Widescreen Gaming Forum

I've been using my new 226BW for near a week now. HL2 is amazing in WS! I'm a BF2 fan as well.

Before this WS LCD I ran BF2 at the highest settings, both in game and in the nvidia control panel. However I've had to turn down some of my settings in order to play the game with no fewer than 30+ FPS, as well as forcing 1280x1074 via the quick launch. HL2 however is still running at full speed, not having to change any of the settings other than to WS 16x10.

Do native games perform better than non native regarding fps?

At any given pixel count HL2 will likely loose framerate going to widescreen as it incresses the Horizontal FOV, while BF2 crops off the vertical which could only improve framerate. What resolutions were you running in BF2 and HL2 before you went widescreen and what resolutions are you running them at now?

Well, if it doesn't make sense, it must be user error. I simply removed my older drivers, updated with new ones and everything is as it should be.

HL2 runs better than BF2 if that helps you understand things. Half Life is just coded better than 99% of the games that come out, which baffles my mind. The Half Life games look so much better than any new games that come out (especially the episodic games with HDR and all that on), and yet the Half Life games run better.

This is going way back, but when BF2142 came out all the people that forced ws seemed to have more errors and worse game play. That was the pattern I notced. I was helping alot of people on the 2 main bf2142 forums and it was definitly a trend that a majority of people with nice machines were having frame rate issues happened to be forcing WS. I asked them to scale it via hardware/software and the issues went away.



I JUST got a WS monitor this week and installed BF2142 again to give it a shot, I used the xyz command or what ever it is to force WS and I think I got a small hit in performance but nothing super bad. Thats going from 12x10 to 19x10.

I already know for a fact that forcing it is just zooming in on the image and cutting the top and bottom of the screen off, thus giving you a slight disadvantage on FS game players. However I couldnt notice it and I liked it better in WS despite that fact. Also the zoom I think may help when sniping ^^.

The question on my mind now is if I force 1920x1080 via those commands and its just zooming in and croping the image. Whats the 'true" resolution I am playing somthing smaller and its just upscaled or is it actually putting the demand of a full 1920s1080 pixels on my videocard/computer???

The reason I ask is I am thinking about just forcing a smaller resolution and having my monitor scale it up for me.

_________________
ViciousXUSMC on the Web - YouTube :: FaceBook :: Website

I JUST got a WS monitor this week and installed BF2142 again to give it a shot, I used the xyz command or what ever it is to force WS and I think I got a small hit in performance but nothing super bad. Thats going from 12x10 to 19x10.
.

That performance hit isn't becuase you are running widescreeen, it is becuase your hardware is rendering over 50% more pixels at 1920x1080 than it does at 1280x1024.

[quote]
I JUST got a WS monitor this week and installed BF2142 again to give it a shot, I used the xyz command or what ever it is to force WS and I think I got a small hit in performance but nothing super bad. Thats going from 12x10 to 19x10.
.

That performance hit isn't becuase you are running widescreeen, it is becuase your hardware is rendering over 50% more pixels at 1920x1080 than it does at 1280x1024.

This is correct.

1280x1024=1310720 pixels

1920x1080=2073600 pixels

This is essentially 33% more pixels to render.

It is actually 58% more:

2073600 - 1310720 = 762880

762880/1310720 = 0.58203125