Is there any chance of adding the option of scaling a widescreen aspect ratio with the 4:3 or 5:4 resolutions?

Many larger widescreen monitors only support 16:10 or 16:9 ratios at insane resolutions (e.g 1920x1200, 1680x1050 or 1600x900). LFS supports these when the 'show non-square modes' option is checked but lower resolutions are at 4:3 or 5:4, making the cars look low and fat.

To get smoothest display out of many LCDs it is best to enable VSYNC but at the monster resolutions in the correct 16:10 ratio, that takes some serious computing power to maintain 60 or 75 FPS, especially when there are more than a couple of cars on track.

One neat feature in 'Call of Duty 2' is the ability to select any lower resolution and 'force' it to look like a 16:10 ratio, so on a widescreen monitor it looks perfect. You get the wider aspect ratio while running a 4:3 resolution. The larger 1920x1200 monitiors have so many pixels that running at a lower non-native resolution still looks very good (unlike my old 19" LCD which looked shit unless at the native 1280x1024). So I'm running COD2 at a resolution that allows the frame rate to stay at 60 (Vsync enabled) but makes the most of the widescreen monitor.

This would be a really nice feature in LFS - is it possible? Is it more that a scaling of the graphics?

I'm currently running LFS at 1680x1050 on a 24" widescreen LCD, which is smooth at 60fps when I'm the only car around, but is less smooth and dips into the 40s at the start of races.

This is my first suggestion for LFS, because I'm totally happy with the way it's going

Who's says 4:3 resolutions are low-res? I'm running at 2048x1536.

Anyway, what sort of resolutions did you have in mind? 1024x576 (16:9) or 1024x640 (16:10)? LFS gets it's resolution list from DirectX, so the resolutions available should match what you can set your desktop to. Don't know about adding others.

I'm not saying all 4:3 resolutions are low, just that the lower resolutions that larger 16:10 monitors support are 4:3. The lowest 16:10 resolution mine supports is 1680x1050, so to get the correct aspect ratio I have to run with that.

COD2 (as an example) allows the lower 4:3 resolutions to display as a 16:10 aspect ratio, even if the pixel reolution is 4:3 (i.e. if that option were selected on a 4:3 monitor it would look extremely squished horizontally).

In theory I could select 1600x1200 and select the 16:10 aspect ratio, but it would defeat my objective of running a lower resolution to ensure the frame rate stays high enough for smooth gameplay.

So do you mean the monitor actually does run at, say, 800x600, but the game pre-distorts the image so it appears correct?

Quote from Bob Smith :

So do you mean the monitor actually does run at, say, 800x600, but the game pre-distorts the image so it appears correct?

That's what COD2 seems to do.

You select the resolution and then there is an option for Aspect Ratio. If you select 'wide 16:10' with any resolution it modifies the output to look correct on the 16:10 screen.

If I go into the monitors OSD menu and check the resolution and frequency it correctly reports the 4:3 resolution (1024x768 or 800x600 whatever resolution I chose). And even though 1024x768 is neither the native resolution or the correct pixel ratio it looks pretty sharp, but importantly is a lot smoother than the mega 16:10 resolutions.

Not sure how easy this would be to implement in LFS.

That sounds like the pixel accuracy (something very important in FPS games) would be comprimised.

What kind of video card and CPU are you running? I can run LFS just as well at 1024x768 as I can at 2048x1280 with:

AthlonXP 3000+ (2.1GHz)
GF 6800GT 128MB
512MB PC3200 DDR SDRAM
Sony FW900 24" CRT

Just another reason CRT's are better than LCD's, no "native res" BS.

Quote from Forbin :

That sounds like the pixel accuracy (something very important in FPS games) would be comprimised.

What kind of video card and CPU are you running? I can run LFS just as well at 1024x768 as I can at 2048x1280 with:

AthlonXP 3000+ (2.1GHz)
GF 6800GT 128MB
512MB PC3200 DDR SDRAM
Sony FW900 24" CRT

Just another reason CRT's are better than LCD's, no "native res" BS.

Not sure what you mean by pixel accuracy. All the COD2 wide aspect option is doing is squeezing 20% more into the view horizontally. On a 'normal' 4:3 monitor it would make things look thinner, but when displayed on a wide aspect monitor the proportions look normal.

The native resolution thing isn't a problem in games now that the native resolutions of large LCD's are so large - with so many pixels they scale very well. I'd say for LCDs, the refresh rate and importance of Vsync are more of an issue, especially for gaming, than being forced to run a native resolution. When it comes to windows desktop and applications you definitely want to be at a native resolution for the most crisp display, but for gaming it doesn't matter. For me the bigger problem is the aspect ratio, as my LCD doesn't support a 16:10 resolution below 1680x1050, the game has to support a 'wide aspect' option for 4:3 resolutions for me to get the right proportions at 4:3 or 5:4 resolutions.

I'm not sure what FPS you're getting at the resolutions you mention, but my aim is to find a setting where the PC can maintain 60FPS or higher. Then with VSYNC enabled (to ensure the LCD is as smooth as possible with no 'tearing') it will be locked at 60fps.

I have an AMD X2 4400 (the dual core buys me nothing in LFS - I can run LFS on one core and a virus scan on the other and see very little drop in FPS) and I have two 7800GTX in SLI configuration (again SLI buys me very little in LFS - I can force it into single GPU mode with little impact). Maybe if LFS is ever optimised for dual core and DX9 I'll get my 60FPS at 1680x1050 (or even 1920x1200) with a full grid, but I would think a 'wide aspect' option for lower 4:3 resolutions would be more likely in the short/medium term.

By the way I'm being picky - I run at 1680x1050 and get a smooth VSYNC'ed 60fps except for when the screen is really busy (e.g. first corner mayhem).

I've now managed to add a few custom 16:10 aspect ratio resolutions in the windows display settings, and then LFS picks these up. As they weren't officially supported by the monitor it is a case of trial and error, with a couple of PC lockup/crashes being the worst symtom.

I was a little cautious at first, as my previous experience of setting unsupported resolutions with my old CRT was a nasty flickering and loud clicking noise from the monitor, that only stopped when I hit the power switch.

The resolutions I've added that worked were 960x600, 1152x720 and 1280x800 at 60Hz. 1024x640 and a few other odd resolutions crashed the computer.

1152x720 and 1280x800 seem to be the sweet spot to keep the frame rate at 60 (except at starts) and maintain a nice crisp display.

My monitor is the ACER AL2416W, so if anyone else has this widescreen LCD, it does support resolutions not listed by the manufacturer.

Quote from Bob Smith :

I'm running at 2048x1536.

Holy mother of g... :faint:

I wonder what that's like !? Do u even need AA for that kinda res? :drugs:

Of course. There's no such thing as too smooth.

Quote from PLAYLIFE :

Holy mother of g... :faint:

I wonder what that's like !? Do u even need AA for that kinda res? :drugs:

Yes. Unfortunately my graphics card drivers don't want to give me AA or AF past 1600x1200. Perhaps I'll have to switch back to an ATI card.

AA and AF work fine for me at 2048x1280, Bob, at least in LFS. GF 6800GT 128MB here.

See here: http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... tid=4400&d=1135378742

That's 8x AA.

Quote from Forbin :

AA and AF work fine for me at 2048x1280, Bob, at least in LFS. GF 6800GT 1280MB here.

See here: http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... tid=4400&d=1135378742

That's 8x AA.

1280 MB ?? As in GPU memory??

Typo. Fixed.

Also, it was my understanding that ATI is the one that has a problem running AA at resolutions over 1600x1200, not NVIDIA. Although, that may only be in the case of Crossfire.

Quote from Forbin :

AA and AF work fine for me at 2048x1280, Bob, at least in LFS. GF 6800GT 128MB here.

So you keep telling me. That isn't enough to get it working though!