Triple screen worth it?

[David B]

I am debating whether to splash out and have 3x 24" monitors or should I stay with my one 32" screen.

Is triple screen that much better?


I play Assetto corsa, Iracing, stock car extreme on P.C but I also play on my xbox one which can only be one screen.

Also is my graphics card meaty enough for triple screens? I have an Amd 7950 3gb, I am not looking to get ultra settings, but on lowish settings get a minimum of 30+ fps or even 60 fps.

I'd like to know people's experience and advice on the matter, thanks.

 

[David B]

The 7950 runs Assetto corsa with eyefinity, medium to high settings at a steady 60 fps.
I am very happy with that! Anyone thinking of triple screens I would Def recommend it☺

 

[Pär Öqvist]

I would run 3x32 . If I would only do simracing I would probably had a triple monitor setup. I have three monitors but 50"+24" don´t quite match . A 50" is like 4 24" monitors.

 

[rauf00]

3x32" perfect match with mi eyes distance (ar.80cm) and correlation to wheel size (320mm) in the middle. Yesterday i forgot to change visual settings in Assetto and go for club event with ultra, steady 100fps with 780Ti in SLI.
If size is not issue i would say go for 32" FHD. I will jump to another level when 120-140Hz will be more affordable.

 

[Giovanni Lazzari]

Hi,

I had before a 42 inch TV. Wasnt sure about changing for triple screen. As soon as I test for the first time i realised I did the right choice.

Cant go wrong, I just wish i could find 27" monitors here in Brazil.

 

[Nino Scholz]

I say yes it is worth it. You can get 2 more 24" monitors for $200 easily. Then as long as you have a decent gpu youll be fine. I use an r9 290x but used to use an r9 270 in 900p and it still looked great. The immersion is worth it.

 

[Brian C Hayes]

triple screens is just Fun ! fun ! fun ! .... go for it ... you only live once .... I have had Pinball tables ... arcade cabinets ... all of the consoles ... nothing comes close to driving a sim on triple screens ... just awesome ..... That said I would consider upgrading your PC and eventually going down the VR route

 

[DayGlow]

If you mainly race then it worth it +1. If you play a lot of mainstream games it can be a bit frustrating. Also consider other costs as you are pushing at least 3K you need good gpu and CPU horsepower to run it.

 

[Rivanov]

I recently build a new (and first) game PC mainly for simracing. I'm using a Dell U2414H monitor and I love it. Especially the insane thin bezels are awesome. Thinking off buying two more of those to have a triple screen setup.. but my GPU is a single GTX 970. Would I be able to run 3 monitors on one GPU with 60+ FPS and High to Ultra graphics in AC of Project Cars?

Or would i turn the settings down to Low / Medium? I'm a sucker for nice graphics... and 3 monitors + extra GTX 970 + new cooler would be too much right now.

 

[Jason Palmer]

I run triples wih and old R9 280x with 3GB of ram and find I can can run a mixture of medium to high settings in most sims.

Some sims like iracing are a bit heavy going and I have to have to sacrifice a bit of eye candy to keep the frame rate around the 100FPS mark but I find others like Assetto Corsa and R3E I can run with a fair bit eye candy on without any problems.

I as for Project Cars I have not spent that much time with as I just can't seem to get a feel for it but I think I just used a pre set high option and it seemed to run fine to me.

My CPU is an AMD FX8350 and I run with 16GB of ram just in case that helps.

Jason.

 

[Rivanov]

Do you run 1080p triples?

 

[William Wester]

I recently build a new (and first) game PC mainly for simracing. I'm using a Dell U2414H monitor and I love it. Especially the insane thin bezels are awesome. Thinking off buying two more of those to have a triple screen setup.. but my GPU is a single GTX 970. Would I be able to run 3 monitors on one GPU with 60+ FPS and High to Ultra graphics in AC of Project Cars?

Or would i turn the settings down to Low / Medium? I'm a sucker for nice graphics... and 3 monitors + extra GTX 970 + new cooler would be too much right now.

Triples are great for immersion but it does take a lot of GPU power to drive them. I'm using a GTX 980 SuperClocked Edition with an i7 and 16 GB ram. At 5860x1080 (3 x 27" 1080p) I have to turn most settings in Project CARS down to high or medium/low to maintain 60FPS under all conditions like during rain or night. It still looks pretty good though overall (not at night so much).
I recently switched to a UltraWide at 3440x1440 which a single GTX 980 will run fine with most everything on Ultra/High. I loose the peripheral vision but it's a tradeoff, gaining more eye candy. If I did a lot of multi-player I would switch back to triples to help with situational awareness.

 

[Jason Palmer]

No mate just three 19" monitors with a combined resolution of 4320 x 900.

They are the biggest monitors I could get to fit within the 90cm wide cupboard I built my rig in.

Jason.

 

[Flying Kefran]

I play in multi-screen since 2010. First thing I can say is that it is much easier 5 years later ! A lot of games work now directly in triple screen; That was very different five years ago.

I have also tested 21/9 screens and I should say that it is a very good choice if you do not have high end GPU configurations, especially the 2560×1080 screens as they do not require a lot more gpu power than a 1080p screen but already bring the benefits of "ultra-wide" display.

I have had different monitors set-up from 3×22" to 3 40 inches TV. Currently, I use 3 curved screens (27 inches) positionned so that the curvature is consistent over the 3 displays... and I am quite pleased:

For racing games, it is brillant: very useful in multiplayer, improves speed feeling and immersion in general.

 

[Nino Scholz]

Do you run 1080p triples?

At 1080x5760, you really start to notice how much some games are optimised so much better than others, and then within the same game different parts of games. When i was running a single r9 290x, AC ran well on pretty high settings almost all the time. R3E ran smooth on some tracks but unplayable in parts of other tracks. Iracing seems to stay pretty consistent in my short time with it (maxed out). For ETS2 some areas smooth but others slide show with high settings. The heavy loads are multiplied by 3 (vs 1080x1920) so the varying GPU/CPU loads are much more apparent.

For me this means i have to lower the settings on alot of games to match the lowest commom denominator within the game....so ive since added a second GPU which has not been all that satisfying thus far for the games I play.

 

[mrs1986]

Hi,

I had before a 42 inch TV. Wasnt sure about changing for triple screen. As soon as I test for the first time i realised I did the right choice.

Cant go wrong, I just wish i could find 27" monitors here in Brazil.

I know this is super old, like realy old, but, can you tell me which sizes are those monitors? I think they look pretty good, I'm still debating between Oculus and the Triple Setup, but I can't find any reasonable priced monitor on my country... (Uruguay)

Thanks!

 

[maxipolo]

complementary question : is a simple 34 or 35 3440x1440p worth it for sim racing ?
Dont reply 3x35"

 

[Paul Blythe]

complementary question : is a simple 34 or 35 3440x1440p worth it for sim racing ?
Dont reply 3x35"

Been using an AOC U3477PQU for nearly two years as the primary monitor with my race rig. Along with EdTracker or TrackHat, it's a pretty good set-up for sim racing. VR is quite expensive, and triple monitors can take up more space than most have available. So yes, definitely worth it.

 

[William Wester]

I've just switched back to triple-screen, have been using a 34" 3440x1440 UltraWide for the past year and a half. I got away from triples for a few different reasons, one being the affordability of the new UltraWide's caused me to switch (could turn on more eye candy). To me, you can't beat triples (comparing monitor use, not VR) for immersion. An UltraWide is nice but still can't get the wrap-a-round effect, peripheral vision of triples. But if not triples, then an UltraWide for racing games. I really couldn't race with a normal ratio monitor.
The triple setup mentioned above (May 30th post) doesn't have the monitors arranged properly (more an UltraWide than triples), in my opinion, and the VOF is way too wide. I sit very close to my center monitor and have the side monitors at 60 degrees - I need to actually look to the side to see the objects (cars, etc.) along side of me - very immerse experience.
As for VR, I'll make the move possibly when the technology matures. I remember being one of the first with a VHS recorder - man that was limited and expensive at the time

Are triples worth it, YES, without a doubt.

Edit, youtube video that may help - another opinion...

 

[Emery]

complementary question : is a simple 34 or 35 3440x1440p worth it for sim racing ?

Remember that these 34" & 35" 21:9 & 21:10 monitors are just extra-wide versions of 27" monitors, so you still have to get the monitor as close as possible to your face (20") for a realistic FOV that is marginal. Pixel size is typically 0.23mm, which is the same as a 40" 4k TV which has no trouble with a realistic FOV.

Tradeoffs between the 40" 4k TV and a 34"-35" monitor:
- TV will typically have twice the input lag of a monitor.
- TV will only be 60 Hz refresh with HDMI 1.2.
- Monitor has less effective FOV because you can't get it close enough due to your steering wheel being in the way and is 2" less wide than the TV (!).
- Monitor requires less GPU... only about 80% of what a triple 1080p screen setup requires.
- Monitor will likely have gSync or FreeSync... not available on TVs.
- Monitor will have your choice of input connectors (but please choose displayport).
- TV requires 33% more GPU than a triple 1080p screen setup... basically 980 Ti, 1080, or 1080 Ti for a single GPU configuration.

One more thing: 50"-55" 4k TV has about the same pixel size as a 27" 1080p monitor.

So how close can you get the screen (typically no closer than 20" for these monitors), what FOV are you willing to settle for, how big is your GPU, and how important is the input lag for you?

[Edit: note that 4k 144 Hz monitors are on the horizon. Too bad they don't come in larger sizes because 4k on a 27" monitor seems like a waste of pixels when they're THAT tiny... not to mention the required GPU to benefit from 144 Hz is absurd at this time]

 

[crunk]

I recently build a new (and first) game PC mainly for simracing. I'm using a Dell U2414H monitor and I love it. Especially the insane thin bezels are awesome. Thinking off buying two more of those to have a triple screen setup.. but my GPU is a single GTX 970. Would I be able to run 3 monitors on one GPU with 60+ FPS and High to Ultra graphics in AC of Project Cars?

Or would i turn the settings down to Low / Medium? I'm a sucker for nice graphics... and 3 monitors + extra GTX 970 + new cooler would be too much right now.

Im on 3 x U2312HM and I've had the GTX970 for quite some time. AC averaged at about 50-55 fps with a mix of high/very high settings (shadows had to be on low though). You would get good fps when alone on the track but with 20+ bots or online the frames could drop to even 40-45 where the immersion would break.

Made the upgrade to a single gtx1070 since and now pushing avrg 70 fps @ 5760 x 1080 everything maxed

The problem for me with these monitors is ghosting so now looking at all the other options out there. Are 3 144hz 27" panels really worth 1500€ and will a single 1070 be enough for the additional resolution or should I go the VR route?! Damn