Thinking of Switching to a Super Ultrawide Monitor

newbert · Mar 20, 2020

I'm thinking of upgrading to a 49-inch 32:9 Super Ultrawide Curved Monitor, but have a few questions about them:

1. My present monitor's native resolution is 2560x1080 at 144mhz. What's the native resolution of a 49 inch 32:9 monitor? No matter what it is, it'll display lots more pixels than my present monitor, so would my GeForce 1660Ti video card still suffice?

2. What radius curvature is best for sim racing, in order to maximize the immersion without unnecessarily introducing undue distortion?

3. Do all current popular sims (AC, ACC, R3E, rF2, AMS2 Beta, PC2, Dirt Rally2, iRacing etc) all support displaying in 32:9?

4. Any drawbacks to going this route?

I'd love to hear from anyone who uses one of these beasts for their sim racing!

Thanks!
Bert

morsify · Jun 7, 2020

newbert said:
FWIW, the curved ultrawide would be my preference. (I use it just for sim racing.)

Hi @newbert , did you buy one of the Samsungs in the end? I'm looking at the same two models and I'm tempted to go for the more expensive CRG90. I think it would stretch my RTX2070 but at least it would be more future proof.

My main concern (apart from the price) is the short height of the screen - can anyone with one of these 49 inch ultra wides comment? At 34 cm it is pretty narrow height, so how does it look in other games, when taking a break from sim racing?

DrRob · Jun 7, 2020

@morsify
I would defo go for the higher res one. The height of the panel is equivalent of a 27" monitor

morsify · Jun 7, 2020

thanks for the reply @DrRob .

I have to go and lie down now. I just ordered the higher res one.

VuChainz · May 23, 2021

Furnace Inferno said:
I have the CRG90 you definitely want to go for it over the older CHG90. You can run it at the same res as the older one (3840x1080) no problem but you get the added benefit of the screen being better. If/when you upgrade then you can bump up the res to 5120x1440.

I have a 1080Ti and the modern games I can’t run at that res maxed like AC Odyssey I just knock down and it’s similar to 1440p performance cost whereas full-res is nearly the same as 4K.

Also just to note there is a new Samsung being released though not sure when now but they have shown it might be worth waiting for the specs or a bigger reduction on the CRG9 when it does release.

I'm glad I found this comment. You made it easier for me to go with the one with higher resolution. The idea of just bumping down the resolution is a good idea.

I do have a 3080 so it shouldn't be a problem at all, but I see that my 2560x1440 monitor struggle to keep a steady 144fps in ACC with ultra settings, I sometimes drop as low as 100 fps. I should probably dial down on some of the settings.

Have you had a chance to test the Odyssey G9 with 1000R curvature? I'm trying to figure out wether it's the curvature or the resolution that causes the distortion on 32:9 monitor.

DrRob · May 24, 2021

@VuChainz It is defo the curvature. With the 1800R I used projection correction of 0.6 / 0.7 in ACC, with the G9 and 1000R I went 1.0 to get the same effect.
Mind you, you should increase resolution oversampling in ACC with higher projection correction, since you stretch the pixels and therefore loose some resolution in the process.
With the 0.6 / 0.7 it would mean like 110% oversampling setting and with the 1000R it would be 120% (This was stated by Gergö Panker IIRC).
With a RTX3800, 120% oversampling, settings to mostly High/ some Epic I can run 70FPS (capped) with almost no dips below this threshold (G-Sync and HDR activated as well).

You can see ACC stresses the 3800 at such high settings quite a bit!

VuChainz · May 24, 2021

DrRob said:
@VuChainz It is defo the curvature. With the 1800R I used projection correction of 0.6 / 0.7 in ACC, with the G9 and 1000R I went 1.0 to get the same effect.
Mind you, you should increase resolution oversampling in ACC with higher projection correction, since you stretch the pixels and therefore loose some resolution in the process.
With the 0.6 / 0.7 it would mean like 110% oversampling setting and with the 1000R it would be 120% (This was stated by Gergö Panker IIRC).
With a RTX3800, 120% oversampling, settings to mostly High/ some Epic I can run 70FPS (capped) with almost no dips below this threshold (G-Sync and HDR activated as well).

You can see ACC stresses the 3800 at such high settings quite a bit!

I see. So the 1800R should be "less" taxing on the GPU than the 1000R because of the oversampling to compensate for the loss of resolution. I might consider going with the 1800R just because of that, but also because I can't find projection correction in AC, only in ACC. I drift in AC, so lack of correction is very visible with Neck FX enabled (side mirror goes from small to stretched out, which is unrealistic and annoying). Do you (or anyone else) know if there is such a correction available for AC?

DrRob · May 24, 2021

@VuChainz I haven't touched AC for a long time (uninstalled even), so not sure. But you could use a triple screen option to get around this issue? Performance impact should be less pronounced than with ACC I reckon.

VuChainz · May 24, 2021

DrRob said:
@VuChainz I haven't touched AC for a long time (uninstalled even), so not sure. But you could use a triple screen option to get around this issue? Performance impact should be less pronounced than with ACC I reckon.

I tried the triple screen option, but the result is far from perfect. I don't even like the triple screen option for ultrawide on ACC (I have a 21:9 right now).

DrRob · May 24, 2021

VuChainz said:
I tried the triple screen option, but the result is far from perfect. I don't even like the triple screen option for ultrawide on ACC (I have a 21:9 right now).

True. The triple screen option in ACC is rubbish with ultrawides as it generates these vertical lines where the break to the other monitors is supposed to be.