Hey guys, what's the difference between analogue and digital when it comes to TH2GO/DH2GO? There is a quite a difference in money too. Would I notice the difference?
Printable View
Hey guys, what's the difference between analogue and digital when it comes to TH2GO/DH2GO? There is a quite a difference in money too. Would I notice the difference?
Hi Drew,
the difference is simple.
If you are using LCD monitors, the digital edition can literally "remove" the plastic separating the monitors, so that you don't actually loose any image on the displays. Actually in essence some monitors have some of the screen behind the plastic.
By manipulating the image with the digital edition, you can stop the amount of screen loss because of this.
Trev
Hey thanks Trevor, I was thinking of using 3 monitors for instruments (maybe 2 17 inch and 1 19 inch in the middle) and maybe an lcd for the 19 inch. I have a core 2 duo E6600 with max RAM 4 gig and a gainward gold edition nvidia 512mb 8800gt with dual output. For 3 monitors mentioned above connected on one output with a DH2GO and a splitter for F/O pus a projector connected to the other DVI output would the sim run reasonably smooth you think? From your experience?
Hmmmmm, that's an interesting point you make.
I actually have the opposite problem - pics on the 3 monitor view seem to "overlap", which looks a little odd during takeoff and landing.
I've been so busy setting up the new PC, that I haven't had time to deal with it, but you made me think that maybe I can fix this either via matrox software or nvidia's manager??
Hello Drewsta,
I just set up a similar sim ( 3 monitors on TH2G plus 2 monitors on second card) on a new core 2 duo E8500 (3.13Ghz), 4 GB ram, two 8800GT 512MB cards.
FS2004 runs great and fast, FSX is a major disappointment though.
In fact, after upgrading my sim from a Core 2 Duo E6400 2.13 GHz, 2 GB ram, 256 MB nVidia Geforce 7300LE plus 256 MB BFG Geforce 6200OC, I see little or no difference in FSX performance!! That really sucks, but fortunately FSX wasn't the only reason I upgraded.
FSX can choke the most expensive machines out there. It probably will for years to come.Quote:
Originally Posted by jytte
Hi Drewsta,
The system you're quoting will run FSX in that config but as Brad says, don't expect great performance. Also if you're using the Matrox to run separate panels then the analogue version will do fine as you don't need the bezel management function of the digital.
I run both FS9 & FSX on a Quad 6600 & 4Mb RAM and IMHO unless you really need some of the addons that FSX offer (and some are really great) you can get top performance using FS9 and quality addon scenery. You'll get max frame rates and no stress. FSX is still very Tweak intensive. You'll need to give it another 12 months I reckon til all the X48 Motherboards and 45nm chipsets plus DDR3 RAM come down in price.
Jytte's upgrade experience is a typical scenario where a doubling of processor and graphics power yields only a 10% FSX performance boost.
Ken.