Just got a GTX780 and hooked up 3 screens. I noticed that with bezel correction on, the FPS number displayed (Ctrl F) slides to the right slightly and is partly out of view "behind" the bezel. I never saw this when I used a Matrox Triple Head 2 Go for my 3 screen hook up. Matrox's technique is to blank out the inner part of the scene displayed in the outer monitors. They then "slide" those outer scenes inward to close the gap. This maintains the aspect ratio but yields a black bar (the width of the bezel gap) at the outside of the outer monitors. Nvidia, on the other hand, blanks a bit from the edges of both the center and outer monitors (only the inner edge of the outer monitors). They then stretch all three screen scenes to close the gap. On the outer screens they leave the outer edge of the scene fixed as they stretch the inner edge inward to close the gap. It has the effect of slightly warping the scene horizontally. But you have no black bars (the width of the bezel gap) at the outer edges when they're done. What seems peculiar is that Nvidia ups the aspect ration numbers from say 5040 x 1050 to 5260 x 1050. This would imply that one would see more of the virtual world, filling the outer edges as the scene is slid inward. But you don't see more. As I said, the outer edge of the scene is fixed to the outer edge of the monitor so you see no more of the virtual world than you would with no bezel control. You might say the stretching is insignificant but I don't use Rf2 multiview so apparent stretching of the scene is a regular issue to be dealt with in setting the FOV. This makes it more difficult to get the correct "look". If Nvidia wants to warp the scene to solve the bezel problem I wish they would warp vertically by the corresponding amount.
that is just our ui issue/coding issue, i assume. i cant test it myself, can someone else confirm and ill report it.
Yes, that's the same solution that AMD uses with Eyefinity. When you activate bezel correction the horizontal resolution increases. This makes part of the UI (or Windows desktop) disappear behind the bezels. If I remember correctly, some time ago, in a Developers Q&A, this was mentioned as something to improve for triple monitors.
The mentioned "issues" are completely identical to the AMD ones, when adjusting for bezel-correction you are simply adding 'empty space' which has to be added to the resolution. I just switched from AMD HD7970 to Nvidia GTX780ti...
Yup, has nothing to do with NVIDIA or AMD, it's just the fact that you are adding a part of the game being rendered that you cannot actually physically see but it's still being rendered and output by the game & GPU. The game itself doesn't know you have a bezel there, it doesn't know that that part of the screen can't be seen by you. The fix would have to come from the game devs.
WIZPER Im thinking of doing the same thing 7970 to 780ti How big of a performance jump did you see? Sorry not on topic.
The ISI-fix would be for the game to NOT render the GUI as one third of total resolution, but at the screens native horizontal resolution - or atleast give the user an adjustable value for compensation.
Close to 50% I'd say. Hard to be specific as I didn't run benchmark tests, but am finally able to enjoy Multi-View
would be great if ISI finally gets to work on triples like they said over 6 months ago still not racing for another 3 weeks never know ISI might have some improvements by then, maybe even 5.1 sounds might get done but I wont be counting on it the simple fixes don't seem to get done very quickly.
I used to use Matrox TH2Go, too. Ricknau's description is accurate. With TH2Go, the center screen is untouched, so the framerate counter is completely visible. The partial blocking with NVidia is due to the way NVidia does bezel correction. With triple screens, it would be a great improvement to be able to move the framerate counter, message center, and HUD, similar to the way you can move (and resize) TechAde's pedal overlay plugin. I'd love to be able to move those to the side screens.
It is an ISI issue. The Nvidia and AMD solution is correct if you want to use all your displays' space. With Matrox you lose some display area on the side monitors. You can move elements in the Windows desktop to avoid having them hidden behind the bezels. You can not do that in rFactor2. So the UI has to adapt to this situation.
Either a) you don't understand what I describe, b) you don't believe what I describe, or c) you're wrong to think stretching the scene in only one axis is proper way to correct for the bezel. Unless you think turning squares into rectangles is correct. ISI may have issues in dealing with the stretch phenomenon but in no way can NVidia's method be the "correct" method to compensate for the bezel. The best way would be to do the Matrox "slide" method but then fill in the outer edges. Or, if the scene is stretched horizontally by x% then stretch it vertically by the same % so squares don't become rectangles. Do this... with no bezel correction single click on any desktop shortcut icon. Look closely at it's nice square shape. Mark the edges very carefully on a piece of paper with a sharp pencil. Activate bezel correction. Use the markings to compare the width. It will be wider. Notice that the vertical dimension doesn't change. That my friend is not the correct way to handle the bezel. But yes, ISI has an issue in that they have to deal with this.
I bought the 780Ti too and found a nice jump in performance, but multi view always seemed wrong to me as in cockpit view the side monitors just looked wrong. The dashboard was in three pieces each with their own camera. The track edges also did not flow from centre to side monitors. Is multi view suppose to be better? Are my monitors at the wrong angle? They are at about 45 deg at the moment.
You are right, I didn't read properly your first post. If AMD does the same (I haven't checked), I understand the only proper solution would be to avoid the drivers' bezel correction and do it in-game. As you say, we need ISI's help with that anyway.
You still have to line your monitors up. It's a combination of the following: - Your in-game FOV (with 24" triples your vertical FOV should probably be between 15 and 30 degrees) - The distance from your eyes to your screen - The angle of your two outer monitors Set your desired in-game FOV. (For eg. with my setup with triple 16:9 24" monitors my in-game FOV to have a 1:1 representation of real life would be about 17.5 degrees, but I compromise for a bit more vertical & horizontal vision and therefore currently use 25 degrees). Then either angle your monitors more in or out until your dash and everything looks perfectly straight or move closer or further to your screen until everything looks perfectly straight. Or do a bit of both. Go in cockpit view while you're doing this and you can see when the dash and cockpit around you look perfectly straight as it crosses from one monitor to the other. After you set your desired in-game FOV you basically just adjust the monitor angles, or your eye's distance to your monitor, or both, until everything looks straight and perfect P.S. Don't forget to setup your bezel correction in your graphics card control panel.
Ya you will definitely want to lower it from 60. 60 degrees is a heavy compromise FOV so that if you are playing on a single screen you can still see either side of you. Everything at 60 degrees will look tiny. Your dials on the screen will look tiny compared to the size of a real dial in front of you when you're in a car. A car right in front of you will look tiny compared to how much of your vision a car would actually take up if you were right behind one in real life. Turns will look very misleadingly un-sharp, causing you to often go way too fast into them (until you get used to the track). Inclines and declines will look flat when they are actually supposed to look very steep, etc. Going to a lower FOV will make you feel like you are actually there in a car, not just playing a game I had trouble going from 60 or 70 to 25 in one shot. Too much of a massive difference. I slowly decreased it by 3 or 4 degrees once I felt comfortable and could achieve my previous best times. Now that I worked my way down to 25 I could never go back to such an unrealistic FOV. Everything is so immersive and engaging at realistic FOVs. Turns actually look big, sharp, and scary lol. Uphills and downhills actually look real steep and exciting. Trackside objects like billboards, fences, signs, markers, etc. etc. are actually big and you can actually see them now. You have to look to your left and right to see your mirrors just like in real life, rather than just looking pretty much right in front of you on your centre screen.
I had a little time to check this with my AMD cards. Drivers version 14.1 Beta. I took screenshots with and without bezel correction: Bezel correction, original resolution 5292x1050: No bezel correction, original resolution 5040x1050: As you can see, the one with bezel correction has a wider view. If you put one above the other, with 1:1 resolution (half the original for each one), you'll see that there is no stretching using bezel correction. So the only problem is that the UI is using exactly one third of the horizontal resolution in both cases, but we would need that it uses a little less when using bezel correction. I haven't done the same test in the Windows desktop, but it looks like it does the same stretching as nVidia when using the resolution with bezel correction. But as I can configure the desktop to use 5040x1050, and rFactor 2 to use 5292x1050, this isn't really an issue.
Very interesting Armando. Looking at your in-game screen shots drove me to look deeper into the bezel correction with my Nvidia card. Just like in your pics, when I select 5260x1050 in the game, I do see a wider scene horizontally. And if bezel correction is off, the picture is squished horizontally because more of the scene it is crammed into the fixed monitor space. (For that reason your upper scene must also be squished.) Then when bezel correction is turned on the picture unsquishes when the bezel zone is eliminated and the scene segments stretch to take up the gap, resulting in normal proportions. The error in my earlier analysis was in using the windows desktop as a scene measuring picture. No matter what resolution one chooses, Windows fills the scene with the desktop picture. I guess I expected more to appear at the outer edges but there is no more picture there. I guess I should have included an option d) What I described is totally irrelevant to what happens in-game. Thanks for continuing to study the issue and getting me off my high horse. I believe I'm tasting crow right now.
