BenQ says "ATTENTION RACING GAMERS!" Has anyone tried this monitor or seen a review from any testers using actual racing sims (rF2 or iRacing)? http://gaming.benq.com/gaming-monitor/xr3501 Looks nice if you have the $$$.
Hello Marc, They do look like nice monitors, check out this review from Inside Sim Racing...they have them in a Triple Screen set up...Awesometacular...LOL http://www.isrtv.com/reviews/benq-xr3501-curved-ultra-wide-triple-gaming-monitor-review/
small rf2 footage with only 2 cars on track. Competition really does show up how unoptimised RF2 is time for a DX upgrade
Even on DX50 a GTX970 wont run 7680x1080@144Hz... Thats 1194393600 pixels every second btw, even if there would be 50 polygons and only T1 shaders on those polygons, a 970 would struggle
Ahh notice you're from Dorset, me too....DX12 would help though. I'm using a 980m 4810 i7 and the game runs poorly on some tracks namely Sebring. Under 60fps on high settings, shadows medium, reflections off etc 24 car grid. Compared to iRacing, AC and Pcars I get 60 constant better visuals
What res are you running. And mind you that your bottleneck is more likely CPU, rF2 computes far more physical calculations than any of the other mentioned sims, and judging from the 980M you are running a high end laptop. Your CPU might even thermal throttle. PM me about whereabouts from Dorset are you from pls
Guys I have tested this monitor. It is 144 hz and you must have at least 120 fps. Triple screen & rFactor2 just forget it. I bought 3 x Predator X34 G-Sync monitors. http://us.acer.com/ac/en/US/content/predator-x34-series
Holy crap. I think the sales pitch for this monitor is as an ALTERNATIVE to triples, not so you can buy three and have 180 degree wrap-around! Even one is expensive enough to make you think more than twice. I am interested in how well it works by itself. And the main reason is that we all know FPS is king, so the native resolution seems manageable on a high-end card. I certainly couldn't use the higher res quad (4K) monitors as long as rF2 still needs super sampling to look acceptable.
Thanks for link. I pay attention to that site occasionally, but hadn't seen that recent review. Look forward to the single screen review upcoming.
Indeed, my 980 just manages my 2560X1440 with some SS in at 60 FPS stable. 4K triple is absolutely out of question on any available hardware if you want to run 144Hz. And in time when we do have such hardware.. the graphics will have moved on to something more demanding. Its a magic circle that you will always have to turn the settigns significantly down in order to have smooth experience
Would it? Sincere question as i don't know. And if it's true, how much "help" are we talking? Extra 2%/10%/30% FPS?
Some reported 20% better performance with DX12. Don't know if it's true. But if it is then it's time for ISI to move on IMO.
Do you under volt for reduced heat or increased battery power. I hate to be mean I never understood gaming laptops unless you can first afford a Gaming PC. I had a look at MSI and kept going up in price to get to 980M till I was @ $3,499 ( Australian) For that I could build a i7-GTX980Ti tower and still have change to get a good enough laptop to do college, whatever. Even a basic tower like mine stock 4690, 8GB-1600 and a GTX970 does high shadows, reflections and 40 cars no problems. Even still sounds pretty poor performance for such a dear a lappy, I would look to bios as suggested and run full performance modes and do a Fresh OS maybe. I still do not like like W10 over W7 with rFactor2 either.
Who have you heard that from? And they're saying 20% better performance in what game in dx12 compared to dx9/10/11? Is there even a game running dx12? If there really is a 20% improvement in performance vs older dx, where is that improvement coming from? Tessellation? If so, i don't think that would benefit a game like rf2.
I think what he means through DX11-12 some things can be optimized better , ie fog, rain , lights, etc.
These comparasions are complicated. It depends on the card, nVidias have been generaly reporting lower gains on DX12 than AMDs did. Also it depends on application. DX12 wont make any difference in many cases, but will do great in other, so if you have an app that focuses on what DX 12 excels at, you will have more gain. But ye not many apps support it, and they have been generaly also testing on DX11 apps running in DX12 mode as far as i know. 20% is too optimistic. It also depends on the assets, how are they build. rF2 assets are as optimized to DX9 as it gets. Just porting them into DX11 wouldnt make much a difference since the object grouping, material sharing and texture atlasing are things that are not really that neccessary in DX11 due to instancing. This whole DX question is far more complicated than it sounds to a person who doesnt know much about real time rendering. but ye. ISI will have to move to new API sooner or later or it will face sure downfall on antique technology
