single, dual, triple -> Monitor's and TV's (LED, LCD...TN, IPS and etc.)

I'm still waiting on a larger G-sync monitor to hit the market. I'm not too into the 21x9 aspect ratio, so I'm hoping that someone eventually makes a 16x9 in a 35" or so. Or if all else fails a big Tv, but I'm not really looking forward to the poor response time or all the other shortcoming of Tvs.
It'll just be a single screen setup for me.

I guess I should ask those with 21x9 monitors how it is, are all of your games working in that aspect ratio? Is there enough screen space vertically? Does height even matter much in a racing game?
 
I'm looking to get into a slightly bigger monitor,
I currently have a trusty old 24" BenQ E2420HD and it is still a great unit for gaming (2ms response, low input lag, and the sRGB calibration out of the box is almost perfect on my copy)
I also do a lot of photo editing and do require proper sRGB Colour Profiling.

My main question is, where are we seeing any discernable difference in GtG response times, Particularly in Raging Games?
 
I watched the Inside Sim Racing review of the BenQ 21:9 35" x3 setup and while it is really impressive, the cost is a bit outrageous. Also, 21:9 doesn't really work with consoles, and while I think I am ready to move to PC racing (mainly due to the huge increase in perf/cost of graphics cards in the past couple months), I don't want to give up the GT series.

While you could argue 3 consoles is still cheaper than a decently spec'd PC, I don't think I could bring myself to buy 3 of the same console. Maybe with the PS3, since they are so cheap and I only need two more, but it is pretty obsolete now.

Anyway. I need to buy a monitor stand, and a monitor or multiple monitors. The Sim-lab stand and the RSeat stands look nice, but I need to decide the monitors I am going with first. There is also the vastly cheaper Obutto stand which has the advantage of being single or triple, but it looks especially flimsy. The GT Omega also is configurable, and is the best bang for the buck at $250 with free shipping, but maxes out at 27" monitors.

Is 27" big enough? I am coming from a single 40" that was sitting on an entertainment center just past my feet, but even if abutted against the wheel, 27" seems too small.

I don't know what size Nick's screens are a few posts back, but that looks a bit much, at least from an aesthetic point of view, since while I am not racing, I am going to see it. You also don't want that mouse in a car feeling either.

While I think curved TVs for watching TV from a couch ten feet away is dumb, curved screens for racing make sense since windshields are curved. I think with triples, it would really help in reducing the sharp angles needed to wrap the screens around you. I'm kind of sold on the curved screens.

Then there is the Hertz debate. The majority of reviews I could find say it is awesome and hard to go back to 60Hz, but stepping up to 144Hz is pricey and G-sync appears to be a few hundred dollars more expensive than the Free-sync counterparts. Seems kind of price-gougey on Nvidia's part.

So many decisions, so many monies.
 
Yeah 40" 1080p are also on the cheaper side of things. I already have one, but it is a 2007 model and has a 1 foot bezel, a contrast ratio of 2:1 and weighs about 600 pounds. I was thinking about heading over to BB today to see what the smallest bezel you can get on a 40" is.

And that is good news that PS4 games are starting to support 21:9. That doesn't make the decision any easier though.
 
Model is 43L420U

Bestbuy has a smokin price on them right now. Essentially what i paid on Boxing day for mine.


No pics of any close ups or anything, If i remember ill snap something for ya today after the F1 race.
 
Yeah wow those are super cheap. All the threads and reviews I am reading say 144Hz is awesome and they'd never go back, but the cost is pretty steep when you are buying 3 monitors. I am hopefully going to try out a Vive next weekend, but even if I got a Vive, I'd still need a display for the PS3 and PS4 when I finally break down and buy one. At this point I have to wait for the updated model that supports 4k and VR.
 
jdwk
Yeah wow those are super cheap. All the threads and reviews I am reading say 144Hz is awesome and they'd never go back, but the cost is pretty steep when you are buying 3 monitors. I am hopefully going to try out a Vive next weekend, but even if I got a Vive, I'd still need a display for the PS3 and PS4 when I finally break down and buy one. At this point I have to wait for the updated model that supports 4k and VR.
Click to expand...


Problem is trying to run Triple 144 without a new gen 1080 card. lol And for me with my motion, im being shook around pretty good, so even less importance for 144

4k VR is still a ways out....and its not Just the VR side of hardware thats lacking, Overall GPU power is lacking to push said 4k VR....So you'll be waiting a while.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I meant the PS4 Neo or whatever they end up calling it that supports 4k, and supports VR, but not both together.

As for the 144Hz, I have to build the PC from scratch. I was hoping to get away with a 1070, since they are actually in stock, but I can wait for the 1080 if its necessary.

It seems like the bulk of the market is at 27", then TV's don't start getting decent until 40". Quite a big gap there. There are 32" monitors, even some curved ones, but they max out at 1080p and 60Hz, so you might as well get a 40" TV many of which will do 1080p@120.

32" seems like it could be big enough if you get them close enough to the wheel. It's at least a big jump up from 27". It's too bad they don't make good ones.
 
I own the following: ASUS PB287Q 4K 28" Monitor, Triple ASUS MG279Q 27" 1440P 144hz, and an HTC VIVE

I've had a lot of success in 4K with Crossfire R9 FURYX GPU's. The HTC VIVE is awesome and immersive, however i'm still getting used to the motion while in sim mode. I get naseous after long sessions. I'm totally OK with all other VR experiences though.

With that said I went ahead and bit the bullet and picked up three 1440P IPS 144hz monitors. Still putting together the rig. Had to RMA one monitor for a little gash on the screen. Hopefully have more details in the next few weeks.

The final setup will have an Ergotech Triple monitor mount with telescoping wings with the 1440P triple on the bottom and the 4K monitor up top. Since I have the HTC VIVE and the Triples using all the slots of my GPU's in crossfire. May have another portable ITX system powering up the 4K monitor haha.
 
The 2016 Samsung curved 1080p monitors, C27F398, are stupid cheap on Amazon. $209. They also have a pretty tight curve of 1800R. They are TN, but hoping with curve, I don't see too much color shift.

It was not an easy decision. Single or triple, 27", 32", 43", 60 or 144Hz, 1080 or 1440p, flat or curved, 16:9 or 21:9, etc. But in the end, my cheapness won out and I couldn't resist the $209 price tag.

I just couldn't justify the 144Hz or 1440p price jump, plus the expense of the hardware to take advantage of them. In
fact, you can't even get a 144Hz curved monitor without going ultrawide, in which case, they are 4x the price.

I did order the RSeat T3L stand which was pretty much double the price of the GT Omega, but since I cheaped out on the displays, I splurged a bit on the stand.

Now time to build the PC I guess. I am thinking I'll look for a pair of PS3s on CL for cheap so I can try out the triples with GT 6, since it'll probably take me a few weeks to get the PC together. I'll post some pics when I get it setup.
 
Forget about monitors, go triple projection with pocket 1080p LED projectors and a curved screen. It takes up no more space than three large screens really. I'll have some video in the next week or so showing my small and large curved screen projects. I've been using curved projection since 2012. No bezels, loads and loads of immersion. Much more so than with monitors.
 
The problem with big screens is the fov, you can't get a fov like this, with 32"+

DSC_0227.jpg


Mine are 24", and I think they are perfect, even the 27 would be nice, it changes little, but already with 32 you would go to ruin the immersive effect for me. :)
 
dedraro
The problem with big screens is the fov, you can't get a fov like this, with 32"+

DSC_0227.jpg


Mine are 24", and I think they are perfect, even the 27 would be nice, it changes little, but already with 32 you would go to ruin the immersive effect for me. :)
Click to expand...

Just checked the same car on my 3 x 42 inch screens. I sit a little over a metre from them, and my fov works out to be remarkably similar to yours. Bezels for example are in almost exactly the same position.
 
dedraro
The problem with big screens is the fov, you can't get a fov like this, with 32"+

DSC_0227.jpg


Mine are 24", and I think they are perfect, even the 27 would be nice, it changes little, but already with 32 you would go to ruin the immersive effect for me. :)
Click to expand...
I don't agree with that at all. As long as you are using the correct FOV for your setup then screen size makes zero difference. Use a handy FOV calculator, such as MrPix's http://www.projectimmersion.com/fov/index.php , to make sure you have it right.

My own triple 40" setup is incredibly immersive and i'd hate to go back to 24" screens.

C79C8D03-0422-4F2E-B600-8692CFDF6F4E.jpg


Excuse the sloppy screen positions. I now have an aluminium frame which supports such large screens perfectly. That set up is incredibly immersive. My whole view is filled with the screens in a way that 24" screens just couldn't.

I'd like to see if your FOV would change using MrPix's calculator compared to the shot you have posted.
 
PzR Slim
I don't agree with that at all. As long as you are using the correct FOV for your setup then screen size makes zero difference. Use a handy FOV calculator, such as MrPix's http://www.projectimmersion.com/fov/index.php , to make sure you have it right.

My own triple 40" setup is incredibly immersive and i'd hate to go back to 24" screens.

Excuse the sloppy screen positions. I now have an aluminium frame which supports such large screens perfectly. That set up is incredibly immersive. My whole view is filled with the screens in a way that 24" screens just couldn't.

I'd like to see if your FOV would change using MrPix's calculator compared to the shot you have posted.
Click to expand...

yes, I tried it and good or bad the view is the same, just a little closer. My point was just that the immersive, ie to be able to see the car dashboard, as with screens over 27 "would become too large to look through the steering wheel, and are often seen auxiliary display with z1 dash (or similar) .

Another problem finding parts of the car really out of scale, put an example of the aforementioned Nick Moxley, tell me if these mirrors are realistic, will be around 30cm

DSC_2929_zpsrdnc5bua.jpg


If I proportioning the wheel of AC f1, with its Fanatec then, but of course would become useless 43 ", because even with AC simulators, do not allow you to back away so much, because at some point you see the seat or seat belts,

Just out of curiosity PZR Slim, comes into AC and me a picture of your fov with AMG GT3, where you see entirely all 3 screens. Thanks and sorry for the English, I'm trying not to use google translate: D
 
That was SandroX's SF-15-T the mirror's might be a bit out of proportion as well as a few other thing's but unless its a F1, i Hide the wheel, so there's no real issue. When i run Round wheel cars like PSander's 787 or his 962, the wheel 100% matches my RL wheel. So while there's some disproportion in this exact picture you choose, this was either the first of 2nd day i had my triples up and running, So likely hood of that FOV being tweeked is pretty good.
 

Latest Posts

Back