Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: PapaFox on September 01, 2014, 02:09:31 PM
-
I'm trying to run the latest version of Aces High on a 4K TV that is connected to an Nvidia 760 via an HDMI 1.4 cable. I understand the issue of 30 fps until HDMI 2.0 video cards come along. I can run Aces High offline fine at 2560x1600 res (30fps limited), but Aces High fails to successfully load when my desktop is set to 3840x2160 res and Aces High is set to the same resolution. I have no problem running Prepar3d 2.3 on this rig at this resolution. Any suggestions?
-
Can't help with problem but have been considering same setup if Rift doesn't work out. Also have P3d v2.3. Can you see much difference with P3d at 4k vs 1080p?
My only suggestion on problem is to try turning vsynch off in AH
-
In older versions of directx resolutions are capped to 2048x1536. But I don't think its possible that the current AH version still uses DX7.
-
There is nothing in Aces High which should prevent the game from starting at that resolution. We have many players running 5760x1080 resolution (three monitors).
The startup window is just a basic Windows window. What happens when you try to start the game? Please be very detailed and specific.
-
I can confirm Skuzzy's statement. I run the game 5990x1080 on my three monitors, higher than 5760x1080 to correct for the monitor bezels.
-
I'm trying to run the latest version of Aces High on a 4K TV that is connected to an Nvidia 760 via an HDMI 1.4 cable. I understand the issue of 30 fps until HDMI 2.0 video cards come along. I can run Aces High offline fine at 2560x1600 res (30fps limited), but Aces High fails to successfully load when my desktop is set to 3840x2160 res and Aces High is set to the same resolution. I have no problem running Prepar3d 2.3 on this rig at this resolution. Any suggestions?
Have you tried disabling vsync? Maybe the low refresh rate is causing something to go funky.
-
I'm trying to run the latest version of Aces High on a 4K TV that is connected to an Nvidia 760 via an HDMI 1.4 cable. I understand the issue of 30 fps until HDMI 2.0 video cards come along. I can run Aces High offline fine at 2560x1600 res (30fps limited), but Aces High fails to successfully load when my desktop is set to 3840x2160 res and Aces High is set to the same resolution. I have no problem running Prepar3d 2.3 on this rig at this resolution. Any suggestions?
Can you use DisplayPort?
-
What games successfully run at 3840x2160 res where Aces High does not?
-
Terrydew- Yes, 3840x2160 res is everything you would like it to be. Everything is in higher res. I'm only at 30fps until Nvidia 800 series comes out with HDMI 2.0, but I am liking the 4K display all the same. I went with 48" in a TV because I thought 28" or 30" was just too small to take max advantage of the resolution. I mostly use the 4K TV for work. Games and sims are just for fun when there's time.
Mr. Ripley- My Nvidia 760 uses a fairly high version of DirectX in Prepar3d 2.3, and since I can see the high resolution fine in that sim, I believe DirectX is ok on my computer. I tried disabling vsyn but it made no difference. Thx for the suggestion, though.
Skuzzy- I too have been running Aces High fine on this very computer with 3 1920x1200 res monitors running in Nvidia Surround mode. The error I get is a small window with "Aceshigh.exe" at the top and the message "aceshigh.exe has stopped working A problem caused the program to stop working correctly. Windows will close the program and notify you if a solution is available". There's a "close program" button at the bottom. Now that I write these words I am wondering if something left over from my multi-monitor setup is messing things up. I will do a little snooping around the graphics side of things to see what I can discover. Most likely, I will update the graphics card driver so as to start over. When Aces High goes down, I cannot move the mouse, I cannot click on "close program". Instead, I Ctrl-Alt-Del to task manager. Aces High IS NOT shown as an application and I get out of the situation by closing aceshigh.exe in processes.
Warmongo- The TV has no displayport input
Boilerdown- I've only tried Prepar3d 2.3 and Aces High so far. I don't have any games on this computer, just various flavors of flight sims and combat sims.
-
I just installed the latest Nvidia driver and same problem persists. When I start Aces High, I see flashing screen and then I am returned to the Aces High launch window, I hear the Aces High music for about half a second, and then all freezes and goes quiet. Only Crtl-Alt-Del gets me out of the fix. Same message as mentioned in previous post persists.
An observation: My 3 1920x1200 monitors combined together gives me about 6.9 million pixels
My 1 4K TV at 3840x2160 gives me 8.9 million pixels (not one dead either ; )) Does anyone operate Aces High with 8.9 million pixels or more? I bring up the pixel count issue because Aces High is running fine on the TV at 2560x1600 res. Naturally, I want the full resolution, though.
-
Is TV hdmi 2.0 or 1.4. If 2.0 try a displayport or DVI to hdmi adapter made for this. I believe then the card will put out 60 Hz. This is based on my 4K research and not on experience since I haven't taken the plunge yet.
They sell adapters that claim to work for this.
-
Terrydew- All the displayport to HDMI adapters I've found so far display up to 1080p resolution. I think I'm going to have to wait for true HDMI 2.0 video card before I'm in luck. My Sony 4K TV is firmware upgradable to HDMI 2.0, fortunately.
-
I have been interested in a 4k tv display as a monitor for awhile now! My research so far has it that 30fps was the max you could get because of bandwidth, some have worked around it with dual cables and adapters but everything I have read so far has said it wasnt ready for prime time quite yet.
Lack of 4k media was only one of the obstacles,and while 30 fps may be ok for TV it just would cut it when it came to computer gaming. Hopefully soon it will all work together and I'll be getting a 4k at that time,now if the motion blurr can be taken care of we may finally have realistic looking displays,like looking out the window....almost!
:salute
-
Morfiend- I primarily purchased the 4K tv for productivity work. I have to complete a non-fiction book in the next month and have to lay out the chapters on virtual 3x5 cards using a word processor especially developed for writers. A lot of screen real estate is needed for such a project, and a 48" 4K TV is perfect for my needs. I'm extremely productive with the 4K tv and for my application 4K is ready for prime time. That said, I think we'll need to see Nvidia 800 series graphics cards with HDMI 2.0 support before the gamers will want to migrate, but why not use my experience to gain knowledge regarding how suitable 4K will be for Aces High? As soon as a second individual with 4K reports in, we can determine if the 8.9 million pixels is an issue with Aces High at the moment of if there's some specific issue with my setup. We'll have various shortcomings associated with 30 fps play until HDMI 2.0 graphics cards appear, but wouldn't it be nice to know that 4K actually works fairly well for Aces High? There's a tremendous variation in quality of 4K displays at present. Sony's 4K TVs have a noticeable visual advantage in text documents over the inexpensive 30fps max Saiko displays, from what I've gathered after reading internet reviews. Dedicated monitors of 40" or 50" size will be better than the TVs but they'll likely be too pricey for a while.
One of my discoveries so far is that 48" makes for a really terrific size in a 4K TV if you're hooking it up to your computer. I believe that 30" displays will be very clear, but the pixel density will be too high to take full advantage of the higher resolution. So far I'm very happy with the 48" size in this resolution. It's pixel density is higher than my 1920x1200 28" monitor, and I like the pixel density right where it is on the TV. Scenes are very clear on my other sim but the details are not so small that my eyes have trouble taking in the details.
-
Papa,
I agree and I was happy to see this post about the display!
Presently I use a 55" LG 120hz tv to play AH on,I was using a 24" widescreen then got a 47" 3d smart TV but I had some issues with the smart and asked the wife if she would like it for the family room..... :devil She asked what I was going to use and I said I would buy a cheaper unit that should be better for the comp. I neglected to tell her it would be larger,stuff she didnt need to know.... :D
I realize there is a huge difference in some of the 4k units,I've been able to check out a couple and while I never did a side by side,you could tell the cheaper units werent as good.
I hope they can overcome the blurr,thats the only problem I have with my TV,and it's only seen on the icons as I move views other wise it compares well with my "normal" 24" widescreen computer monitor. One thing of note,it would take 6 monitors like my 24 to equal the screen size of the 55,3 across and 2 high so there's no comparison as far as realestate area.
Ideally I'd like an 80in monitor,that would give me close to lifesize,maybe even better and I can sit back about 5 or 6 feet from the monitor so I can see it... ya I cant see inside 3 ft very well.....if at all!
Keep us informed,I might have to send the wife on vacation...... She's not allowed in the mancave!! :noid
:salute
-
Papa,
I agree and I was happy to see this post about the display!
Presently I use a 55" LG 120hz tv to play AH on,I was using a 24" widescreen then got a 47" 3d smart TV but I had some issues with the smart and asked the wife if she would like it for the family room..... :devil She asked what I was going to use and I said I would buy a cheaper unit that should be better for the comp. I neglected to tell her it would be larger,stuff she didnt need to know.... :D
I realize there is a huge difference in some of the 4k units,I've been able to check out a couple and while I never did a side by side,you could tell the cheaper units werent as good.
I hope they can overcome the blurr,thats the only problem I have with my TV,and it's only seen on the icons as I move views other wise it compares well with my "normal" 24" widescreen computer monitor. One thing of note,it would take 6 monitors like my 24 to equal the screen size of the 55,3 across and 2 high so there's no comparison as far as realestate area.
Ideally I'd like an 80in monitor,that would give me close to lifesize,maybe even better and I can sit back about 5 or 6 feet from the monitor so I can see it... ya I cant see inside 3 ft very well.....if at all!
Keep us informed,I might have to send the wife on vacation...... She's not allowed in the mancave!! :noid
:salute
The blur you experience is due to the slow (and probably cheap) panel used in your LG. I would never buy a TV for computer use before verifying through reviews that it's suitable for gaming. Very few TVs are. Also with TV:s you have to be extremely careful when comparing them. Two shops can have a, say, Sony flatscreen TV with matching 6 model numbers, but the last 1 or 2 numbers can mean it's internally a totally different TV even though it looks the same and has the same model branding.
-
The blur you experience is due to the slow (and probably cheap) panel used in your LG. I would never buy a TV for computer use before verifying through reviews that it's suitable for gaming. Very few TVs are. Also with TV:s you have to be extremely careful when comparing them. Two shops can have a, say, Sony flatscreen TV with matching 6 model numbers, but the last 1 or 2 numbers can mean it's internally a totally different TV even though it looks the same and has the same model branding.
While the LG may not be the"best" panel out there it has one of the best response times on any TV,I did my research and have been using a LG for several years!
The only blur I see is on the text of the icons and it's only when I switch views using a hatswitch,with TIR you dont see it!
I have it setup beside my 24 in monitor and have check delay and input lag running AH on both and I cant see any difference and even my samsung comp monitor has a slight blur,tho not as noticable when you change views. I understand most if not all LCD screen have this effect to some degree or another!
YMMV.
:salute
-
While the LG may not be the"best" panel out there it has one of the best response times on any TV,I did my research and have been using a LG for several years!
The only blur I see is on the text of the icons and it's only when I switch views using a hatswitch,with TIR you dont see it!
I have it setup beside my 24 in monitor and have check delay and input lag running AH on both and I cant see any difference and even my samsung comp monitor has a slight blur,tho not as noticable when you change views. I understand most if not all LCD screen have this effect to some degree or another!
YMMV.
:salute
Are you using a 'computer mode' on the TV or if it hasn't got one, disabled all image enhancing features? Those may cause blur and lag also.
-
Morfiend- Your story about the TV swap reminds me of a maneuver a pilot friend of mine did with his wife. He told her he was considering buying a P-51 Mustang. She asked how expensive. He replied "about a million dollars" (this was many years ago). She said, "Ouch". Then he said, I'm also thinking of buying a Stearman Biplane instead. She enquired about the price and he said "$100,000.". She said, "Buy the Stearman", so he did.
Mr. RIPley- You have a good point about monitor vs. TV and monitor is typically the best choice when both are reasonably priced. At the moment, there aren't reasonably priced 4K monitors in the 50" size, and so it makes sense to take a close look at the TVs. Text looks better on a monitor than on a TV, for example, but I'm happy with what I have at the moment and wouldn't trade it in. That said, most gamers won't want to consider the 4K option until graphics cards with HDMI 2.0 ports are released.
-
Morfiend- Your story about the TV swap reminds me of a maneuver a pilot friend of mine did with his wife. He told her he was considering buying a P-51 Mustang. She asked how expensive. He replied "about a million dollars" (this was many years ago). She said, "Ouch". Then he said, I'm also thinking of buying a Stearman Biplane instead. She enquired about the price and he said "$100,000.". She said, "Buy the Stearman", so he did.
Mr. RIPley- You have a good point about monitor vs. TV and monitor is typically the best choice when both are reasonably priced. At the moment, there aren't reasonably priced 4K monitors in the 50" size, and so it makes sense to take a close look at the TVs. Text looks better on a monitor than on a TV, for example, but I'm happy with what I have at the moment and wouldn't trade it in. That said, most gamers won't want to consider the 4K option until graphics cards with HDMI 2.0 ports are released.
:rofl :rofl :rofl
Your friend is a smart man,always give them a choice,just be sure it's the choice you'd make.... :devil
Rip, Yes I run it in computer mode and have a DVI input setup,I could go HDMI but I dont use the speakers so I dont need the sound.
As I said I have done a side by side test,granted the computers were slightly different and so were the vidcards but I could see no noticeable difference between the 2 screens. I can run the 24 at 1920x1200 and the 55 is limited to 1920x1080 but the response time is actually better on the 55. Well according to the specs it is and as I said I cant see a difference except for the size. Maybe someone with better vision than mine may see things differently,however I have it setup for me not anyone else...... :devil
As soon as you can get 60FPS or better out of a 4k display I will be "shopping" around and I'm afraid I'll have to send the wife to an island down south so I can sneak it into the house.... Do you think she'd notice if I change the 42" screen I have in the bedroom for the 55???? :devil
:salute
-
Papafox this is a sample of what I was referring to. It says it supports 2.0 but would only do you any good if your tv was hdmi 2.0. This I think also assumes your card has the latest displayport?
http://www.amazon.com/Belkin-Displayport-Adapter-Black-Supports/dp/B00COEBCXY
-
A thread I found on HDMI 2.0 on the GTX 900 series: https://devtalk.nvidia.com/default/topic/776251/linux/343-22-gtx-970-980-support-hdmi-2-0- . Although nowhere in the documentation included with my 980, nor on the box, nor anywhere else official that I can find does it indicate that HDMI 2.0 is a feature of this video card, the last post in that thread from sandipt seems to indicate they think its a bug that HDMI 2.0 isn't working in the latest drivers.
-
So my Nvidia 970 arrived today and I slammed it into the computer and cranked up Aces High. Guess what, everything works great this time. I am using the same HDMI cable I used before but the 2.0 specs in the Nvidia 970 allows my Sony 48" 4K TV to work great in Aces High now. I have terrain distance set on max, anti-aliasing set on max (I don't need it there but I was curious) and I'm at 59-60 fps solid. I will have to fly more to check for ghosting or blur, but so far the picture strikes me as excellent. Very pleased at the moment.
I believe Aces High or my old Nvidia 760 weren't happy with the slower 30fps refresh rate. Once the Nvidia 970 and HDMI 2.0 arrived. all was good.
The great thing about 3840x2160 res on a TV is that you can pick out the details of cons way out and better judge what they are doing.
-
:)
So a 970 is a lot better than a 680?.
-
<snip>
I believe Aces High or my old Nvidia 760 weren't happy with the slower 30fps refresh rate. Once the Nvidia 970 and HDMI 2.0 arrived. all was good.
<snip>
Aces High has no idea what refresh rate is. That is all managed by the video card and its driver.
If it is working with the new card, it simply means the old card, or its driver, had a problem.
-
:)
So a 970 is a lot better than a 680?.
When you reach 3840x2160 resolution, HDMI 2.0 is the only reasonable way you want to connect your display if you want more than 30fps, and HDMI 2.0 was not available on Nvidia cards until the 900 series cards made their debute. I see a substantial difference between my Nvidia 760 and the Nvidia 970. I see no advantage with the Nvidia 980 because everything can be maxed out with the 970 at full 3840x2160 res. As always, a faster graphics card only makes things better if your CPU can deliver the necessary fps. In my case, performance was restrained by the graphics card, and a better card made an incredible difference.
Personally, I would not hesitate to use the Sony 4K 48" TV as primary monitor for flying Aces High. The greater size and greater resolution makes a noticeable difference.
Skuzzy- I offer this update and the original message as a service to others who will inevitably try using a 4K TV as monitor with Aces High. If someone cannot get Aces High to work at 3840x2160 res, even though some other flight sims work at that res, the answer is simple now: buy a graphics card that support the HDMI 2.0 standard. Hopefully, the reader was careful enough to have purchased a TV with HDMI 2.0 support as well. The Nvidia 970s are selling for a little more than $300 now, anyone who can afford a 4K TV can afford a graphics card to run it properly.
-
When you reach 3840x2160 resolution, HDMI 2.0 is the only reasonable way you want to connect your display if you want more than 30fps, and HDMI 2.0 was not available on Nvidia cards until the 900 series cards made their debute. I see a substantial difference between my Nvidia 760 and the Nvidia 970. I see no advantage with the Nvidia 980 because everything can be maxed out with the 970 at full 3840x2160 res. As always, a faster graphics card only makes things better if your CPU can deliver the necessary fps. In my case, performance was restrained by the graphics card, and a better card made an incredible difference.
Personally, I would not hesitate to use the Sony 4K 48" TV as primary monitor for flying Aces High. The greater size and greater resolution makes a noticeable difference.
Skuzzy- I offer this update and the original message as a service to others who will inevitably try using a 4K TV as monitor with Aces High. If someone cannot get Aces High to work at 3840x2160 res, even though some other flight sims work at that res, the answer is simple now: buy a graphics card that support the HDMI 2.0 standard. Hopefully, the reader was careful enough to have purchased a TV with HDMI 2.0 support as well. The Nvidia 970s are selling for a little more than $300 now, anyone who can afford a 4K TV can afford a graphics card to run it properly.
:aok
Now I have 2 things to ask Santa for..... :devil
:salute
-
I would just like to report that I am running a GTX760 and today plugged it into a 4k 58" TV and have the same issues as PapaFox.
Flashing white screen and AH will not run.
I too might need to look at a bigger card.
-
I would just like to report that I am running a GTX760 and today plugged it into a 4k 58" TV and have the same issues as PapaFox.
Flashing white screen and AH will not run.
I too might need to look at a bigger card.
Did you connect it through the display port? That is the only connection on an NVidia 7 series video card which can support 4K resolutions.
See if this helps: https://developer.nvidia.com/4k-ultra-high-resolution-development
-
No I haven't got an adaptor yet for display port, so was running using HDMI.
Thanks Skuzzy, yes have seen that link :)
I did get it running at a reduced resolution of 2560 x 1600 as did PapaFox, albeit at 30Hz though .. was ok for just today :P
Will pop out and get a Display Port Adaptor in the morning.
-
NVidia clearly states you cannot do UHD with a 6 or 7 series video card without using the Displayport.
Uh, there is no adapter. If your card does not have a display port, then it cannot do UHD. Putting an adapter on an HDMI port so you can plug into the Displayport of the television is not going to work.
The reason they require the Displayport has to do with bandwidth. HDMI does not have the bandwidth to support UDH resolutions.
-
I would just like to report that I am running a GTX760 and today plugged it into a 4k 58" TV and have the same issues as PapaFox.
Flashing white screen and AH will not run.
I too might need to look at a bigger card.
You will need a 500+ dollar graphics card to play any recent game in 4k at playable framerates.
-
NVidia clearly states you cannot do UHD with a 6 or 7 series video card without using the Displayport.
Uh, there is no adapter. If your card does not have a display port, then it cannot do UHD. Putting an adapter on an HDMI port so you can plug into the Displayport of the television is not going to work.
The reason they require the Displayport has to do with bandwidth. HDMI does not have the bandwidth to support UDH resolutions.
GTX760 has a display port but my tv does not :( There is a display port adapter but it reduces the signal back to HDMI 1.4 :(
I read somewhere yesterday that Sony and Samsung have an accessory box that spits out HDMI 2.0 for use with certain older tv's that are only HDMI 1.4
In terms of Display Port TV's only one available is the Panasonic AX800.
:)
-
You will need a 500+ dollar graphics card to play any recent game in 4k at playable framerates.
Yes looking that way .. I think at this stage its still better to stick to 1080 :)
The NVidea 970/980 series have HMDI 2.0, my older 760 has display port but finding a tv with display port is tough.
Its a costly exercise which ever way one turns :(