Widescreen Gaming Forum

I'm keen on joining the TH2Go Club, but the caveats are:

- running 2x X1950 Pro in Crossfire
- not upgrading video solution anytime soon

Nonetheless, I'm still interested in getting the digital edition in the near future (thugh knowing my luck, they'll release a unit immediately after I've purchased it, that handles more than 3840x1024).

I was wanting impressions - and perhaps get screenshots - of games running across 3x 20" screens at 2400x600. Games I play at the moment are:

- Prince of Persia: SoT, WW, TTT
- Test Drive Unlimited
- Need for Speed: Carbon (and on release, Pro Street)
- Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter: 1 & 2
- Neverwinter Nights: Diamond Edition

If anyone could provide, it'd be greatly appreciated.


System: http://bp3.blogger.com/_kOSZmLJ-7S4/Ruzlrq1fCiI/AAAAAAAAAA0/-7OcryXX9eM/s1600-h/IMG_0558.JPG

* In-Win C-Series 583 ATX Mid-Tower Case
* Super Flower Aurora Series SF-600R14A 600W PSU
* Dell 2007FP 20" Screen (x3) @ 1600x1200
* Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 @ 2.13GHz
* Gigabyte GA-965P-DQ6 Motherboard
* Gigabyte GV-RX195P256D-RH X1950 Pro (x2)
* Corsair TWIN2X PC6400 2GB RAM
* Western Digital 7200RPM SATAII 160GB Hard Drive
* Pioneer DVR-111D DVD Writer
* Logitech G25 Racing Wheel
* Logitech Z-5500 Digital 5.1 Speakers
* Logitech Ultra Vision Web Camera
* Wacom Bamboo Tablet
* Microsoft Strategic Commander
* Microsoft Natural Ergonamic Desktop 7000 Keyboard
* Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0 Mouse
* Very cool clock (the cogs move!)

at 2400x600 you are not getting very lucks because of the low resolution.

- Prince of Persia: SoT, WW, TTT

DO not support SG.


Look under the screenshots section for screenshots!

Well, I've trawled and trawled, to no avail.

If anyone has the time, perhas they could chuck up a couple of screenshots?

Will I get more exposure if the mods throw the thread into the screenshots and video section?

Some comparison screenshots for you ...
Sorry I don't have much time to do any more for you ... maybe in a few weeks ... 8)

Click to see full size ...

Bioshock ...
2400x600 ...


3840x1024 ...


GRAW-2 ...
2400x600 ...


3840x1024 ...


2400x600 ...


3840x1024 ...



Tomb Raider - Anniversary...
2400x600 ...


3840x1024 ...


2400x600 ...


3840x1024 ...


I hope they help ... :D

As per the PM; cheers Paddy. Appreciate you having taken the time out to do this.

Safe to assume you did this on the big rig, with the 3x 2001FP?

Granted, the higher the resolution the better a game is going to look, but your impressions?

Did you feel sick looking at it at such a low resolution, or could you still get as consumed as you would at 3840x1024?

EDIT: big rig, not baby rig *slap*

I didn't play any of them very far at 2400x600 ...
That said if it was only a stop gap until I could get a better card that would do 3840x1024 I could live with it.
Working in desktop would be a much bigger problem for me ...
TH for gaming in my opinion is way way better than playing on one screen even if I had to run at 2400x600 ...
The immersion from the peripheral vision just does it for me every time.

The jaggies can get a bit much but of course it looks sooooo much better with plenty of AA ...
Bioshock looks good regardless of the AA ... I think it was off ... look lower right at wall edge ...
GRAW 2 has "edge smoothing" ... AA isn't possible with it ...
The Anniversary shots didn't have AA ...
Here are the two Tomb Raider shots again this time with 8 x AA ...




The other thing to consider is how well your screens scale the image ...
Try running your games on a single screen at 800x600 ... see what it is like ...
You will probably think ... yuk !
BUT
I think (as I have said) that the immersion from the peripheral vision will make all the difference ... though in desktop you may not be able to cope ... lol.

Yep I did these on the "Big Beast" ... the other comp is "Little Beast" and "Uber Beast" is comming as soon they release the 8900's or whatever they will be called ....
The native res of the 2001FP's is 1600x1200 ... they scale the image very well imo ... :D

1600x1200 should scale perfectly to 800x600, no? Every pixel at 1600x1200 is a 2x2 block of pixels at 800x600, but there should be no interpolation, and it's the interpolation that makes the image look screwy.