Ultrawide single or triples?

cosimo

I'd like to hear from you.

I'm considering either 3x Asus VG248QE or 1x Benq XR3501. Three of the latter would be awesome but too expensive and I'd need a SLI gfx system.

Ideally I'd like to keep my system single Nvidia card. Now I have a GTX 780 which serves me very well.

Go!
 
Whatever you have the "horsepower" to run at your desired frame rates.
 
I have the same card and I guess you are trying to go 144FPS, but I am pretty sure its not going to work with a single 780, rendering multiview. Considering you need more than 144fps to get a stable 144Hz/FPS I think a mid/low game settings should work on a single screen, maybe even high settings but with just few cars running and shadow blur off/reflection off...
 
Tuttle said:
I have the same card and I guess you are trying to go 144FPS
Click to expand...

Actually I'm quite happy with anything around and above 100 Hz. My player.json caps framerate at 120.

For that reason I would exclude LG models that seem to support up to 75 Hz.
 
Ultrawide single with trackIR just enough to see the right side mirror in the cars you usually can't see it. Should be enough view compared to triples
 
cosimo said:
Actually I'm quite happy with anything around and above 100 Hz. My player.json caps framerate at 120.

For that reason I would exclude LG models that seem to support up to 75 Hz.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure this is a good idea as you should buy a 144Hz panel if your system is able to run up to 144FPS (or the half but then make no sense). If you have fluctuating frame rate under that number, and/or your FPS are dropping under 100, you may experience very bad tearing and laggy responsiveness.

My suggestion is, if your system is not capable to run more than 144FPS, in a solid way, I'd focus my attention on a GSync panel which is basically adapting monitor frequency to FPS.
 
Will Mazeo said:
Ultrawide single with trackIR just enough to see the right side mirror in the cars you usually can't see it. Should be enough view compared to triples
Click to expand...

Yeah but I'd personally prefer a 60Hz triple screen than a single and expensive 144Hz Ultrawide, especially if not running GSync.

Also the GTX 780 it's a pretty damn good card, but still too weak to run 144FPS with good graphic settings. It's already on the edge to keep 60FPS with everything maxed out.
 
Tuttle said:
Yeah but I'd personally prefer a 60Hz triple screen than a single and expensive 144Hz Ultrawide, especially if not running GSync.

Also the GTX 780 it's a pretty damn good card, but still too weak to run 144FPS with good graphic settings. It's already on the edge to keep 60FPS with everything maxed out.
Click to expand...

If things happen as I expect I want to buy a new PC. I was considering triples but I'm more inclined toward ultrawide monitor after some research, less headache with config, less space, video card running more fps (even if not reaching 144, I'm totally fine with anything above 60) and higher detail options than with triples(?)
But I need to see if I can adapt to trackIR first... the only time I used it I felt a bit dizzy so if I can buy the new PC I'll get my "32 TV and try on it first, if I can't adapt then I'll go with triples
 
Will Mazeo said:
But I need to see if I can adapt to trackIR first... the only time I used it I felt a bit dizzy so if I can buy the new PC I'll get my "32 TV and try on it first, if I can't adapt then I'll go with triples
Click to expand...

I guess because, with trackIR, your eyes are targeting same point, while you are moving/exaggerating your head rotation to make IR working.

For example; you want to look at your left mirror

Triple Screen; your eyes are moving to the left screen, as you know left mirror is there. This is a pretty much natural eye movement. Same as you do with your real car.

tIR; your eyes are still targeting the center/single screen and instead using eyes to target the mirror, you need to rotate your head to the left to activate the tracking. So, your eyes are NOT moving, your head is. This is really not a natural action and yes, when you keep your eyes targeting a point, while your body/head is moving, you may feel some dizziness, but I think it's just a matter of being used to it, especially because first time using iR, people tends to exaggerate the head rotation.
 
cosimo said:
I'd like to hear from you.

I'm considering either 3x Asus VG248QE or 1x Benq XR3501. Three of the latter would be awesome but too expensive and I'd need a SLI gfx system.

Ideally I'd like to keep my system single Nvidia card. Now I have a GTX 780 which serves me very well.

Go!
Click to expand...

I got a Acer Predator X34 about a month ago and love it. I've got a GTX770 with almost everything on max and it runs great. It's a GSync panel and was very expensive. My FPS are way down on what I used to get with a 32" TV 1920x1080 @ 60Hz, about 80 - 100FPS, now I have a much higher resolution 3440x1440 @ 95Hz I get maybe 40 -70 FPS but I never notice when the frames drop, and everything is much nicer to look at. I have it less than an arms length away from my face so it's very clear.
There's a great comparison site to check your how your monitor compares with similar models, here's mine ... http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/acer_predator_x34.htm

SS
 
Tuttle said:
I guess because, with trackIR, your eyes are targeting same point, while you are moving/exaggerating your head rotation to make IR working.

For example; you want to look at your left mirror

Triple Screen; your eyes are moving to the left screen, as you know left mirror is there. This is a pretty much natural eye movement. Same as you do with your real car.

tIR; your eyes are still targeting the center/single screen and instead using eyes to target the mirror, you need to rotate your head to the left to activate the tracking. So, your eyes are NOT moving, your head is. This is really not a natural action and yes, when you keep your eyes targeting a point, while your body/head is moving, you may feel some dizziness, but I think it's just a matter of being used to it, especially because first time using iR, people tends to exaggerate the head rotation.
Click to expand...
Thanks, that's interesting. After sometime not playing a 3rd person game (basically all I play is sims + League of Legends) I also feel dizzy when I play one of these games such as Tomb Raider, it goes away after a few days.
 
Hey Cos. I definetaly would go the tripple route. I'm using it for a year now and still think it's a blast. I'm using 24" 60hrz monitors and with my system i can more or less run 60fps off line with 23 ai. Obviously at race starts the fps drop but after lap1 i get good fps. On line all is better which is because your computer doesn't need to calculate physics off ai. I get 90+ fps there all the time. My system is shown in my profile and game settings is all on high except for shadows medium fast blur and reflection low. Wouldn't go the sli route because perfomance of sli in rFactor2 doesn't seem to be good (no offence ment and only from hearing) in fact it seems to me sli is a pain in the **** for all software.
 
Triples, no contest.

A 34"+ 21:9 is awesome for single monitor use though.

Great choice on the VG248QEs. I had 3 of them for a while. The best monitors I've so far ever owned.
 
Definatelly triples. You should be very happy with 3x24" 16:9. IMO, height is big enough and you get quite a big horizontal picture. I was able to comfortably use 1:1 FOV with my 22" 16:10 screens, so with your choice it should be even better :)

Having 120/144Hz monitor is a big step forward vs 60Hz regardless, if you can maintain matching fps to refresh rate or not. With 120/144Hz, tearing, if happens, is much less noticable anyway (to a point you might say, you don't have it anymore) and you also get smoother picture with faster response. That's my opinion based on 2 monitors I tested: Iiyama ProLite G2773HS and BenQ XL2411T.
 
The great thing I think many forget is that these monitors can also be set to 100 Hz incase 120, 144 or more fps is too difficult to achieve. Don't forget about that ;)
 
If you prefer to drive F1 cars it might be better to use two screens instead. The line where they meed can simulate the support strut for the halo.
 
A final (?) update. I went the way of the triple Asus VG248QE which I picked up second hand for about half the price, so basically I've got 3 for 2 :) That was a fraction of the cost of an ultrawide Benq.

I setup my desktop with Nvidia surround and bezel correction @ 5900x1080 and 120 Hz.

With rF2 in multiview and 2x in game AA, and FPS capped at 120 I usually get 80 to 120 FPS depending on the track. I'm definitely satisfied that way. The simulation experience is far more immersive, especially in races with lots of cars around you. Can't imagine going back to one screen. The multiview adjustment tool in rF2 is perfect.

It is also a bit weird to be honest. I expected to be astonished, but it was all very "naturally awesome" to suddenly run triples, but not surprisingly awesome. :)

We'll see whenever GTX 1080 reaches a reasonable market price.

If you have questions, feel free to ask.
 
LesiU said:
Have you set FOV to realistic/calculated, or just dialed to your taste?
Click to expand...
Hi LesiU.

As you know, the rF2 multiview tool is using real distance values in centimeters, so I just measured distances, monitor sizes and angles and input them in the tool. I assume that when doing that, rF2 graphics engine uses a real 1:1 fov.

I noticed that the actual FOV is in fact not adjustable anymore with the usual FOV+/FOV- keys. The image doesn't change when adjusting it outside the multiview tool.

Now I sometimes adjust the seat height, but that's about it.
 
I had 3 screen setup probably before this tool came out so I calculated correct FOV (and setting side monitors at correct angles) by myself and just set that in the sim.
If the tool makes all the neccessary corrections, then great. Enjoy and as you said - it's "naturally awesome" but you would be missing it, if you go back to 1 monitor :)
 
Having used both solutions and still owning a 21:9 50" panel I can say that the gain you will experience in your peripheral view from these "ultrawide" screens is pretty marginal even when comparing it to regular 16:9. And certainly nothing even remotely comparable to that of proper triple screens, regardless of its actual dimensions.

Another thing to consider when talking about those extra wide screens is the hit you'll end up taking regarding your vertical field of view which will be much lower, therefore causing an even bigger impact in your whole experience than the small gains you'd think you'd get horizontally.
 
imho SMP is what ISI called multi-view which has been in rF2 from the beginning. it can be done in directx9 like our sim shows. only downside is the performance hit it takes. But hardware is getting to a point where performance isn't an issue anymore for the games we play today. The games from the future (we don't call it rF3 ;) ) Will stretch the hardware of today again.
 
Eddy said:
imho SMP is what ISI called multi-view which has been in rF2 from the beginning. it can be done in directx9 like our sim shows. only downside is the performance hit it takes. But hardware is getting to a point where performance isn't an issue anymore for the games we play today. The games from the future (we don't call it rF3 ;) ) Will stretch the hardware of today again.
Click to expand...

SMP is not multi-view as such, did you see the video, basically you can have as many as 16 projections from one viewpoint with no loss in performance, so for us triple screen user that could be as high as a 30% increase in performance.
 
I think we have a language issue here Cookie. We don't dissagree. All i wanted to say was: rendering multiple images isn't new, hence my talk about isi doing it with multi view. What is new is the hardware becoming capable of doing it without the need of using multiple gpu's but with only one and not loosing on performance. I hope my cracky English was good enough to explain what i mean

And yes i've seen the video [emoji6]
 
All's good Eddy, iRacing is getting the update today we should be able to turn off render three screens separately and let SMP do it's stuff, then see what the real world performance gain is.
 
SmellySkidmark said:
I got a Acer Predator X34 about a month ago and love it. I've got a GTX770 with almost everything on max and it runs great. It's a GSync panel and was very expensive. My FPS are way down on what I used to get with a 32" TV 1920x1080 @ 60Hz, about 80 - 100FPS, now I have a much higher resolution 3440x1440 @ 95Hz I get maybe 40 -70 FPS but I never notice when the frames drop, and everything is much nicer to look at. I have it less than an arms length away from my face so it's very clear.
There's a great comparison site to check your how your monitor compares with similar models, here's mine ... http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/acer_predator_x34.htm

SS
Click to expand...

Hi SmellySkidmark, just saw you upgraded your GTX 770 to 980, can you tell us about your gains in rF2 @3440x1440? I have exactly the same card and i'm desperate to know from a owner how it was. Thanks!
 
Rui Santos said:
Hi SmellySkidmark, just saw you upgraded your GTX 770 to 980, can you tell us about your gains in rF2 @3440x1440? I have exactly the same card and i'm desperate to know from a owner how it was. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Hi Rui, I just sent you a reply PM, here's a copy for anyone else that may be interested.. or not :B

Hi mate, yes I still have the x34, great screen.
I've upgraded the GTX770 to a GTX980 4gig, and I've gotta say I was a bit disappointed at the level of increase I got grafix upgrade. The 980 had a very small increase over the 770, I think I turned up the AA to 8x from 4x & Texture Filtering from 8x to 16x & Shadows from Medium to High. I still get about the same framerates at around 60 to over 120, depending on the track. I'll just check what I get at Silverstone ... Ok 87 in pit lane, 91 on the start/finish line and up to 132 ontrack.
Anyway my thoughts on the screen, it's chalk & cheese really, I had a 32" TV @60Hz 1920x1080, so this is a massive improvement, the clarity of 3440x1440 @95Hz is amazing, I know it's also a faster refresh rate at like 4ms too so I would have to say that my overall driving has improved from the immersion and high detail.

I did struggle to get the best drivers for the card and ended up using a benchtest site for speed results.
Here's the results with the 770 before the upgrade ... http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/1382919
Here's 980 after with driver test complete ... http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/1387712
I think you'll need to check yours aswell as the newest driver for me was SLOWER.
Let me know how you go with the drivers.

SS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top