Triple Screens with a 4k monitor?

[stuuuj]

Hi All!

I'm looking at getting three screens for racing (and other games) but I was considering picking up a 4k monitor as my centre, and then 2x 1080's either side. Could I possibly stretch the res out to benefit from the extended screen displays or would that simply not work?

Thanks

 

[Jeremy Ford]

For Nvidia cards it won't work, as with triples in gaming you're combining all the monitors into one big screen to span a single large resolution picture to be displayed across all panels so mixed resolutions aren't compatible. And frankly if it did work you'd be getting slideshow frame rates.

 

[Emery]

When it comes to triple monitors (rather than TVs), the current best workable resolution are triple 32" 2560x1440 so total resolution is 7680x1440(*). This way you get high refresh rates with the most vertical size. Flat would be preferred, but the market is mainly putting out curved screens in that size.

Ideally you'd want a 40" or larger monitors, but then you have to go with 4k resolution which limits you to 60 Hz refresh and triple 4k multiview is not really feasible for fps.

Triple 1920x1080 at higher refresh rates is well within the capabilities of good video cards today, but monitors larger than 27" are going to appear fuzzy due to the low dot pitch.


(*) 7680x1440 multiview (angled side monitors) can barely be handled by a single GTX 1080Ti, with rF2 struggling to maintain 60 fps unless settings are turned down. Expect next generation of GPUs to have no trouble.

 

[Leemstradamus]

Everything that has been stated is true. I think their was a software that could allow you to mix them but not sure on performance. A single GTX 1080TI can handle triple 1080p screens with ease in AC and I racing. Not sure about PCars or rFactor 2. I could never get rFactor 2 to run smooth on triples and gave up years ago.

 

[Leemstradamus]

Another thing to look at if you want triple screens is just getting a good 4K TV the screen space is quite a bit. I have a 40" sitting on my desk and it is impressive.

 

[Emery]

Another thing to look at if you want triple screens is just getting a good 4K TV the screen space is quite a bit. I have a 40" sitting on my desk and it is impressive.

Agreed! There are only three downsides of a 40" or larger TV. First is few TVs have sub-15 mS input delay, second is being confined to a 60 Hz refresh, and the third is missing out on the ability to look out the side "windows".

I use rF2 as my benchmark for worst case fps. All other modern race games that support multiview will have 10-20% better fps (haven't tested pCARS 2 yet... pCARS 1 doesn't support multiview and neither does R3E, though coming soon).

 

[Leemstradamus]

Agreed! There are only three downsides of a 40" or larger TV. First is few TVs have sub-15 mS input delay, second is being confined to a 60 Hz refresh, and the third is missing out on the ability to look out the side "windows".

Everything you said is spot on , I'm just a bit spoiled. I sold my triples after I went to VR. I also got my 40" during Christmas for $290. It is good enough but I'm waiting for these manufacturers to pull their head out of their rump and give me a true 40" 4k with G-sync and at least 120hz.

 

[Leemstradamus]

At this point I'm not sure if triples as we can use them are worth the investment. They never gave us the ability to use mixed screen sizes which was dumb and the cost is still way up there.

 

[Jens Roos]

Im running triple 27" 2560x1440 with gsync. Started with 2pcs 1070 in SLI, in AC fps would be in the range 65-115 depending on car/track and number of cars. Normaly around 100fps with a few cars.

rF2 the span would be 30-110fps, ok with a few cars but far from smooth, this with dx11 but no post effects.

i have now upgraded to 2pcs 1080ti extreme in SLI, AC stays normaly at 120fps, to drop at 100 with 25 AI race start.

rF2 now max out at 120fps and drops to 75fps during race start. This with same settings as above.

So running hi-res triples will put some strain on your PC, for me VR in its current state is not an option, lack of resolution and rather narrow fov. Trple 27" is close to 180 fov with 650mm eye/screen distance. Also not to see anything around you, heat/fog with glases or correction lens inserts are on the con side.

120hz is max when running 7680x1440

 

[Jens Roos]

Note, on rF2 (and ETS2, ATS) you can set different center/side width but height should be same. In AC it is fixed

 

[Mr Latte]

Agreed! There are only three downsides of a 40" or larger TV. First is few TVs have sub-15 mS input delay, second is being confined to a 60 Hz refresh, and the third is missing out on the ability to look out the side "windows".

I use rF2 as my benchmark for worst case fps. All other modern race games that support multiview will have 10-20% better fps (haven't tested pCARS 2 yet... pCARS 1 doesn't support multiview and neither does R3E, though coming soon).

Some of Sony TV models in recent years supported 120Hz refresh.
Possibly some of this years models from other brands do but again your right monitors can deliver higher refresh or with less lag times. Although it appears TVs can deliver much better HDR if looking to the current trend and future.

Another problem in the TV sector is that you cant seem to get the best/performance models in 40" type sizes. I cant see a 120Hz panel based model that is known to also support PC at 120Hz under 49" size.

Prices of some monitors are just ridiculous all because they offer higher refresh.
I guess for each user it depends what are the things that appeal more to each user.
As adaptable refresh is available now over HDMI it means TVS could support such but it doesn't appear to be happening at the moment.