Hi all

 

I've got about $175 in birthday money (at Amazon.com), and I'm contemplating finally getting a widescreen monitor (or buying an RC airplane).

 

I've currently got a 19", running at 1280x1084 (see signature below for details).

1. I generally understand that the more pixels rendered, the higher the performance hit. But is there a way to translate that into FPS loss and/or increased stutters?

2. Through earlier searches, I think I'd be looking for the best combination of monitor size and response time. Does anyone have any suggestions for what would work well in the $175 range, given the rest of my current set-up?

 

Thanks for your feedback!

 

Kevin Young

 

FSX Acceleration, REX2, UT2, Active Sky Evolution

 

My FSX Setup:

 

E6600 @ O/C to 2.99GHz

FSX running solo on Western Digital 10K RPM Drive

EVGA GEForce GTS450

Abit AB9 PRO

2GB (2 1GB sticks) CORSAIR XMS2 DDR2 800 (PC2 6400)

Creative SoundBlaster Audigy4

Logitech X540 5.1

Windows XPSP3

You don't seem to have a very powerful system Kevin to be honest, so I suspect you may see a performance drop at the higher native res of your new monitor.

 

I recently switched from an old CRT monitor, to a BenQ 120Hz wide screen monitor, and didn't see any loss in performance. But I do have an i7 920 at 4GHz and a GTX 580.

I suspect you are right. What I'm trying to do is quantify the performance hit (is that an art or a science?).

With my current set up, I have frames locked at 30, which I get very consistently after climb out, or if there are few clouds. With heavier clouds, or with lots of other traffic, it can dip down to the mid-to-upper teens, but still mostly smooth. (Maybe from the 10,000RPM HD dedicated to FS, or the Nvidia Inspector settings? Not sure.

I run UT2 at 90% commerical, 5% GA

REX cloud textures limited to 2048 res by Texture Max Load Editor, with cloud layers limited to 5 by ASE.

 

If I could quantify the loss, and potential trade-offs I'd need to make, that would be the best outcome. If it's too much of a guess, and I'd risk FSX running like a slide show, maybe I'll opt for the RC Aircraft. Thanks for your input!

Anyone want to chime in? Thanks.

It's very hard to estimate the performance hit because it depends on a number of factors. You could monitor your GPU usage to see if there's headroom for it to handle more resolution.

What settings do you use in Nvidia Control Panel or Nvidia Inspector? With moderate levels of antialiasing you should be able to run 1080p off a GTS450 no problem

While we're on this topic, I would like to hear from you guys as to what is the main reason for FPS drop when using more screens? I have been playing with Kosts's new tweaks recently and find the difference amazing, however I cant keep the required 30 FPS when in high demand areas such as FSDT KLAX, UT2, UT, PMDG MD11.

 

My system is a 2600k OC 4.8 & gtx590 running 3 X 30in screens in NVsurround. If I use just one 30in screen at 1080 resolution the FPS are lock in solid at 30 but as soon as I run the 3 30in screens thur NV/surround at 6044 X 1080 the FPS drop to around 15 - 20.

 

So my question is... by running 3 screens am I placing more demand on the GPU or CPU? I would think its GPU so can I help the labouring card by throwing another gtx590 in or try OC the current card?

 

 

thanks

IM

AA - Setting is 8xS

AA Transparency Supersampling 2x sparse grid Supersampling

 

Anisotropic filtering setting 16x

(I tried to attach a screenshot, but couldn't figure out how.)

I'll monitor GPU utilization and report back. Thanks.

AA - Setting is 8xS

AA Transparency Supersampling 2x sparse grid Supersampling

 

Anisotropic filtering setting 16x

(I tried to attach a screenshot, but couldn't figure out how.)

I'll monitor GPU utilization and report back. Thanks.

 

GPU utilization (from Inspector) had max of 84%, but hovered between 44-47% on flight from PHL to EWR, with up to 192 AI a/c in the sky. Aircraft shadows are still turned on, as well.