I just setup a new state of the art system but still have my first 20" 4:3 LCD monitor connected to it that has worked flawlessly for almost 8 years. I run it at the native 1600 x1200 resolution which has done well for me in FS9 and FSX, as well as other sims and FPS games. I resisted the widescreen mode, since to get a 16:9 monitor of roughly comparable size, I would have to go to a 25" screen. Also, 1920x1080 is lower resolution when the screen dimensions are taken into consideration, so I've resisted that change.What are the opinions here? Is it worth making the change to 16:9? Is 1080p sufficient resolution for FSX when considerng a 27" widescreen monitor?

Edited March 5, 201214 yr by neil0311

I still love my 20' 4:3 screen and wish I could fine 2 more just like it!

I have four 4x3 screens stretched across to give me a panoramic view of FS9. I'm dreading the day I have to switch. I don't believe FS2004 natively supports the "new" wide monitor format and you have to resize your windows, anyway, otherwise everything looks all stretched out (buildings are low and fat, gauges are oval, not round, etc.) Many people have reported "getting used" to it, but I'm prolonging that displeasure as long as possible.

I have four 4x3 screens stretched across to give me a panoramic view of FS9.

I'm mainly going to use FSX now which supports widescreen, and could switch to the 4:3 for older sims like FS9 and IL2. How do you do the multi-monitor thing? I have additional monitors but assume you need multiple video cards to support it?

No, one card and a dual- or triple-head2go is all that's needed. Although a head2go is almost as expensive these days as a video card. I don't get that...!

So for all of the folks out there using widescreen, is 1920x1080 sufficient, especially at 27" or do I need to shell out the big bucks for 2560 x 1440?

So after scouring the FSX forum, I decided to go with a 16x10 aspect ratio IPS panel. I was tempted to go 27" (2560x1440) and get the Dell U2711 which seems to be one of the best models out there, but when I considered the cost, the potential for a big hit to fps performance, and the size of the panel in a relatively up close configuration, I decided to scale back slightly.I went with the Dell U2412m, which is a 24", edge lit LED that has pretty good reviews, but comes in at 1920x1200 resolution. That way I know I won't be giving up any vertical resolution and will gain some extra field of view horizontally. It will also easily scale to 1080p with letterbox or to 1600x1200 with pillarbox for older games. Best thing was it was less than $350 delivered, so not much wasted if it doesn't work out and needs to get repurposed. Spending almost $1000 for the 27' might have been painful if it didn't work out.

IMHO, 16:10 is a considerably better choice for FS than 16:9. I've tried them both side-by-side, and the added panel height with the 16:10 makes a noticeable difference in screen real estate--especially what you see over the glareshield of the average VC panel.My two 30" 16:10 IPS Dells have almost worn out my smile muscles...