Wideview vs TH2Go

[mickc]

Gents,

I am re-thinking my projector setup, and would like to hear from Wideview users on their experience

I currently have, brand-new in the boxes, 3x Benq MW811ST Projectors, and a Matrox TripleHead Digital Edition.
My original plan was for one mega-PC to run the visuals, using the TH2Go and the 3 Projectors.

I have now ordered 3x Benq W1080ST projectors instead, and I am selling the MW811STs.
The only reason i did this is the upgrade to HD resolution, 1280x1024  vs 1920x1080

I don't think it would be feasible to expect one PC, no matter how high the specs are,  to run a 5760x1080 screen, and expect frames rates that don't look like a poorly animated South Park episode, so i am looking at 3 Scenery PCs with Wideview, each running one projector.

What I am worried about is the continuity of weather, clouds, and traffic from one Wideview screen to another
I have tested Wideview for my passenger window view, and it seems pretty good, but I am wondering what it is like with 2 views that adjoin each other.

Also, does blending the adjacent views with warping software affect the passing of weather/traffic from screen to screen?


Cheers

[blueskydriver]

Why not switch to X-plane 10? No wideview and no th2go, if you go with 3 pc's...

John

[blueskydriver]

Ben,

Are you using OPUS?

[HarryZ]

I don't think it would be feasible to expect one PC, no matter how high the specs are,  to run a 5760x1080 screen, and expect frames rates that don't look like a poorly animated South Park episode, so i am looking at 3 Scenery PCs with Wideview, each running one projector.

I have one computer ( Core i7, 6G RAM, Nvidia 660 GPU which has the Surround feature and does not require TH2G) and it runs FS X very well. It will also work with the TH2G but I'm not sure what the max res would be with the new 314 Nvidia drivers.

Harry

[Jon Boe]

I've been using Wideview and WideTraffic with FSX for several years.  The weather and the AI are synchronized so that is not an issue.  You are correct, while reasonable performance can be gained using a TH2Go and three 1280 x 800 projectors you will be watching a slide show with HD.  Plus if you try to wrap the display using a TH2GO you get a stretched image, not a true perspective.

I am presently running WXGA projectors with Wideview and getting in excess of 50 FPS with sliders right and a lot of high impact weather/traffic/add-on airports.

Jon

[jskibo]

FYI to the OP.

While of course 3 would be better than 1, and you would be set up for XP10 down the road, I currently run 3 1080P plasmas off one PC that's an i5-3570 OC to 4.2GHz, 8GB Ram and a GTX680.  I get 20's on the ground and 70+ at altitude.  Not really a slide show anywhere, so I wouldn't be afraid to start with one and move to three as time and money permit.  You'll be able to fly with one PC fine.

[Maurice]

I'm not sure what the max res would be with the new 314 Nvidia drivers.

Harry

I tried the 314 drivers but the installation failed and I had to go back to the old drivers. Probably something to do with my system though rather than flaky drivers but I wonder if anyone else tried them yet.

Maurice

[XOrionFE]

I've been using Wideview and WideTraffic with FSX for several years.  The weather and the AI are synchronized so that is not an issue.  You are correct, while reasonable performance can be gained using a TH2Go and three 1280 x 800 projectors you will be watching a slide show with HD.  Plus if you try to wrap the display using a TH2GO you get a stretched image, not a true perspective.

I am presently running WXGA projectors with Wideview and getting in excess of 50 FPS with sliders right and a lot of high impact weather/traffic/add-on airports.

Jon

Hello Jon,

On your wideview setup do you run dedicated visuals or does one of your visuals also act as the master?   I am considering buying one more PC so that I can have dedicated visual computers and have a better performing master rather than trying to have a PC doing both roles as I do now.   I think this would also help X-plane as well.      I have never gotten good weather or traffic sync on my wideview setup.   The weather I can have close but only if I choose static weather instead of trying to run Activesky which I prefer.   As for traffic, I many times will get part of a plane on the center with the other half missing on a side monitor.    I use Widetraffic and while it syncs some, it doesnt sync all.   I suspect somehow some FSX traffic is sneaking in on the sides even though I think I have all the FSX traffic sliders to zero.    I also run ultimate traffic on all so that could be the problem.   In other words, I have problems syncing weather and traffic in Wideview but not sure of my settings which may be the culprit.   X-Plane on the other hand is pretty smooth on syncing everything.

Scott

[Jon Boe]

Hi Scott,

I am running a dedicated PC for the FSX Server.  I believe that trying to synch weather using one of the clients as the server will be next to impossible due to the small amount of latency between the two.  Whereas if you us a dedicated server the timing is precise at each of the IG's.

Since the sliders on the server can be set to minimum values you don't need a high powered PC for the function.  I'm using my 6 year old computer that I used initially with the TH2GO.

I am running Active Sky on the server and Flight Environment X on the clients as all you need are the textures.  For AI I am using Ultimate Traffic 2.

Cheers,

Jon

[HarryZ]

I tried the 314 drivers but the installation failed and I had to go back to the old drivers. Probably something to do with my system though rather than flaky drivers but I wonder if anyone else tried them yet.

Maurice

Hi Maurice,

I initially got the failure response as did another friend of mine when he tried to load the 314 drivers.  Did you use the Custom Advanced installation which removes the older drivers first?

After I got the failure to install message I rebooted my computer and the drivers did indeed get loaded. Not sure how that happened but I have the 314s.

Harry

[Garys]

Im also running the 314 drivers. With FSX.  I didn't have any troubles with the install. I haven't noticed any performance difference between the the new and old drivers. The current NvInspector still works as well.

Im currently running a THG on a 4.5ghz overclock on 660Ti and. Using the 1/2 refresh vertical sync option in inspector and locking frames to 30 in game I have smooth flying except for a few microstutters every now and then at airports. Both sliders at normal. Overall still a nice experience.

I tried the wideview route as I was wanting to get the same performance that Jon and Nat were getting with their setups. Running 3 identical computers all overclocked to 4.5 and an i7 920 as the server I was just never able to get the results that they achieved. I always had at least one client that would be a stuttering mess. The client that would not sync would change on each startup so not an individual pc problem.  Obviously a network issue that I was never able to nail down. I tried all the suggestions in the wideview forums but was never able to fix.

Im now back to using the triplehead on 1 pc setup and quite content to sit on my hands for the time being. I have 2 more nice systems + 920 server sitting idle that I can throw into the mix anytime. The upfront expense of the other 2 systems as well as the warping software for 3 client + server setup was unfortunate but I have them at the ready for the change to Xplane or if I ever wish to to pursue the FSX/P3D wideview setup again in the future.

Gary

[sluyt050]

If you want to run in HD and want correct (not stretched) views and smooth imaging in all situations, my opinion is that WidevieW is the (only) way to go. Presently, I have very good experience with 1 server (FSX + Wideview) for 2D panels etc. (but not scenery) and 3 Clients (FSX + Wideview) for scenery only. My setup is 3840 x 800 pixels. I use identical aircrafts on all of my PC's to get a proper alignment between the 3 views. For the PMDG 738NGX plane (which I use at present) it is sufficient to install it on the server. For the clients I only use their aircraft.cfg file (i.e. no complete install).

For top performance you have to use one monitor/projector/view per client as the Wideview manual advises. A continues frame rate of 30 fps is possible with all FSX sliders (except traffic) to the right + PMDG 738NGX + a heavy add-on airport + 1024 x 1024 AS2012 clouds. I believe that my setup could easily cope with HD too, but I did not test it.

WidevieW synchronization of static weather is good. Real-time weather set from within Wideview, I find less successful. I understand so far there is no other way to do it. Hopefully HiFi will come with a solution for that; actually I put the question to them today.

I also tested OpusFSX but I never succeeded in getting smooth imaging on the clients using their Live View. Also real-time weather synchronization on the clients for me was negative. So for me OpusFSX was a no go. The nice thing of WidevieW is that it is well integrated with FSX (Prepar3D) and has a lot of fine tuning options. One of them is IntelliSmooth. It works!

WideTraffic traffic synchronization is a bit ugly since only the standard FSX AI is supported. So traffic generated by (most) add-on airports is not synchronized. OK, I can live with that as long as they don't damage my plane! 

Just a last addition: I used Kosta's tweaking guide for FSX fine tuning.
Ref. http://kostasfsworld.wordpress.com/fsx-software-and-hardware-guide/

[HarryZ]

Im currently running a THG on a 4.5ghz overclock on 660Ti and. Using the 1/2 refresh vertical sync option in inspector and locking frames to 30 in game I have smooth flying except for a few microstutters every now and then at airports. Both sliders at normal. Overall still a nice experience.

Hi Gary,

Out of curiosity, why are you still running TH2G when you have the 660Ti card which has the Surround View feature in it?

Harry

[XOrionFE]

Hi Scott,

I am running a dedicated PC for the FSX Server.  I believe that trying to synch weather using one of the clients as the server will be next to impossible due to the small amount of latency between the two.  Whereas if you us a dedicated server the timing is precise at each of the IG's.

Since the sliders on the server can be set to minimum values you don't need a high powered PC for the function.  I'm using my 6 year old computer that I used initially with the TH2GO.

I am running Active Sky on the server and Flight Environment X on the clients as all you need are the textures.  For AI I am using Ultimate Traffic 2.

Cheers,

Jon

Thank you Jon.  I suspected I really need the extra PC and you have confirmed it so that is now on my shopping list.  It will help x-plane also and I will run the instructor station on it.   I want to be able to run XP or FSX at will.   

[Garys]

[Hi Gary,

Out of curiosity, why are you still running TH2G when you have the 660Ti card which has the Surround View feature in it?

Harry

Its actually one of the easiest things to setup in the cockpit which is nice. As I don't have the hdmi or display port to vga adapters I have just never given it a thought.
Is there a benefit of using surround as opposed to the TH2G in a single pc setup?

Gary

[Maurice]

Is there a benefit of using surround as opposed to the TH2G in a single PC setup?

Gary

If there is, I've yet to see it. Surround totally sucks every time you update the drivers and have to redo all the settings to get the surround back even if you do not go for the clean install where it removes the old drivers first. If anybody had a better experience, please share your magic .

Maurice

[HarryZ]

Its actually one of the easiest things to setup in the cockpit which is nice. As I don't have the hdmi or display port to vga adapters I have just never given it a thought.
Is there a benefit of using surround as opposed to the TH2G in a single pc setup?

Gary

It's a question I asked myself several times before making the change.

The TH2G, I was told, adds a layer of latency as minimal as it may be.  I always like to think that the fewer pieces of hardware you can get away with in a sim, the better. I also feel that using the technology that Nvidia built into their own GPU would be better than what Matrox has to do with the TH2G that has to work with several video cards.

I wont' deny the hassle of reconfiguring the 3 projectors in Surround View when you do a driver change.  But for whatever reason, it was easier than the original configuration setup with the 310 drivers.

Maurice mentioned that he didn't see any benefit from TH2G vs Surround View but I did in my set-up... a slightly sharper image and I ended up with 5760 (1920x3) x 1080 with the new 314 drivers.  I wish I would have tried the 5760 level with the TH2G to see what would have happened.

I, like most simmers, can't seem to leave things alone for a long period of time when they are working just fine.  I just have to try the latest "gadget" and see how it works. And that, often, leads to a lot of choice vocabulary when I discover the change didn't quite go as I thought it would!!  The latest challenge I'm going to try is a relatively new device called Crucial Adrenaline.  It involves a 50GB SSD drive that with special added software, creates a 50GB cache for your regular HD, vastly improving the performance of not only FS X but your entire operating system....all for about $ 100.00  Stay tuned.

Harry

[jskibo]

Haven't owned a TH2G in a couple years, but did they get rid of the need for monitors that would do 59Hz for 5760 x 1080?  That was a pain that I'm glad is done.

[Boeing Skunk Works]

All I ever used was WidevieW so I have nothing to compare it to but I really liked it.

I had the main FS server running two instrument displays and the forward view, and three other client computers running four additional outside views.

This was really difficult to set up well since three of the five monitors were different sizes. I managed to get a pretty good view if you were sitting in the pilots seat. Any off-angle would skew the view for an observer looking from a side angle or over my shoulder.

I used that well-aligned flight as the default flight always, and relocated the aircraft from there. I think it was Newcastle or Dublin or Glasgow. Somewhere in the UK.

[sagrada737]

The initial setup for my Sim is with FSX and Sim-Avionics - each on separate computers.  The FSX computer uses a nvidia GTX680 GPU that supports Surround.  However, I initially set this up using a digital Matrox TH2G, which yeilds a nice resolution across a 3-monitor LCD display of 5040 x 1050 x 32.  I can't complain about the display quality running Megascenery SoCal in an unlimited framerate mode, with the recommended Settings tweaks for FSX.

As has been eluded to by Maurice, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"  I too have been tempted to try out nvidia Surround, but I am concerned about such changes to a setup that seems to working fine.

I'm not exactly sure why the resolution comes up as 5040 x 1050, but that's what I get.  I wonder how this would display on an HD projector setup.  I mention this because I notice that BenQ has introduced a new short throw projector with zoom capability.  It is their W1080ST model, for around $1200.  This projector supports the 1080 resolution.  I'm not sure how using Wideview would affect this setup or display quality/performance.

Perhaps to stay on track with this thread, is anyone using HD projectors with either Wideview or TH2G, and what are the display results?

Mike

[sluyt050]

The initial setup for my Sim is with FSX and Sim-Avionics - each on separate computers.  The FSX computer uses a nvidia GTX680 GPU that supports Surround.  However, I initially set this up using a digital Matrox TH2G, which yeilds a nice resolution across a 3-monitor LCD display of 5040 x 1050 x 32.  I can't complain about the display quality running Megascenery SoCal in an unlimited framerate mode, with the recommended Settings tweaks for FSX.

As has been eluded to by Maurice, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"  I too have been tempted to try out nvidia Surround, but I am concerned about such changes to a setup that seems to working fine.

I'm not exactly sure why the resolution comes up as 5040 x 1050, but that's what I get.  I wonder how this would display on an HD projector setup.  I mention this because I notice that BenQ has introduced a new short throw projector with zoom capability.  It is their W1080ST model, for around $1200.  This projector supports the 1080 resolution.  I'm not sure how using Wideview would affect this setup or display quality/performance.

Perhaps to stay on track with this thread, is anyone using HD projectors with either Wideview or TH2G, and what are the display results?

Mike

Hi Mike,

I used to work with the TH2GO in a 3 x 27" full HD monitor setup. It worked great. The only problem was the low frame rate
at certain conditions caused by 1+3 active FSX cockpit views. So I had to go back to 1 stretched view. That's the reason I switched to WidevieW for my projector setup explained in this topic earlier. Although I do not operate in Full HD anymore, I am convinced that WidevieW will do as well in Full HD as it performs for me now. Also consider the positive experience Scott has with his WidevieW Full HD setup so far.

A last remark to whom it may concern: I do not believe that a projector with a native resolution of 1280 x 800 pixels (which I have) is capable to produce a higher resolution image. Although it will accept a higher resolution signal, the result will still be a 1280 x 800 p. image. If WXGA projectors would be able to produce true HD images why than the necessity to make Full HD projectors? Correct me if I'am wrong. (Ref. http://www.bambooav.com/information-about-projector-resolution.html).

[Maurice]

A last remark to whom it may concern: I do not believe that a projector with a native resolution of 1280 x 800 pixels (which I have) is capable to produce a higher resolution image. Although it will accept a higher resolution signal, the result will still be a 1280 x 800 p. image. If WXGA projectors would be able to produce true HD images why than the necessity to make Full HD projectors? Correct me if I'am wrong. (Ref. http://www.bambooav.com/information-about-projector-resolution.html).

After more testing one more time, I totally agree with this. When you use a higher resolution than the native resolution, it does make a difference and for some, it might look better but in my experience, there was a definite loss of clarity. This may be very subjective but as much as I was hoping that the image would be sharper, I have concluded that for me at least that is not the case.

As you said, the projector has a definite number of pixels and the projector's electronics condenses the extra pixels and creates an image that still matches its native resolution (number of pixels). But I guess that depending on how good the electronics is, it could well be that some brands may be better at this conversion process and produce an image that is somewhat better although the manual clearly states that the best image is achieved with the native resolution.

Bottom line, try a higher resolution and see whether you like it better or not. Easy enough to try 

Maurice

[jskibo]

The PJ would post process if fed a higher res image than its capable of displaying.  Now some units have very good post processing, others are, well, crap, so what looks great for one and not for the other may be a matter of the chip in your projector....Pixelworks, Marvell Qdeo, etc...

[mickc]

Thanks for the replies guys.

I think i will just have to try it and see how it goes.

I don't have any plans to go to Xplane at this stage, as my system is designed around Prosim737, which as yet is not fully working with Xplane.
I will be running P3D.

I mention this because I notice that BenQ has introduced a new short throw projector with zoom capability.  It is their W1080ST model, for around $1200.  This projector supports the 1080 resolution.  I'm not sure how using Wideview would affect this setup or display quality/performance.

Mike, as I stated in my original post, I have already ordered 3 of these units which was the reason for me making this thread

[HarryZ]

A last remark to whom it may concern: I do not believe that a projector with a native resolution of 1280 x 800 pixels (which I have) is capable to produce a higher resolution image. Although it will accept a higher resolution signal, the result will still be a 1280 x 800 p. image. If WXGA projectors would be able to produce true HD images why than the necessity to make Full HD projectors? Correct me if I'am wrong.

It was me who made the resolution comment.

Projectors are indeed capable of producing higher resolutions than their native level but there can be a price to pay for that.  I had a BenQ unit that had native 800x600 native res.  But I flew it using 1024x800 and did indeed get that resolution.  But as the sales person at Projectors Canada told me, the minute you ask a projector to go above its native level, it has to stretch the pixels to fill in the gaps and you can get a mixed bag of results. Often you will get an increase in bluriness but it depends on the quality of the projector.

As well, once you get beyond what a particular projector's capabilities are, you will get a blank screen with the message "beyond unit's capability" or something similar.

The current BenQ 814 units I have obviously can go beyond their native 1280x800, in my case 1920x1080.  And my visual is definitely sharper and clearer than anything I have ever experienced.  I'm going to call my contact at Projector's Canada and see what info I can obtain about the technical happenings in this case and will get back to the forum.

Harry