Ideal screen size for Triple Monitors...
6 6

26 posts in this topic

Hi guys

I'm looking at a DIY rig and am currently looking at screen sizes for a triple-screen set-up.

I noted that a lot of the triple screen mounts hold up to 27" monitors. Surely 27" is too small? At that size it will still feel like a 'game'?

What's the best size to get nearer to a 1:1 experience?

I saw on the simperience site that on their top of the line rig they use 3 x 46" monitors.

I found a good video of 42" monitors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCzIfvtt4hM

I was wondeirng what people's opinions are on the subject?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow - what an awesome reply. I really, really appreciate it!!!

Yes, I was worried about the 'giant car' effect you mentioned. And yes, makes perfect sense about the distance from the user. On the Simxperience rig the monitors are 46", but are mounted a fair way back.

I like on your images you can see the steering wheel size on-screen matches the physical wheel almost perfectly 1:1.

This has really given me some fdod for thought!!!

Where can I get/see/use a FOV calculator?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am using 3 - 43" (4K HDTV) monitors center monitor directly behind Fanatec CSW base and it is a excellent representation of 1:1 in cockpit view . I originally had 3-47" and that had a slight large car feel , with the 43" I believe I hit it right on. I'm extremely happy with the results. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any images?

Big difference between 27" and 43" when only, what, 12 inches further back?

Really interested to see as a comparison.

I was actually considering 43" originally as I can get a good price on that size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bigger is not better in this case. I started with 32" TVs and could never get them as close as I wanted, but when I changed it up to 27's it actually was much easier to set them up like I wanted them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Lionheart said:

Wow - what an awesome reply. I really, really appreciate it!!!

Yes, I was worried about the 'giant car' effect you mentioned. And yes, makes perfect sense about the distance from the user. On the Simxperience rig the monitors are 46", but are mounted a fair way back.

I like on your images you can see the steering wheel size on-screen matches the physical wheel almost perfectly 1:1.

This has really given me some fdod for thought!!!

Where can I get/see/use a FOV calculator?

Yes, the wheel on the screen is exact 1:1, if I turn on the in game wheel then it is in the exact same location and size as the physical wheel.

ACvPC5_zpsagkpjsy8.jpg

IMG_0803_zpsjczwxcob.jpg

I use this one because it also does your side monitor angle, which is just as important as FOV.

http://www.edracing.com/edr/FOV.php

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good topic. But my guestion is, which is better, three utrawide or three 16:9? I just look this Benq 21:9 video (amazing!!) but i cant say is it better than triple 16:9...

How about center 21:9 and side for 16:9? Or center 16:9 and side 21:9? What happend if mixed this? :D

Edited by SamKan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SamKan said:

Good topic. But my guestion is, which is better, three utrawide or three 16:9? I just look this Benq 21:9 video (amazing!!) but i cant say is it better than triple 16:9...

How about center 21:9 and side for 16:9? Or center 16:9 and side 21:9? What happend if mixed this? :D

Regarding the 21:9 center and side 16:9s, it is not currently well supported - if at all.  iRacing will not support it. Also, Assetto Corsa's triple screen setup utility is set for identical monitors, rFactor 2 appears to be the same way.  As triples are still a relatively niche market overall, it would be a safer bet to stick with 3 of the same size for now because their not widely supported as it is, and I can't imagine there is any motivation for developer support at the moment. Plus AMD and Nvidia don't currently support it as part of their surround configs.

As far as 21:9 vs 16:9... I can't offer an real world opinion, but I can argue for a benefit - if you angle/position them to go past 180 degrees.  I think John makes this point in his review of the BenQ trip setup.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzTDT14mK8U

 

Your eyes are effectively limited to slightly less than 180 degrees (almost like a flat plane perpendicular to the floor right at you eyeballs) , and you can easily cover that with 16:9 monitors.  If you position 21:9 monitors of equivalent vertical height at the same angles, you would have "wasted" screen space as it would go past the ~179 degrees your eyes/brain can use.  (This is relative to you eye position not the edge of the monitors, in the video above they erroneously say 180 when talking about the monitors relative to each other because they somewhat resemble a semi circle, but the angles are greater, and even more if John's head it taken to be the center of the imagined circle)

However, you will not be looking straight ahead all the time. At least you shouldn't be :)

So anytime you turn your head, the extra screen space would come into play and help maintain immersion by extending the .... um... viewing arc(?words??) such that your eyes won't catch the screen border as quickly - or at all.

I think you would have to set it up this way to see benefit from 3 x 21:9.  Otherwise you're going to run into a problem with your effective display ratio.  3 x 16:9 gives roughly 5.3:1. If you were to set up your 21:9 triples to 179 degrees you would have 7:1 which would be rough.

But again, John Sabol is the best source I know of for real world use case opinions.

 

 

Edited by KaydenX0rZ
ETA: link to review of BenQ triples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, that resolution would not be supported by almost all racing games.

They support 5760 (3 x 1960) x 1080, which is 3 x 16:9 monitors.

Any other more unusual shape (such as extra wide) would not be supported and so would need to be manipulated in some way, with possible poor results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lionheart said:

Agreed, that resolution would not be supported by almost all racing games.

They support 5760 (3 x 1960) x 1080, which is 3 x 16:9 monitors.

Any other more unusual shape (such as extra wide) would not be supported and so would need to be manipulated in some way, with possible poor results.

To clarify, most sims that have/support triple monitor adjustments (AC, iRacing, rFactor2 for example) vs. just allowing wide resolutions (Forza, etc.) will allow three monitors of any resolution as long as the resolutions are identical.  As long as that condition is met, the sim's math just works.  Not with differing resolutions.

It's something that I've had to concede.  There is no Nvidia Surround/AMD Eyefinity support for differing resolutions. Between symmetrical/synchronous(?term escapes me?) triples support and VR, developers have little incentive to explore this.

And as Lionheart brings up you'd have to engineer your own solution. But... maybe that is right up your alley. If so, you are a braver soul than I.

Oh! also important, cost to benefit.  If you can find a deal on a 27" 144Hz 1080p monitor (I was looking at some Acers a few weeks ago for $200)  that would give you 5760 x 1080 @ 144Hz for less money than 2560x1080 @ 144Hz (the BenQ monitor fluctuates between $600 and $800)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nino said:

I use 3x40" in 1080p about 6" behind my wheel base and it feels right to me, shooting for 1:1. I'm always going for immersion. Very happy with this setup.

Can you show a picture? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/29/2017 at 8:40 AM, Krassi said:

Can you show a picture? 

Sure! I will take a few new pictures tonight probably. i'd rather show it off in its most up-to-date, lessons learned configuration vs the older pics i have at the moment.

 

Edit: added recent pics

IMAG1674.jpg

IMAG1675.jpg

IMAG1676.jpg

IMAG1673.jpg

Edited by Nino
add pic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks good, but I'm thinking maybe slightly overscaled (i.e. too big)???

I can't see a steering wheel on screen so hard to gauge.

I went with 32" in the end which allows me to put them behind the wheel base. Still hard to get near the 179 degree FOV - you'd have to bring them in very close.

Scale-wise on screen looks about right however. Onscreen steering wheel at same scale as physical wheel in front of it.

Used the FOV calculators. It's just the 179 degree thing that's hard to get. You need your monitors really close to get that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lionheart said:

Looks good, but I'm thinking maybe slightly overscaled (i.e. too big)???

I can't see a steering wheel on screen so hard to gauge.

 

 

Yup i prefer to hide my wheel since it's in the real cockpit. I set it up by what feels and looks right vs actual calcualtions, so it's certainly possible it is in fact too big, But it feels right to me when in it. But being human my perception could certainly be off.  Also in triple screen pics, the side monitor angles always look weird, but when you sit in the the middle in real space, the angles resolve alot better (R3E does not have full triple support like AC, but for alot of cars it works out decently).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, probably a little off-topic.

What I would say, at least in the UK, it's not really practical to get monitors over 27". At 27" you can get great spec monitors for good money.

To get a 32" monitor (x3!!!) is silly money, so you're then into television territory rather than monitor.

The image on a TV is NOT comparable really to a true monitor. Monitors are pin sharp up close, whereas (most) TV's are not.

I bought 3 x Samsung 32" TV's for £199 each with 5 years warranty. The results are awesome, but the image is definitely not as sharp as a monitor. I notice this most on the windows desktop. When racing noting stands still as such as so much less noticeable.

Refresh rates for TV's will not match a good monitor.

So down to budget really. The price jump between decent 27" and 32" monitors is quite considerable!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, CrashBandit said:

I am not sure if I should start another thread about the monitors but what other key features should I look for when selecting a monitor for triples? Is anything over 1ms Response time bad?

Not at all, only TN panels can run at 1ms due to their technical simplicity which also limits viewing angles, so not ideal for triples where the monitors are angled to your view. 4-5ms is just fine. The high-end 144mhz gaming monitors that use VA and IPS panels are 4-5ms. Monitors with VA panels are the best bang for your buck/euro/pound/bottle caps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
6 6