21:9 worthwhile w/o Freesync?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheElbows
  • 14 comments
  • 2,732 views
TheElbows

TheElbows

Messages
1,561
United States
United States
So, as a last step to my budget racing sim set-up, I'm considering a 21:9 monitor. Namely because I can't afford triple monitors, some games don't support them properly, and I'm not sure my GPU can run three.

So I've been looking at 21:9 but with no desire to break the bank...been keeping it to stuff like this:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00VBNQJSM/?tag=gtplanet-20

Now, I run an Nvidia card and thus won't be able to use the Freesync (an AMD perk if I understand - like NVidia's much more expensive GSync).

The question is, is a monitor like this worth running if I can't use Freesync/G-Sync? Currently running a 24" 1920x1200 monitor from NEC that I've had for about 8 years. I'm not interested in spending $800-1000, but at the mid-5's, it seems more palatable.

Worthwhile?
 
21/9 screens can be a very good option... especially if you go for 2560*1080 resolution, it is much more manageable by single GPU configurations than triple screens set-up.
You should consider anyway that you will encounter as many games that do not support 21/9 resolution properly as you would for triple-monitor. Sometimes it is even worse (i.e. assassin's creed game).

Also be sure that you can connect the screen in display port, DVI or HDMI 2.0. Normal HDMI is not OK for anything above 1080p (16*9). So your video card needs to have the necessary outputs.

I am not sure how Freesync screens behave when connected via DisplayPort or DVI to a non-AMD card, better make sure that it will be OK !
 
Last edited:
Isn't there software that can make games think one very wide monitor is in fact two narrower monitors side by side? As long as the games supported two-monitor setups, they should work with that.
 
Yes there is some software that helps. Don´t seem to be much issues running full screen but I am sure there is older games that you must run borders with.

As for freesync not sure but shouldn´t it have low input lag if you run without it and v-sync off? Or do you then run a different scaler?

To me I don´t think it´s worth it to pay 200$ for Gsync (freesync is a bit cheaper but then you don´t quite know what you are getting) as I am fine running v-sync off in my racing games. I don´t get much tear in them for some reasons like I get in some action games. There I can live with some input lag and just run v-sync on.

But all 21:9 monitors I seen including that LG have some 25 ms+ of input lag which is a bit high though not awful. Acer has some new with G-sync but it´s incredibly expensive. If the monitor have G-sync it can´t be that high and generally releasing a freesync monitor with high input lag it won´t sell.

There is some Corea monitor of unknown brand. https://teksyndicate.com/videos/a399u-affordable-4k-gaming-monitor

If 4K is to hard to drive you can maybe scale it down to a 21:9 resolution and use less pixels. Not sure if you can do that on that monitor. Not sure what the res would be to tired to do the math ;).
 
All good points. At the moment, I want the ratio/fov...but I just don't want to increase lag too much. 25ms etc. sounds a bit high for what I was hoping for. I'll have to check the specs on the monitors I've been looking at. I may pick up the monitor for normal work regardless. Maybe find a way to mount my 24" NEC closer to my racing rig and just deal with it. Who knows.

Any other input is appreciated - any brands to suggest or issues people have run into with 21:9. I'm fine playing with borders as long as I know PCars supports 21:9 (which it does). The ratio is more for use with the racing games than my other gaming.
 
If you want to check the widescreen support of specific games, http://www.wsgf.org/ is a good place to start. There's also Flawless Widescreen and Widescreen Fixer which can help certain games (they both only work on specific games, if I remember correctly) display better at wide aspect ratios so you're going to want/need those. I think you'll find almost all racing games will support your resolution either natively or through simple ini tweaks, I mean I've even had Grand Prix Legends and Richard Burns Rally running on 48:9 (triple 1080p) before now - mods required, of course, but who doesn't want GEM+/RSRBR anyway?

So, yeah, if you mainly just want racing games then I'd say an ultrawide is worth it. I'm probably biased, though, I really want an ultrawide because I recently decided I can't be bothered with the triple monitor hassle any more, but I still play a lot of racing games. A 21:9 seems like a good compromise, so... Yeah.

As for the Freesync thing, I wouldn't worry about it, for most people adaptive sync technology is the digital equivalent of snake oil anyway - I very much doubt many people would perceive input lag if they weren't told it's a thing.
 
Maybe most people wouldn't notice the input lag from a single source in the total chain, but it adds up. 10 ms here, 10 there, suddenly you have 100 ms more than you could have had with better gear. :p
 
I went with a 28" 4K monitor which runs 60fps. It cost $429 (from Monoprice) and provides a great view. It requires a DisplayPort output from your video card to run at a full 60fps.
 
Anyone have input on Ultrawides with reasonable latency? That's the only thing holding me back.

Specs for my comp are:

i5 3.5 quad
GTX 970 card
other junk

Any concerns about pushing too many pixels if I stay 2860x1080? Do you need a superior built rig to run a simple 21:9?
 
Acer have some on their way but they are going to be really expensive. You won´t max games out but I am sure you can run a lot of games okay with that rig :)
 
mister dog
I hope it will become an industry standard in the future. One step closer to the cinematic experience at home.
Do hope they get rid of the curved craze as i find that one a bit silly, but 21:9 seems the way to go now.

Also:

http://www.pcgamer.com/lgs-34-inch-219-monitor-has-convinced-me-that-ultrawide-is-better-than-4k/
Click to expand...
This is where it actually makes a bit of sense though, the curved screen. With a fixed seating position for a single person, it's only going to have upside if one is logically close to the screen. A big OLED screen with adjustable curve would be a real winner though.
 
TheElbows
Anyone have input on Ultrawides with reasonable latency? That's the only thing holding me back.

Specs for my comp are:

i5 3.5 quad
GTX 970 card
other junk

Any concerns about pushing too many pixels if I stay 2860x1080? Do you need a superior built rig to run a simple 21:9?
Click to expand...
I'm running an i5 with a GTX780 (roughly the same as the GTX970) and I'm running 5870x1080 triple screen resolution off the single card in Assetto Corsa and Project Cars. Obviously not at ultra, but looks great to me.

I think everyone who says that you need this or you need that are only thinking about ultra settings.

If you are happy to lower some settings until next gen cards come out and drop in price then really there is nothing stopping you from going wide or even triple screen.

The only reason why I would like to upgrade my card eventually (not in a hurry at all, I'll be waiting till next gen) is just so I can don't have to fiddle with settings to find a solution that works well - it would be great to just set everything at max and know it will still be fine. In saying that, since setting the games up I haven't needed to adjust them, I just set them for worst case scenario as in lots of cars in weather conditions.
 
LeMansAid
This is where it actually makes a bit of sense though, the curved screen. With a fixed seating position for a single person, it's only going to have upside if one is logically close to the screen. A big OLED screen with adjustable curve would be a real winner though.
Click to expand...
Yes but if it also has to serve as the living room TV for the family, the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. But for a sim racing mancave you are right that it would be better.
 
I'd rather have a 16:9 40" 4k monitor than a 21:9 monitor. If you think about it, you can turn the 40" 4k into a 21:9 monitor when you want to play games and don't want to spend all your money on a ludicrous GPU. However, when you're outside of games, you can split it into 4 virtual 1920x1080 monitors all with separate content.

with 4 virtual displays on the 4K monitor, you can play games as if you had two 1080p monitors side by side, but with no bezel in the middle. The top two virtual displays could be either turned off, or display useful 2d content relevant to your game.

I'm not sure if this is possible on all 4K monitors, but a guy I knew that bought one told me that it had four inputs where you could hook up a separate source for each virtual 1080p monitor. It might also be possible to do this in software, but I'm not sure about how good the driver support is for that.
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back