This looks interesting: https://www.samsung.com/nl/monitors...57-inch-240hz-curved-dual-uhd-ls57cg952nuxen/ Who ownes one and can share experiences?
I have one like that, switched from three monitors, I would probably stick to three monitors if I could do it again.
Good to know ! Was thinking about this monitor, but also about a triple setup. I think I wait for the 5090, since it might be too hard right now to get proper fps in 4K triple. Currently on an oled screen and do not want to go back to lcd (or miniled) ...
I guess it depends on what you're using it for. If you use it for work, then triples are probably better. At least in my opinion.
Just keep in mind that rF2 (like all games) renders onto flat surfaces. Having a 1000R curve will make a bit of a mess of perspective, even if you set it up with multiview in rF2 and use some correction. You'll either have the edges well wrong (which may or may not bother you) or have the centre of each portion correct and a mismatched angle in between. With triples you obviously have the bezel gap (with some hardware solutions to 'hide' it) but you can get the perspective dialed in quite nicely - albeit with some caveats (need to have the screens all lined up correctly to your eyes) and some drawbacks (head movement will throw it off again, more angle to the edge of the screens affecting colour/brightness). There's so many variables it's hard to generalise, but it can be easier to have more overall screen real estate and more wraparound using triples, while keeping a relatively comfortable distance. Triple 4k would be pushing things for sure, it's probably currently a tradeoff between full resolution and high FPS...
with the rise of this kind of monitor... might be a good idea to implement a way to handle curve monitor. iRacing already have it... and I remember I could do it on rF1... (config file)
Do you know if this already super noticable on triple 27”s curved monitors or is it something that would be more pronounced on a 59” super ultrawide? I know its a bit subjective, as you mentioned it may or not bother everyone, but Im running a 49” super ultrawide at the moment and never noticed any deformation. Im switching to triple 27”s but not sure if I should go curved or flat..
Honestly I throw it out there because it's true and people should know as many details as possible (and for that purpose, my post is just to start the investigation, not a "don't do it" advisory ), but in practice as you've found it's probably not that noticeable unless you're looking for it. The thing with a single screen is you either don't use multiview and get more noticeable warp towards the edges, or you turn on multiview and reduce the warp by having virtual triples, but that could create noticeable joins on the image where you obviously just have a single screen. Of course triples means you have a very noticeable join between the images too. It's just offset a bit by the perspective (potentially) being correct otherwise. I would say it just comes down to radius - smaller will be worse, or more likely to be noticeable. In your case, I'd still vote for flat all else being equal, but often all else isn't equal. If you get better features on curved, just go for curved. @The_Bad_Fasterd I'll add, 27s are good (I run those currently) but if you sit close enough for half decent FOV and have the side screens wrapping around, any movement of your head will throw out the perspective a bit anyway. So all in all probably not worth being too concerned about it. Warping the image to fit a curved surface, as done with curved projector screens for ages, does largely correct the perspective (more difficult if the curve isn't constant, which is the case with many screens) but will never be as sharp as a flat image. As far as I know graphics cards only render onto flat surfaces - anything that 'corrects' the output is just another step warping the original image.
Cheers, appreciate the insight. I will definitly run a bezel free kit so I think that should negate at least some deformation at the screen borders at least. I have raced a lot in VR but after a year or two I was over the hassle. The 49” is pretty cool but I miss the screen real estate for close side by side racing which breaks the immersion for me. Triples will hopefully offer the best of both worlds.
I, sorry to have a different opinion, but.. I used to use 3 monitors. But with the advent of VR, and the appearance of devices like HP Reverb 2 among others, I was never able to go back to monitors, so much so that my "Setup" doesn't include a monitor. About 1 year ago I lost my right sight due to cancer, I thought I would never be able to use a VR device again, but in the end it's exactly how I see it in reality, the loss of perspective is topped off by the brain, as I can still drive and play . Returning to the subject at hand, VR has the view that a pilot has in his cockpit, something that a monitor or 3, or even 360 degrees of monitors will never be able to simulate.
No need to be sorry - everyone has an opinion and they're all valid. I know some people who switched to VR and love it, others don't like it as much as screens for whatever reason (or use both at different times, again for varying reasons). It's great to have insights like yours from lots of people to help others decide what to try/use.
You are right, VR is absolutely incredible. I bought the Reverb G2 when it came out and I spent two years racing in VR only. With the help of OpenXR I was able to run rf2 at high resolution, 90fps and decent size grids. It was absolutely amazing. However, VR in its current state is still a bit too buggy for me. I spent a lot of time tweaking settings, which is also a problem in setting up ai races in rf2. There were also connectivity issues with the Reverb from the start, they got a little better with the v2 cable but in the end i spent a lot of time taking off the headset (and set of headphones) adjusting things, and then putting the headset on again. After some time it was really taking away from my time on track and it was sucking the fun out of racing. After I switched back to my 49” monitor I was spending a lot more time actually racing and enjoying the experience. I will probably try again by the time 5090ti comes out and the experience is more user friendly because I think it offers the most realistic/immersive racing experience. Until that time Ill stick with triples.
Yes, I agree, it is sometimes a problem with VR devices, that only work with the cameras built into them, to position themselves in the configured space. In my case (I'm going with the 3rd pair of VR glasses) Reverb G2 v2, so far I can't complain, I haven't had any problems, it doesn't lose position, but perhaps with experience, I realized that they don't "like" very bright environments or in low light. The only problem I have at the moment is that I can only be there for about 1:30 hours, after which I get tired of driving, but satisfied with the experience. It's the closest I'll ever get to driving the cars I want and like, and when I feel like it (every day, practically). About performance: Maybe someone will not believe, but in my system ( 5800x3d*32GB 3600 cl14 and rtx3800 12GB) is smoother with steam VR than openXR, I play RF2 at 120%, i think 3440x3200 something like that, at 90 fps, with 21 Ai cars, visible 16 config: VideoResW=1920 VideoResH=1080 VideoRefreshRate=100 VideoMode=114 VideoRefresh=2 WindowedMode=1 Borderless=0 VrMirror=1 EPostProcessingSettings=2 MSAA=2 VSyncMode=0 UseFXAA=0 ShaderLevel=0 And some tweaks in the player.json file. Medium track Full player car Full Ai car the rest in low and 1 or 2 thinks in medium that in cannot remember.
After all, I was wrong! Fiddle a little more with openxr, and it really changed the VR performance, now i can use almost FULL in all graphics settings, with 21 cars, smooth as silk. i Still have 34% of GPU to push, tried rain at night @100% in OpenXR toolkit, Unable to change resolution, after restart i get a black screen. Edit: to reflect the true, i was mistaken with resolution, but i have NIS active, without upscalling just to improve the image.
