PDA

View Full Version : Monitor size; max supported resolution


GoNavy
01-18-2008, 05:20 PM
Does anyone know the maximum supported resolution of G4, or where to find that information?

I presume this dictates the "upper limit" for a display resolution, without sacrificing clarity or detail.

Thanks, GoNavy.

opjose
01-18-2008, 05:40 PM
Some guys here are pushing it well beyond 2048x2048.

Remember though that the limit is really what your video card and cpu can handle.

The higher the resolution the more work your video card has to perform, the faster it should be to keep up.

Even given a large plasma display, anything beyond 1280 is wasted.

LonnieO
01-18-2008, 05:51 PM
Some guys here are pushing it well beyond 2048x2048.

Remember though that the limit is really what your video card and cpu can handle.

The higher the resolution the more work your video card has to perform, the faster it should be to keep up.

Even given a large plasma display, anything beyond 1280 is wasted.

OPjose

In another thread I have been working on a vid card heat problem you have responded there as well .
I'm running 1920X1200 highest 32 bit this was the native for the monitor could this cause excessive heat?
Please explain why anything beyond 1280 is wasted

GoNavy
01-18-2008, 06:00 PM
Opjose:

I see a 24inch wide screen is typically 1920 x 1200 or so resolution, probably as big and heavy (and expensive) as I might want.

Do you know the maximum supported resolution of G4?

Have you seen G4 when it is run at 2048 x 2048? How did it look and perform?

I ran it on a 15 inch lcd at 1024 x 768. Then I ran it at that same resolution on a 19inch. Then I ran the 19 at 1280 x 1024. There was a noticeable improvement in picture clarity.

I also compared frame rates. At the lower resolution, a particular scene was running at 67 fps. Without changin the scene, running the higher resolution dropped the frame rate to 62 fps.

1024 x 768 = 786,432 total pixels.

1280 x 1024 = 1,310,720 pixels, a 1.67 increase.

The frame rate change was (62 - 67), 1.08.

I wonder how far one can go, with dropping frame rates, until the video card can't keep up with the demand.

2048 x 2048 = 4,194,304, a 5.34 increase over the 1024 x 768., i.e., the equivalent of spreading the image over five 15 inch displays!

Adam Taylor
01-18-2008, 06:44 PM
As with most any 3D application, the only limit that is really present is what your graphics hardware can support. If you have an amazing CPU with an amazing graphics card hooked up to an amazing monitor, RealFlight should be able to keep up just fine, without any upper bound of its own.

GoNavy
01-18-2008, 07:30 PM
As with most any 3D application, the only limit that is really present is what your graphics hardware can support. If you have an amazing CPU with an amazing graphics card hooked up to an amazing monitor, RealFlight should be able to keep up just fine, without any upper bound of its own.

Wow, thank you Adam. That is amazing; no loss of sharpness. It's only a question of the capabilities of the cpu including the graphics card-- the ability to supply the extra +'s and -s demanded by the larger display.

Query: At what frame rate will the user notice problems such as stalling or jerky display? I see one can spend significant sums on higher end graphics cards. Nonetheless, if G4 has limitless resolution support, that might be money well spent.

When you refer to an amazing monitor, what do you mean? I am aware of qualities such as gray to gray response time, brightness, and contrast ratio, and how these may affect the display experience.

Too bad my local vendors are not inclined to allow me to temporarily load G4 on a display cpu and try out a big display.

opjose
01-18-2008, 09:41 PM
OPjose

In another thread I have been working on a vid card heat problem you have responded there as well .
I'm running 1920X1200 highest 32 bit this was the native for the monitor could this cause excessive heat?
Please explain why anything beyond 1280 is wasted


The GPU may generate a bit more heat at higher rest but the difference would be negligible.

Re: 1280

Most large screen monitors max out at 1280p resolutions.

As you go up from there you will not gain the huge increase in clarity that you would see say going from 800x600 to 1280x1024, etc.

Once you are in the 1280p resolution range, if you have "left over" GPU power available ( as in an SLI configuration ) instead of pushing added resolution a better use would be to let the GPU's deal with anti-aliasing and video effects, bloom, particles, etc.

These would have a more dramatic increase in what you perceive as picture fidelity etc....

Remember that the amount of GPU power required as you increase the resolution is NOT linear, it's not asymptotic either, but it does ramp up at a high rate.

For example: at 800x600x32 bits you are roughly dealing with 13 megabits in a single from in the frame buffer alone.

At 1280x1024x32 you are dealing with 40 some megabits per frame times the number of frames per second.

You get the picture as you go beyond that, heh...

Multiply that by the number of frames ahead you render ( typically 2 to 3 ) and then the a median target frame rate, and it's a LOT of data being moved around.

Even if the GPU is doing all the rendering work, something still has to push the bits into the video frame buffer so the throughput require ramps up VERY quickly as you increase the resolution... and you start running into all sorts of bottlenecks...

So let's say the 1280x1024x32 with 4Q anti-aliasing looks almost as good as 1600x1280x32 without it... since the 4Q can be handled by the GPU hardware whereas other values decrease video performance as some of the load must then be handled by the main processor ( BTW: The Nvidia "Q" settings are the most efficient as the hardware handles them... ), then why bother stepping up to 1600 only to realize a performance hit?

GoNavy
01-18-2008, 11:33 PM
Opjose: Well you lost me somewhere along there, but....
if the amount of work to be done is the product of the number of pixels of screen resolution times 32, that is a linear function, IMHO.

It is not linear based on screen diaganol measurement.

Not sure what you mean by "most large screen monitors max out at 1280p resolutions".

Best buy advertises a 30 inch wide screen lcd as 2560 x 1600.

Interesting; a fellow claims he runs G4 on a 50 inch plasma: http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_6924743/anchors_6930643/mpage_1/key_/anchor/tm.htm#6930643

LonnieO
01-18-2008, 11:43 PM
Thanks for the in depth reply I think I follow it but I need to get my pencil and calculator out and do some math for it to fully make it into this old brain.

As for the question of max res it is what it is set at 1920 X 1200 highest 32 bit and that is also the recommended monitor native resolution. and the default the 8800 software put on my system .

and I think the added fans have kept the heat down to 157 and running smooth

Thanks everybody for help and explanations

anybody want to buy an isa 8bit card with 128k :D
NO? it was real fast in the day! WAIT! I know reject will buy it :eek:

MartinT
02-02-2008, 05:10 PM
I've got it running at 3840x1024 full screen, and it works beautifully! (that equates to 3 screens of 1280x1024 each :cool: )
Thanks to my MatroxTriplehead2Go.
Really immersing view, I can highly recommend it, also for racing and flying sims.
Regards,
Martin

nonpareil_one
02-05-2008, 02:16 AM
2048x2048??? I'm confused. That's a square screen :D Or, 2 of my monitors stacked one on top of the other...

I use a Sony GDM-FW900, a 24" 16:10 Widescreen CRT (eats LCD image quality for lunch, but it's huge, 92lbs)

http://img1.grafika.cz/grafika/images/FW900.jpg

I run at 2048x1280 windowed or full screen and the sim looks and runs great. I usually run most sims or games at 1920x1200 or 2048x1280. My desktop is 2048x1280x32@85hz. At that screen resolution in 3d games and RF G3.5 and 4 I find it makes anti-aliasing redundant and rarely use it.

My next monitor will be a 30" 2560x1600 :D I am getting tired of moving this beast and will gladly deal with a little motion blur for 80+ pounds of weight savings.

NPO

pilot07
02-05-2008, 10:09 AM
sim looks nice on 32" LCD TV

WeFly4Fun
02-05-2008, 04:52 PM
I am using an Infocus projecter to display my g4 on a 72x72 " screen - this is as close as I can get to actually being at the field.