Resolutions

[Dan Morera]

Just out of curiosity what resolution are you using on monitor and what video card do you guys have? I just want to benchmark what out there, I'm buying a GeForce 7950GT and it turns out that my monitor's max resolution is 1280x1024 pixels (or I think it is) so I want to see if I need to start saving for a new monitor (hopefully not wife about to kill me )
Is higher always better?


Thanks
Dan

[Nick N]

Just out of curiosity what resolution are you using on monitor and what video card do you guys have? I just want to benchmark what out there, I'm buying a GeForce 7950GT and it turns out that my monitor's max resolution is 1280x1024 pixels (or I think it is) so I want to see if I need to start saving for a new monitor (hopefully not wife about to kill me )Is higher always better?


Thanks
Dan

I run 1920x1200 wide screen LCD


FS9 is best run, in my opinion, at 1600x1200 or in that range. 1280x1024 is not a bad resolution in FS9 but if you went out and bought a 8800GTS 640 it would be a waste of the card because it wants to see much higher resolutions to warm up the core.


A 256 7950 will probably do best at 1280x1024. You need a 512mb video frame buffer to really run the higher resolutions smooth. There is also the fact that if the video card is slower and has 512 it would probably be better on performance to run 1280x1024 however in the case of a 7950 you are in the range of bumping it up.

Some smaller, less expensive, wide screen LCDs run a native 1600x1020 which is good.

If you are use to a CRT and have never owned LCD it may take a bit of getting use to. Going from a shiny glass screen to a flat one has a bit of a psychological effect, and, many cheap LCDs do not have very good contrast and brightness which means you have to tweak them in the drivers where with CRT that was not necessary. There is a bit of a transition everyone goes through moving from CRT to LCD.

Sony made FP units a few years back with a shiny gloss screen which looked like a picture tube and had an amazing brightness to it. I still have it and I do not know if they make them anymore.

The only reason I moved from that unit to the wide screen I use today was the resolution. The Sony was a 1280x1024 unit. The image was amazing and because of the screen technology it looked like a CRT.

The only thing I miss about CRT is that gloss screen. Everything else is far superior.

To answer your question, yes, if the hardware will run the higher resolution and you have a monitor that has NATIVE support for that resolution, the image quality in FS9 will increase simply because the software will sharpen those fine details. The expereince starts to take on the look of a picture instead of a cartoon.

Some full size 1920x1200

[jimcooper1]

Start Saving!!

The 7950GT is a superb card and, if required,  it will drive 2 x 2560x1600 monitors (providing your CPU can keep up!!).  I've used a 7950GX2 to drive 4 ouputs...3 projectors through a TH2Go at 3072x768 and the 4th through a 30" monitor  (2560x1600).  The 7950GT will easily run 2 x 24"W monitors at 1920x1200 each.

Regards

Jim

[Nick N]

Jim's our local monitor/resolution expert

Hes running a very nice multi-monitor/projection setup and knows what he is talking about


FS9 is much better looking at higher resolution

but I would caution about the memory on the card. Higher resolutions need a larger video memory. It does make a difference in performance so the 7950 512 would do you very well on a really nice high res monitor.

[jimcooper1]

With that GPU you'd be wise to go for 512MB VRAM otherwise you're just throttling it's potential.  However, your system should be balanced...remember FS is a CPU intensive piece of software..simply slapping a large GPU will not help performance if your CPU, FSB and RAM can't process the pixels fast enough!

Regards

Jim

[Dan Morera]

Yeah, it's on going thing, by them I'm done (are we ever) I'll would have spent more than NASA in computer parts  ;D

[Nick N]

Hes running a Pentium D 3.0 so he is a bit restricted in that sense and only has 1GB of memory which he will be increasing to 2.


Given the nature of the processor and his budget, the 7950 512 will be a bit much for the CPU bus but not too over the top. It will also compensate a bit with the GHz rating. Given he does not wish to upgrade for a while and he is not a 'gamer' by definiton I considered the 7950 512 the best choice for his needs.

If he bumps up the monitor with that card he will see an awesome nice improvement over what he has been running (*cOuGh* x300 )

[a1]

I run my screen at 800x600 x32. Can't run it any higher my eyesight is really bad. My card is at my sig.

[Dan Morera]

Actually ram is going to be 3gb. My current 2 512's and 2 (1gbs).

.....nice improvement over what he has been running (*cOuGh* x300 )

Hey don't make fun of the newbie  

<- (pokes Nick N with a stick)

[jimcooper1]

Can't run it any higher my eyesight is really bad.

I'm sorry to hear that...If you win the lottery get a Dell 30" and run it at 1280x800 instead of 2560x1600 it will look superb!


Jim

[Nick N]

2560x1600 it will look superb!


Jim

that's really the res of prime choice


most cheaper LCD monitors do not have that native ability but you can get CRTs cheap now that do

[richardd43]

Speaking of monitors, what exactly is "dual link DVI"? My monitor and GPU both brag about having it.

[Nick N]

Speaking of monitors, what exactly is "dual link DVI"? My monitor and GPU both brag about having it.

You have to have the correct data cable designed for dual link, which should have come with the unit.

There is DVI-D single link and DVI-D dual link

There is also DVI-I single link and DVI-I dual link

The transmission protocol is TMDS, or, Transition Minimized Differential Signaling.

Single link runs off of a 166Mhz transmission packet amp (actually 165.75 to .90) where dual runs two of them side by side. The dual transmission increases the signal and therefore the resolution ability.

DVI single link typically runs lower resolution where DVI dual link displays the higher resolutions upwards of 2048+


When using high res you should be using the correct cable. Many people make a huge mistake and think that a cable is a cable... it must be designed and rated for that purpose.

Modern units incorporate that into the unit as one plug. There are some older ones that have 2 inputs. The important thing is the cable is rated for the resolution and protocol. Sometimes monitors do not come with cables and/or over time a cable gets swapped out and its the wrong one.

[Akula.]

I'm looking for a big monitor too. Problem is, when it comes to big monitors, I'm not having anything less than 27". Which means that I'm going to have to get a job before I even think about replacing my 22"  :D

All my friends say its not healthy for a 15 year old to be spending that much money on a computer, let alone a monitor, but then again they've never seen a game like Half Life 2 running at 2560x1600.

I'm going to go look for a job now  ;D

[Sanjuro]

I have an LG monitor that does 1680x1050.  My only reason for not going higher was my own purely conservative estimation of how many months (years?) I could really run games at max settings on a 1980x1200 monitor.  I'm not doing SLI or anything so I figure, with Crysis on the verge of coming out...not very long.