SOLVED Opinions about a new monitor

J

JEmilio

Registered
Hello dear colleagues,

I'm looking to upgrade my current 20" monitor. I am between these two options, a) an ultra wide 25.6" 21:9, or b) 27" 16:9.

I want to choose the monitor that would give me the biggest vision though the corners since right now all the corners are blind to me. My doubts are, is really noticeable the gaining of the ultra wide over b) at this low size? and do you think is justified to buy an ultra wide of this small size or should I save for a bigger one? The problem with saving is that in two months the prices could simply duplicate because of the volatile economy of my country.
In everything other aspect they are quite similar and so are their price.

Thank you in advance
 
I went from a 2K 16:9 monitor to a 21:9 and I wouldn't go back. In my case what I appreciate more is the possibility to lower the FOV: it gives you a big boost in the immersion and in the feeling of being in the car.
Yes, you lower the side view a bit, but at least you have the option to choose between a more realistic FOV or a wider view.
My monitor is bigger, though: I don't remember exactly the size right now, but it's above 30".
 
I would choose the ultra wide, but in a bigger size.
I have a 29 in ultrawide and its only 28,5 cm tall in the screen, my guess is a 27" only will be 26cm tall and it is a big difference.
I wish I could have a 34" but my desk is almost not wide enough, and I also move my screen to the edge(and a bit more) of my desk for racing and back for office, so weight does matter too.
 
JEmilio said:
Hello dear colleagues,

I'm looking to upgrade my current 20" monitor. I am between these two options, a) an ultra wide 25.6" 21:9, or b) 27" 16:9.

I want to choose the monitor that would give me the biggest vision though the corners since right now all the corners are blind to me. My doubts are, is really noticeable the gaining of the ultra wide over b) at this low size? and do you think is justified to buy an ultra wide of this small size or should I save for a bigger one? The problem with saving is that in two months the prices could simply duplicate because of the volatile economy of my country.
In everything other aspect they are quite similar and so are their price.

Thank you in advance
Click to expand...

Those two have identical horizontal size. So ignoring resolution, the 16:9 will give you more vertical view with the same horizontal.

You'd want to consider resolution though, guessing you have expensive hardware in your location so fewer pixels might be easier to run.

*hmmm... I have a bias towards real FOV, so maybe my conclusion doesn't really make the most sense. It might be better to favour more horizontal pixels (21:9) to maximise your apex view; with higher FOV you will see plenty vertically.
 
Thank you for your answers guys...
Lazza said:
Those two have identical horizontal size. So ignoring resolution, the 16:9 will give you more vertical view with the same horizontal.

You'd want to consider resolution though, guessing you have expensive hardware in your location so fewer pixels might be easier to run.

*hmmm... I have a bias towards real FOV, so maybe my conclusion doesn't really make the most sense. It might be better to favour more horizontal pixels (21:9) to maximise your apex view; with higher FOV you will see plenty vertically.
Click to expand...
On one hand, I will use the monitor mainly for racing so I shouldn't care about the vertical, should I? and on the other hand what you mentioned about maximizing the apex view is what I want the most.

Thomas also mentioned the vertical view, so can you guys explain me why is it important? I think I have a miss-interpretation about it.
ThomasJohansen said:
I have a 29 in ultrawide and its only 28,5 cm tall in the screen, my guess is a 27" only will be 26cm tall and it is a big difference..
Click to expand...

And regarding to the resolution, yes I can manage the extra gpu load.
 
JEmilio said:
Thank you for your answers guys...

On one hand, I will use the monitor mainly for racing so I shouldn't care about the vertical, should I? and on the other hand what you mentioned about maximizing the apex view is what I want the most.

Thomas also mentioned the vertical view, so can you guys explain me why is it important? I think I have a miss-interpretation about it.


And regarding to the resolution, yes I can manage the extra gpu load.
Click to expand...

I have triple screens so I was thinking in terms of true (correct) FOV; in that scenario the taller screen is an advantage, you have (some) more chance of seeing dashboard elements and more immersion from a bit more sky and overhead objects like bridges and overpasses.

On a single screen you're very likely running higher FOV than reality, so that will automatically include a bit more of the dash and sky elements; so I'm probably leaning towards the 21:9 as a more efficient (pixel number) way of getting the screen width you want.

And regarding size, yeah, a bigger screen is always better, but I understand cost is always a factor (otherwise we'd all be running 65" triples!). Coming from a 20" currently I think the 25.5 would be a nice improvement.
 
My point was not so much about getting more vertical view, I just want you to keep in mind that a ultrawide 25" is quite smaller than a 16/9 25" on the vertical size.

I love my ultrawide and for a single screen solution its great.
I run with 52 FOV, which is a compromise to get a more broader view.
I think there's enough vertical space on a ultrawide. I have often multiple overlays running.
index.php
 

Attachments

If you have the deskspace i think its absolutely worth it to save a little extra money for a 32:9 super ultrawide.

Used models can be found cheap and you dont need to buy a high resolution one.
The game looks great at 3840x1080p imo.
I can tell the difference with my current 1440p because it gives even more side view, but you dont notice a huge difference on track.
 
A friend who has a TV 55" (120 cm wide) has asked me this: what is the most suitable resolution to achieve a true scale or 1:1 ratio; HD, FHD, 4k? I have not known what answer, I suppose I would have to go to his house to take some measurements with the game running, and do some mathematical calculations. The truth is that it had never occurred to me, but talking for a while with my friend we have come to a conclusion: let's say, Hypothetically, a real car that is 1.8 meters wide will fit at 1:1 scale on an TV 85"(182 cm screen), but what resolution should you use? And I suppose that the FOV will have to be adjusted ... I don't know, but I was left out of place for a while when my friend asked me, It may not be possible to reach the exact 1:1 either, but what will be the closest resolution?
Would it be a good idea, from the inside view, to take as a reference the measurements of a steering wheel whose real measurements are known, Radical SR3, GT3 / GTE, USF 2000, etc ...?
For example, if we assume that on an TV 85" at 4k, we have a 1:1 scale and the steering wheel of a Porsche 911 measures 32 cm in reality, it would have to measure the same on the screen, if not, it should calculate the scaling percentage.
If it were the same actual measurement as the 85 "screen, it could scale to a TV 55". 85"= 100%, 55" = 64.705 (approx. 65%). 32cm steering wheel = 100%, 65% = 20.8cm on TV 55".
I suppose that in order to be realistic, I should get on the 55 "TV that the steering wheel has the real measurement, 32 cm, without distorting the image too much
A month ago I helped a friend assemble a TV 40" and after 2 days we modified the height, removing 7 cm and it greatly improved the sensations and comfort when driving.
A few years ago maybe these sizes were not possible, if it was not with projectors or triple screens, but I have not found information about this in the forum.
It may not be the right section to ask, I just want to know how to get a real scale, or failing that, the scaling percentage, I will deal with the rest later, although I recognize that some adjustments may be subjective.
Is my mathematical logic correct?
Can S397 provide any information on this?
 
Alex96 said:
A friend who has a TV 55" (120 cm wide) has asked me this: what is the most suitable resolution to achieve a true scale or 1:1 ratio; HD, FHD, 4k? I have not known what answer, I suppose I would have to go to his house to take some measurements with the game running, and do some mathematical calculations. The truth is that it had never occurred to me, but talking for a while with my friend we have come to a conclusion: let's say, Hypothetically, a real car that is 1.8 meters wide will fit at 1:1 scale on an TV 85"(182 cm screen), but what resolution should you use? And I suppose that the FOV will have to be adjusted ... I don't know, but I was left out of place for a while when my friend asked me, It may not be possible to reach the exact 1:1 either, but what will be the closest resolution?
Would it be a good idea, from the inside view, to take as a reference the measurements of a steering wheel whose real measurements are known, Radical SR3, GT3 / GTE, USF 2000, etc ...?
For example, if we assume that on an TV 85" at 4k, we have a 1:1 scale and the steering wheel of a Porsche 911 measures 32 cm in reality, it would have to measure the same on the screen, if not, it should calculate the scaling percentage.
If it were the same actual measurement as the 85 "screen, it could scale to a TV 55". 85"= 100%, 55" = 64.705 (approx. 65%). 32cm steering wheel = 100%, 65% = 20.8cm on TV 55".
I suppose that in order to be realistic, I should get on the 55 "TV that the steering wheel has the real measurement, 32 cm, without distorting the image too much
A month ago I helped a friend assemble a TV 40" and after 2 days we modified the height, removing 7 cm and it greatly improved the sensations and comfort when driving.
A few years ago maybe these sizes were not possible, if it was not with projectors or triple screens, but I have not found information about this in the forum.
It may not be the right section to ask, I just want to know how to get a real scale, or failing that, the scaling percentage, I will deal with the rest later, although I recognize that some adjustments may be subjective.
Is my mathematical logic correct?
Can S397 provide any information on this?
Click to expand...

Getting correct FOV and therefore correct perspective only requires 2 things in rF2: you set the FOV that matches the FOV the screen occupies in your vision (which is easy to do with trigonometry, or any number of online calculators) and that you (your eyes) are perpendicular to the centre of the screen.

Any 'measurements' or corrections required from there are about camera placement in the car, or the car itself. There's only one correct FOV for a particular screen at a particular distance, and it's independent of resolution or aspect ratio. Different sizes (/distances) and resolutions just give you a different size window into the game world, and a nicer (or worse) view.
 
The_Bad_Fasterd said:
If you have the deskspace i think its absolutely worth it to save a little extra money for a 32:9 super ultrawide.

Used models can be found cheap and you dont need to buy a high resolution one.
The game looks great at 3840x1080p imo.
I can tell the difference with my current 1440p because it gives even more side view, but you dont notice a huge difference on track.
Click to expand...
Oh well, that's really not an option for me. In such case I would upgrade other things before.
 
Lazza said:
I have triple screens so I was thinking in terms of true (correct) FOV; in that scenario the taller screen is an advantage, you have (some) more chance of seeing dashboard elements and more immersion from a bit more sky and overhead objects like bridges and overpasses.

On a single screen you're very likely running higher FOV than reality, so that will automatically include a bit more of the dash and sky elements; so I'm probably leaning towards the 21:9 as a more efficient (pixel number) way of getting the screen width you want.

And regarding size, yeah, a bigger screen is always better, but I understand cost is always a factor (otherwise we'd all be running 65" triples!). Coming from a 20" currently I think the 25.5 would be a nice improvement.
Click to expand...
Last night I simulated how the 21:9 will looks like and yes, with my regular in game seat position I could barely see the top of the dashboard unlike with the simulated fov of the 27".
As I suspected, in terms of horizontal they produced almost the same view so to make the final decision I will take into account other features.
 
JEmilio said:
Last night I simulated how the 21:9 will looks like and yes, with my regular in game seat position I could barely see the top of the dashboard unlike with the simulated fov of the 27".
As I suspected, in terms of horizontal they produced almost the same view so to make the final decision I will take into account other features.
Click to expand...
Not sure if I misunderstand, but if you're considering running correct FOV on a single 27" I wouldn't recommend it.

Your two options above are indeed identical in terms of horizontal size.
 
JEmilio said:
Oh well, that's really not an option for me. In such case I would upgrade other things before.
Click to expand...
What setup are you on?

I know people can be happy with smaller monitors, but for me a big monitor is probably the single most important part in a simracing setup.

Sure brakes and wheelbase are important, but I found I can enjoy racing a lot more on a bigger screen than the other way around.

Im on a very high end setup and if I had to choose, I would change my pedals or wheelbase for a cheaper model than go back to a smaller monitor.
 
The_Bad_Fasterd said:
What setup are you on?

I know people can be happy with smaller monitors, but for me a big monitor is probably the single most important part in a simracing setup.

Sure brakes and wheelbase are important, but I found I can enjoy racing a lot more on a bigger screen than the other way around.

Im on a very high end setup and if I had to choose, I would change my pedals or wheelbase for a cheaper model than go back to a smaller monitor.
Click to expand...
I have a G29 with some mods in the pedals including Hall sensors and a "progressive" spring in the brake. Ever since I started simracing I thought the next upgrade was going to be a better steering wheel and pedals, I never really contemplated a bigger screen because I always believed the pedals were holding me back until I changed my mindset, you know it's hard to trail brake consistently with the g29's pedals, but now with enough practice I've managed to master them (although I'm still unable of extract 100% of them) and somehow I'm able of make really competitive times. So now I'm kinda ok with the G29 set, what leaves me with the option of a bigger monitor but not some crazy stuff like a 34".
 
Lazza said:
Not sure if I misunderstand, but if you're considering running correct FOV on a single 27" I wouldn't recommend it.

Your two options above are indeed identical in terms of horizontal size.
Click to expand...
Oh no, I use a fov 8-9 degrees bigger than the theoretical and in the simulation I mentioned I considered it.
 
Ok guys, so finally I purchased the ultra wide. Wow it feels like a whole new experience, for the first time ever I feel inside the car and the viewing through corners is awesome. Also games like ETS are much more enjoyable.
So thanks to everyone who helped me in the decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top