Cheers,- jahman.

jahman- a screenshot simply removes the bezels and places the images side by side. However because the outer view angles are shifted, there is always a bit of scenery missing or hidden as in the view out of a car where the windshield posts continuously hide a slice of scenery.Re automatic panning- consider driving a car with no windows - just a panning mini cam on the roof, a wide screen monitor in front of the driver and an auto panner on the driver's cap!(Thanks for the offer of a ride- I'd prefer to walk!!!)Happy New Year to all- Alex Reid

Pixel size is important: That's why I got the 1920 x 1200 26" LCD rather than the 1900 x 1080, and personally I would have gone larger if I could have afforded it, as for some reason pixels are not visible to me to the point of being bothersome.So I see a large single monitor as an alternative to multi-monitor which I deem an unacceptable solution for VC, as I get two sets of vertical bars: The aircraft windscreen edges and the monitor edges. Would drive me nuts, I think! (Anyone care to comment?) So until NULL-edged monitors appear, a single large monitor in VC mode with TrackIR (plus a small monitor to the side for undocked avionics panels) is the way to go for me.Cheers,- jahman.

I am at the oppostie side. On a larger screen, it is almost as if I can't stop noticing pixels. lolWhile a larger screen is definitely more conducive to reality, it doesn't really take the place of multi-monitor due to the peripheral effects of the extra monitors. A single panel, whether small or large, is a lot like flying with blinders on. Since I am heavily into racing sims as well, having extra monitors would help tremendously with regards to situational awareness, sense of speed, and being able to gauge turns better.

I am at the oppostie side. On a larger screen, it is almost as if I can't stop noticing pixels. lolWhile a larger screen is definitely more conducive to reality, it doesn't really take the place of multi-monitor due to the peripheral effects of the extra monitors. A single panel, whether small or large, is a lot like flying with blinders on. Since I am heavily into racing sims as well, having extra monitors would help tremendously with regards to situational awareness, sense of speed, and being able to gauge turns better.

Exactly! The choice is:- Multimonitor: 3x more pixels, horizontal peripheral vision.- Single Monitor: TrackIR automatic head positioing and panning with EZCA for acceleration shakes (turbulence, G-loading).I have used both: While flying an approach, multi-monitor gives me the feeling of sitting in a sim shack with a nice hardware set-up, while single-monitor with TrackIR and EZCA for that elusive "in-plane" feeling.Cheers,- jahman.

As the old saying goes- choose your own poison!!!45º Tunnel Vision OR 146º Normal Vision. (No panning or zooming, just Smooth Landings!)Both pics same location- Duluth R27 @1.0 zoom. If your medical vision test is similar to first pic, farewell to a flying career!Alex Reid