43" Monitor Decisions and Impracticalities

[Emery]

Looking to upgrade my 27" IPS triple monitors to larger for more immersion. Going to 32" monitors unfortunately does not increase my FOV because I'd have to move them back to clear the steering wheel base, thus the next stop is 43". At 43" in the same place as the 32" monitors, my vFOV increases by a substantial 10 degrees!

Okay, let's go shopping. Dang, there are only two 43" monitors with increased refresh rates and they just came out circa December/January: Acer (US $1500) and Asus (US $1000). Both monitors are BRG VA panels, so have poor text and viewing angles. The Asus already has a bad reputation, while the Acer's reputation is marginally better and it comes with 120 Hz GSYNC.

All other monitors are 60 Hz. There's an HP that's over US $1,000, so it's out of consideration (why pay that much for only 60 Hz?). LG has updated their IPS 43" monitor without offering any discount on the old model; both are available on Amazon for US ~$700. And good old Viewsonic hasn't changed their IPS model in 3 years.

Reading reviews, the LG is fragile, as in it is easy to break the panel when moved. I think the LG will accept a 1440p input, where that is not listed for the Viewsonic. The Viewsonic's panel otherwise seems to be marginally better. The Viewsonic is scarce and most prices seem to be above MSRP (US $676), however I've located a place that has them decently below MSRP.

My current 27" monitors are 1080p and can operate at 75 Hz if I use a Windows custom resolution. Currently I'm running them at 60 Hz because the occasional Windows or nVidia driver update kills the custom resolution and it's a pain to recreate it. So though I like a refresh of at least 75 Hz, apparently I can get by with 60 Hz these days. With the 4k monitors, I'd still be simracing at 1080p until the video card is upgraded at some future date. Regular desktop, though, would be running at 4k.

So the decision has three outcomes:
1) Do nothing because the perfect 43" monitors do not yet exist (high refresh rate IPS panel)
2) Buy the Viewsonic monitors because of price & quality and regret not having a high refresh rate
3) Buy the Acer monitors, break the budget, and be disappointed by the VA panel text & viewing angle

Overall, I'm leaning towards 2 due to FOV lust, but 1 is probably more practical in the COVID world. I read that Samsung is leaving LCD behind and exclusively going to QLED manufacture. Is that going to drive panel costs up? Have I missed anything else (other than VR)?

 

[idealtarget]

If you have a proper triple monitor mount and an extender for the wheel rim, you can place the center monitor 52cm from your eyes and achieve 180° fov (with 27" monitors) and 61cm with 31.5" monitors. No need to go with bigger monitors.

 

[jamescarruthers]

I have a Samsung 50" running in gaming mode, and it's running fine with a great picture. $383.00 in the US. EDIT: I should add that I have an MSI 32" curved, and I prefer the 50" way over that monitor, plus the picture quality is the same in my eyes.

How is the lag on a TV? I always thought that was an issue.

 

[Bonehead]

I run it in 'Game Mode' and I don't see any.

 

[Emery]

No need to go with bigger monitors.

Oh yes there is! You're forgetting vertical fov. You have to use a virtual rearview mirror in many tintop cars because the one in the car is too high to see with 27" or even 32" monitors when using a realistic fov. There's also the center console speedometer in the Cobra, which is too low to see with 27" monitors.

 

[idealtarget]

Oh yes there is! You're forgetting vertical fov. You have to use a virtual rearview mirror in many tintop cars because the one in the car is too high to see with 27" or even 32" monitors when using a realistic fov. There's also the center console speedometer in the Cobra, which is too low to see with 27" monitors.

Triples 27", 52 cm from eyes - 180° fov
Triples 31.5", 61cm from eyes -180° fov
Triple 40", 77cm from eyes - 180 fov.
In all cases, the center (height) of the screen is line up with eyes.
Can you see more (vertically) with the bigger monitors?
To be able to see more of vertical fov (than 27" and 32") you have to place them (40" monitors) closer. Do you know any race sim tha supports more than 180° fov?

 

[Deleted member 197115]

Triples 27", 52 cm from eyes - 180° fov
Triples 31.5", 61cm from eyes -180° fov
Triple 40", 77cm from eyes - 180 fov.
In all cases, the center (height) of the screen is line up with eyes.
Can you see more (vertically) with the bigger monitors?
To be able to see more of vertical fov (than 27" and 32") you have to place them (40" monitors) closer. Do you know any race sim tha supports more than 180° fov?

Modern FOV Calculator

 

[idealtarget]

Modern FOV Calculator

View attachment 375356

I didn't understand your example, but ok. So this is an example of triples 43", 50 cm from eyes. The width of a 43" monitor is 95.19cm. I used iracing calculator and i saw this. Side monitors angles 87.18° (almost 90°) and 261.53° fov. Can you realise what this means? Almost half of the side monitors would be behind your head. There is no benefit of using more than 180° fov. You will have to put the 43" monitors 82.5 cm from your eyes for 180° fov and it will be the same like 27" 52 cm from eyes and like 31.5" 61cm from eyes.
The correct placement of a monitor is the center (height) of the monitor to be in line with your eyes. Because there is also the column of the wheel, when you use a big monitor like 43" you can't place it behind the wheel like this. It will be higher because of its physical height. And then you will waste 1/3 of the screen to see the roof of the car or the sky.

 

[idealtarget]

I just wanted to help, but if you can't undestand this, go with 43" monitors. You will have 60hz and not enough gpu power to run triples 4k or you will have 144 hz (a lot of money, 3.000+) and not enough gpu power also. Or you will run them in 1440p and for sure it will be worse than a native 1440p panel.

 

[jamescarruthers]

Something useful with the FoV calculator is that Assetto Corsa uses vertical FoV.

You'll see that 27"@50cm and 43"@80cm have the exact same vertical FoV.

There's no real reason to go with 43" unless you want to sit further away. Personally I find 50-60cm away from a screen perfectly comfortable.

 

[Deleted member 197115]

I didn't understand your example, but ok. So this is an example of triples 43", 50 cm from eyes.

Which gives 180 degrees on PCars2 (horizontal FOV). Is it really just how much of the view you can block with side monitors (which depends on monitors angle) or scale of the world?

 

[idealtarget]

" gives 180 degrees on PCars2 " Yes because PCars2 has a maximum fov of 180 degrees. If you put 80cm in the calculator the fov would be the same (80cm or less). If you place the 43" monitors closer than 80cm in project cars 2, then everything on the screen will appear bigger than it sould.

 

[Deleted member 197115]

You are right there, noticed that myself shortly after posting.
I have 42" monitor 50cm away, which gives me 55 degrees Vertical FOV and 86 horizontal accordingly to FOV calculator.
And everything is 1:1 size.
As adding side monitor does not change vertical FOV, scale should be the same, just more stuff on sides.
I don't think there is anything OP should worry about, he'll just get more vertical stuff than on 27".
Looking forward to the pictures when everything is setup. Green jealous.

 

[idealtarget]

With a single 43" 50cm away, you are fine. You will not have more than 180 degrees fov. But if you put two more side monitors you won't be. You have to put the monitors farther away (82.5cm or more). I explained before why.
1. The games has to support more than 180 fov.
2. If more than 180 fov is supported then half of the side monitors would be behind your head.

This was my last post here. Of course anyone can do whatever he wants. If somone wants to use triple 65" TVs to be able to see the center mirror and the dashboard it's ok. I can do the same with my triple 27" and 32" monitors.

 

[Emery]

Because of Multiview, most sims support "more than 180 deg" and it's actually beneficial if some of the side monitors are behind you because glancing over your shoulder was entirely possible in racecars before 2001 (before HANS became mandated, first by NASCAR late in 2001), so it's a reasonable action that adds to immersion. As HANS and seats with side headrests have become more common in tintops, there's no reason to even attempt to look out the side windows, but as I like all periods of motorsports, then I want the option.

The toughest rearview mirror to see in-game that I'm aware of are the stockcars in rF2. The upper mirror becomes fully visible at 52.8 cm viewing distance. Fake news about seeing roof or sky at 50 cm viewing distance. Sometimes you actually have to try something rather than theorize.

43" 4k monitors are about as big as one should use if you sit 51 cm (20") away because of pixel size when doing normal office things. With my reading glasses, I'm much more comfortable at about 61 cm (24").

The main snafu I've encountered is nVidia's fault. The video driver just won't let you configure 1080p Surround when the 4k monitors are attached. I'm not the only one with this problem. AC and rF2 perform reasonably well at triple 4k -- ACC, PCARS2, and AMS2 are dogs. AMS1 doesn't see 4k triple as an option. Haven't tested Raceroom yet.

 

[Emery]

With my system (GTX 1080, 3.4 GHz i7-4770 circa 2012, Win10), here are the sims which can hold more than 60 fps in Triple 4k in Multiview (angled monitors), possibly with graphic settings adjusted:

• Assetto Corsa
• Raceroom
• rFactor 2

The following sims hold more than 60 fps on a single 4k monitor, but need more power for Triple 4k in Multiview:

• Automobilista 2
• Project CARS 2

And that leaves Assetto Corsa Competizione as needing settings turned down to run close to 60 fps on a single 4k monitor.

Original rFactor and original Automobilista do not recognize Triple 4k monitors as a possible resolution and their performance on a single 4k monitor, while adequate, is lacking.

Worth noting that minimal AA is needed to obtain a nice image at 4k.

 

[Emery]

Difference between 27" at my original distance and 43" at my current distance. [edit: jamescarruthers mentioned the offset, so I generated a new pic]

 

[CC]

I use displayfusion with my surround from steam used it over a year that has custom resolution besides your surround Nvidia ones, never tested changing it though.

 

[CC]

@Emery

Gyazo

gyazo.com

not sure why I cant go past 60hz with anything always resets back to 59.99

 

[Emery]

I use displayfusion with my surround from steam used it over a year that has custom resolution besides your surround Nvidia ones, never tested changing it though.

Gave it a go and can see how it fixes some of the annoying quirks of Surround, but it doesn't give the capability to add resolutions to Surround. I think the answer lies in using the CRU utility and adding an extension block to the monitor EDID, but I'm still not quite certain what I'm doing in there.

 

[CC]

Gave it a go and can see how it fixes some of the annoying quirks of Surround, but it doesn't give the capability to add resolutions to Surround. I think the answer lies in using the CRU utility and adding an extension block to the monitor EDID, but I'm still not quite certain what I'm doing in there.

Yeah im not having the best of luck with mine either im on my 3rd set of cables which are all 3 meters each so not cheap,
7680x1440 my screens are 144hz they show 144hz settings in there on screen UI ingame using steam im getting awesome fps in every game apart from ACC which seems to locked to the 60hz, Nvidia surround wont go past 60hz it shows 144 as an option but just keeps resetting back to 60hz so does displayfusion also, I didnt read any manuals or configs so maybe something on my end,
none the less ingame looks absolutely mind blowing so whatever the hz is looks and feels great its not like im having issues with screens flickering or anything bad just a visual 60hz setting, looks way nicer than my 5680x1080 triples what I had before 24 inches your screens are insane resolution