Author Topic: 30 inch monitors (Read 1865 times)

PapaFox · « **on:** December 13, 2007, 12:25:11 AM »

Is anyone running Aces High on a 30 inch monitor with 2560x1600 resolution? I'm building a computer for a squad member and he's getting a 30" Gateway LCD monitor for his work programs (but boy will it be nice to run AH on it!).

My big question is whether a single Nvidia 8800 GTX or the new G-92-based 8800GTS 512 can deliver 60fps at that 2560x1600 resolution.

Fortunately, the Gateway has a powerful processor that can upscale a 1920x1200 or lower resolution up to the max resolution, so there is a plan B if the single video card can't cut the mustard at max res.
thx,
Papafox

Fulmar · « **Reply #1 on:** December 13, 2007, 06:49:04 AM »

I can't see why he couldn't. Also depends on the processor other specs of the system too. But I imagine budget hasn't constrained these.

Running the high res pack and AF and AA would be the question, see if at that high of a resolution to see what kind of load AH delivers.

Wingnutt · « **Reply #2 on:** December 13, 2007, 12:04:45 PM »

dunno if said "gateway" is worth putting an 8800GTX on, most likley a card half the price would offer the same performance considering the system being the bottleneck..

I run a 7900GTO on an athlon 64X2 6000+ and ive never seen anything under 60 FPS at max res, it always stays at 60 as that is the refresh rate of the monitor. it would probably be well over 100 if it want for that.

AH is more CPU intensive than Graphic card intensive..

a good cpu and ram will net bigger gains than 2 wasting money on a high dollar 8 series Nvidia card.

Krusty · « **Reply #3 on:** December 13, 2007, 12:35:54 PM »

P.S. at THAT resolution you don't need FSAA. There'd be so many pixels in the picture it would almost do the job for you.

When you think about it, FSAA is a way to get around lower resolutions by smoothing them out. Higher resolutions have a smaller pixel size and wouldn't need the smoothing as much.

I'd looove to see that setup, though

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #4 on:** December 13, 2007, 01:23:37 PM »

Hmmmm.
wonder how AH would look running on my 50 inch plasma TV. LOL

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #5 on:** December 13, 2007, 01:27:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Hmmmm.
wonder how AH would look running on my 50 inch plasma TV. LOL

The real question is how would your 50 inch plasma tv look with cockpit bars eternally burned on the screen?

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #6 on:** December 13, 2007, 09:13:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
The real question is how would your 50 inch plasma tv look with cockpit bars eternally burned on the screen?

And that is exactly the reason why I am still only wondering what it would look like.

Im crazy.
Not stupid

Getback · « **Reply #7 on:** December 14, 2007, 11:22:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wingnutt

AH is more CPU intensive than Graphic card intensive..

a good cpu and ram will net bigger gains than 2 wasting money on a high dollar 8 series Nvidia card.

Thank you Wingnutt! I purchased an 8600gt for about 130 bucks instead of 260 to 280 for the 8800. I'm satisfied. Good to have someone who thinks like me. I opted for more processor and memory. Pretty darn happy with the setup. In fact I am just amazed how fast it moves through the web pages and runs AH.

The Fugitive · « **Reply #8 on:** December 14, 2007, 12:18:26 PM »

This is an old picture, DJ229 got a bigger TV to play on a few months ago

Krusty · « **Reply #9 on:** December 14, 2007, 12:27:42 PM »

You wouldn't burn the bars onto a plasma screen, any more than you would on your LCD monitor, would you?

My LCD's got no issues after several years of heavy AH use, I doubt a much higher quality plasma would have a worse result.

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #10 on:** December 14, 2007, 12:58:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
You wouldn't burn the bars onto a plasma screen, any more than you would on your LCD monitor, would you?

My LCD's got no issues after several years of heavy AH use, I doubt a much higher quality plasma would have a worse result.

You would, permanently too.

Krusty · « **Reply #11 on:** December 14, 2007, 03:03:52 PM »

Why? I don't have a plasma TV but it's the latest rage for the most vibrant of colors. If the colors burned into it within a short period of time, there'd be no reason to use it as a TV either, right? I mean, if it's that crappy, what's the big alure of having a plasma TV?

Avaro · « **Reply #12 on:** December 14, 2007, 03:51:12 PM »

I left my computer on downloading a few things overnight and burned lines into my monitor lol...

Krusty · « **Reply #13 on:** December 14, 2007, 06:25:11 PM »

I've left mine online for a while before, also, and after 2 years (just over 2, I think) it's still got no problems at all. It's not even the best. It's got 26ms response time so that's a clue as to how bargain it is.

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #14 on:** December 14, 2007, 07:14:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Why? I don't have a plasma TV but it's the latest rage for the most vibrant of colors. If the colors burned into it within a short period of time, there'd be no reason to use it as a TV either, right? I mean, if it's that crappy, what's the big alure of having a plasma TV?

TV picture contains a constantly changing stream of images where computers typically are stuck with a constant image of some sorts.

Ask yourself if you've ever seen a superior and bright plasma computer monitor? Then ask yourself why..

The main pitfall of plasma is and has been tendency to burn images, high power consumption and a gradually fading brightness.

The new monitors are better than old in every aspect but the problems still exist. LCD works on a totally different principle which is why LCD is used for monitors, not plasma.