AC triple screen setup question

I have the triples right at the back of my V2 base, so about half the distance of yours. I too can see the gauges perfectly through my wheel (as long as I'm not in a race and have the position bar blocking part of the view...)
It would be great if we could downsize that overlay and/or place it on top of the screen.

 

Simultaneous Multi-Projection is indeed an exclusive Nvidia technology for Pascal GPUs but it has to be implemented by developers to make a difference. You say "afaik AC will support this".

AC would be an excellent candidate of course for this technology: racing games make the best use of VR and triple screens so it would be a big deal but I've never heard Kunos say they would support this. Do you have any source or were you speculating? Thanks

 

I read on forums that Stefano is working on it, maybe mentioned in stream (?) And that AC has some presentation with NVidia regarding this in Gamescom. Don't know if it was true, second hand information

 

I'm not sure there'll be any benefit to be had for triple screens from SMP.

There's no significant performance discrepancy between single and triple screen rendering when using surround - certainly nothing like there is with VR - so I don't see where the significant gains are likely to come from.

 

It's mostly speculation for now as I'm not aware of any real independent benchmark yet but pcgamer reports significant gains on one specific demo here. I copied the gist below:

"The game was running at 4K but only hitting about 50 fps, just a bit below the desired 60 fps for a 60Hz display. By flipping a switch, the game renders the outer portions of the display at a lower resolution and stretches these, leaving the main section of the display—where you're most likely focused during gaming—at full quality. Frame rates jumped from 45-50 fps without multi-projection to over 60 fps, and while there was a slight loss in quality, it was only really visible if you were stationary and carefully looking for the change."

http://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-gtx-1080-1070-features-detailed/

 

I hadn't realised that it would be possible to render the side screens at lower res, that does sound useful. Will be interesting to see how much extra performance you can gain before the upscaling becomes an issue.

 

And would SMP be interesting to render a full view for the mirrors?

 

SMP certainly isn't a prerequisite for 3D mirrors, plenty of other sims/games render proper reflections. SMP might make it more efficient, but I suspect the 'flat' mirrors we currently have are probably a result of Stefano's limited time and they were simply easier to implement.

Having used the Vive for the last couple of months it's something that is very noticeable in VR and I'd love to see it improved.

 

3x42" 1080p, 1080gtx 2GHz, 11.2GHz mem absolutelly maxed no drozd under 60fps vsync, on-line , nordschleife 32 players

 

Hm, seems like 21:9 displays become more common. Also, for a 34" 21:9 display, the height is very close to a 27" 16:9 display (approx. 4mm off, iirc, I'm sure it won't be noticeable once you're driving).

So I think a pretty cool setup would be to use a 34" 21:9 display in the middle and use the 27" 16:9 displays on the sides.
Moves the bezel even further out of the middle and might make racing nicer, especially with a curved screen.

Three 21:9 displays (as shown in that BenQ video) sounds like overkill and too expensive, but 27" screens are available at a reasonable price.

I think I'll wait until the beginning of next year, though.
I guess Freesync will be more common by then.

 

With the LG 34UC79G, there is now a 34" 21:9 curved screen with 144 Hz Freesync available. Maybe other manufactures will do something similar, we'll see.
The LG seems a bit prizy, but afaics, there are only two 21:9 screens available that can do 144 Hz (this and a 35" AOC).

One LG in combination with two 16:9 27" screens at the sides (lot's of those available with Freesync) seems like a very interesting yet affordable setup.
Still not sure if the different screen sizes might result in problems, though.
But if triples fail in a specific game (for whatever reason) with the 21:9 screen you still have a descent wide alternative available.
Also would be nice for motion pictures that have a wider aspect ratio.

What do you think?

 

I think it is a bit too pricy. At first i thought to sell my 34um67 for this one but watching UC79G's specifics i see minimum free sync range is too high (50hz) and for that price i wish it was 4K panel at least.

 

Well, it's brand new, so I wouldn't expect a descent price.
However, I suspect that more screens of this kind will be available in the future and I think I will go into that direction. Just have to figure out in the next months if I stay with a single screen or use triples (either 3×27" or 34"+2×27").

You can get 21:9 2160p screens, but they won't be 144 Hz right now.
The main reason for that is that they're still using DP 1.2, since that (until a few months ago) is what graphics cards were supporting.
See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#Resolution_and_frame_rate_support_for_DisplayPort
Even for "regular" 4k (3840×2160) @ 144 Hz, you would need DP 1.4 (+DSC, no idea if that is supported by the cards), so a 21:9 screen will have at least the same requirement.
Nevermind that 144 fps at 4k resolution needs a strong graphics card.

Since for racing we're talking about fast movements and since you usually don't pay attention to single pixels, I'd rather go for a high refresh rate rather than high resolution.
The time for 4k will come and then we have the graphics cards and the connectors (DP 2.0?) that can handle everything.