Hi, I am considering purchasing LFS but am having issues getting the demo to work on triple 22 inch monitors. Here are the specs:

Core 2 duo E4300 @ 2.62GHZ
2GB ram
8800GTX
8400GS
3 x 22 inch Samsung LCD
SoftTH
Vista 32-bit

I can get the game to work on one screen with no problems... but when I try to go triple screen the game will freeze and I have to ctrl-alt-del to get out. SoftTH shows as using DX8, can I change it manually to DX9? I am new to the game and cannot find the option.

I also tried 2 different drivers from Nvidia, same thing happens.

rFactor works fine with the setup @5240x1050 (100 x 2 for border), but I would like to try LFS after reading all the stuff about it.

Thanks.

ok, so I got it going, but I don't know if its working properly... I get triple screens but am having issues with getting the borders working. I have to force the resolution on softTH to 5040x1050.. but if I try to add borders of 100 it doesnt work even if I change the resolution to 5240x1050.

Also, my frame rate drops from 180-300 on single screen to 38-40 on triple screens... is that normal? I assumed since I can get over 300FPS with everything cranked that I would at least be able to hit 60 with stuff turned down.. I cannot even get into the 50's.

At resolutions that high you are going to struggle, it requires massive memory bandwidth. I've got 3x 22 inchers also, I can only run 3840x960 without any FSAA and only get in the 40s (with an X1800XT primary).

Also LFS only uses DX8, so you can't force it to use the dx9 dll; LFS wouldn't know what to do with it.

Is memory bandwidth the only thing holding me back right now? I'm just wondering if switching to OC'd DDR3 would make a difference... if thats the only thing holding me back it would be worth it to me.

I can't possibly imagine your graphics card holding you back even at those resolutions. My 6800GT can run on two screens at 2560x1024 with 60 FPS (IN SOME SPOTS). Even if I NEVER got over 30, I'd expect your 8800GTX to be more than powerful enough to run the game at 1.5 times my res and still see a massive framerate improvement.

stang - dual screen is NOTHING compared to a triple screen config. It requires about 3 times more processing than dual screen. Its not just adding one monitor - its rendering an image 1.5X bigger, THEN breaking it up in 3 parts, THEN joining 2 parts together, THEN sending the correct part to the secondary gfx card, THEN putting both sctions on the screen at once.

Dual screen is render one big image, send to monitor, done.
40 fps seem right for those res...

Hi guys,
I have 1024x3840 running 8AA on an AMD+6400 2gig mem with a 7900gtx and I it doesn't drop under 150fps with hi-res skins? Mostly over 200.

You should be able to run more IMO



johnny

Quote from Stigpt :

stang - dual screen is NOTHING compared to a triple screen config. It requires about 3 times more processing than dual screen.

I don't doubt that, but I thought that an 8800GTX would be way more than 3x as powerful as my card... or is that not true?

It may have something to do with SoftTH? I don't know. I know on single screens I can crack 300FPS with everything max'd. I just want to be able to run triple screens at 60FPS. If it means buying faster ram or a 9800GTX when it comes out then i'll do what ever it takes.. i just don't want to spend money needlessly since im trying to finish my cockpit.

what kind of motherboard do you have?

I'll put my full specs.

E4300 @ 2.62GHZ
2GB Mushkin DDR2 PC-5300 OC'd
EVGA nvidia 680i mother board
2 x 150GB Wester Digital Raptors in raid-0
XFX 8800GTX oc'd to Ultra specs
EVGA 8400gt
Soundblaster Audigy 2 Platinum
Vista Home Premium 32-bit
SoftTH
3 x 22inch Samsung 225's
G25 Wheel
G15 KB
G7 Mouse
Z5500 Speakers

I'll probably upgrade to a 3.0GHZ core 2 duo and OC it as close to 4.0 as I can get.. if memory bandwidth is the issue, what if I go 780i motherboard with fast DDR3 memory?? then I just need a 9800GTX and a new soundcard.

the ram is really a bit underpowered being 667 but more importantly are both cards in the 16x slots or is one of them (probably the 84) in the 8x slot?

also afaik youre the first one to try softth on a dx10 (vista) system... no idea how well those 2 get along

Both are PCI-e x16 as per specs below I think the third one is just x8.. but its not being used.

Expansion Slot
- 2 x PCIe x16, 1 x PCIe Graphics expansion slot, 2 x PCIe x1, 2 x PCI
- 2 x 32-bit PCI, support for PCI 2.1

hm that was my best shot
still you could try lowering the resolution of the side monitor thats fed by the 84 and see what happens

Quote from Stang70Fastback :

I don't doubt that, but I thought that an 8800GTX would be way more than 3x as powerful as my card... or is that not true?

I just built a machine for my mate who also races LFS.
The machine is almost the same spoec as mine but with an 8800gtx where mine is a 7900.
I must say the is not any difference in LFS from his to mine and I run 3 screens, it just shows that LFS is mainly CPU power, although a better Graphics card will help me in many ways I'm not going to change yet.

Edited, should say CPU power and memory bandwidth, meaning the backend of the graphics card

I should clarify, it's the bandwidth of the memory in your graphics card that matters. Also the PCIe link is a limit that upgrading your card won't solve. Dropping to a sightly lower res on the sidescreens (so less data is transferred to the second card), and using 16-bit colours on the sidescreens, should bring a large boost to any card.

Quote from john_rees :

I just built a machine for my mate who also races LFS.
The machine is almost the same spoec as mine but with an 8800gtx where mine is a 7900.
I must say the is not any difference in LFS from his to mine and I run 3 screens, it just shows that LFS is mainly CPU power, although a better Graphics card will help me in many ways I'm not going to change yet.

Edited, should say CPU power and memory bandwidth, meaning the backend of the graphics card

Yeah, but isn't the main difference when all you are doing is changing the screen resolutions at those higher settings, the graphics card? I know the game is mostly CPU intensive, but I would still think that the difference between 2560 and 3560 res would be solely up to the card to handle...

...what are your framerates anyway and what res exactly are you running?

Quote from Bob Smith :

I should clarify, it's the bandwidth of the memory in your graphics card that matters. Also the PCIe link is a limit that upgrading your card won't solve. Dropping to a sightly lower res on the sidescreens (so less data is transferred to the second card), and using 16-bit colours on the sidescreens, should bring a large boost to any card.

hmm, You just reminded me of something I will look into as soon as im home from work... A couple of weeks ago while diagnosing my machine for what ended up being a software problem I lowered the bus speed of my PCI-E bus down to stock. I'm gonna crank it back up when I get home tonight.