Single Large Monitor or 3 Smaller Seperates

6096x1080? not 5760x1080(3x1920)? where does that extra 336 pixels come from?

edit:
bezel compensation?

Yup, 'zactly. You can't see the extra 336 pixels but they still get processed. Also means that when a planet etc goes behind the bezels it doesn't get all stretched out of shape. You don't notice the bezels after a minute, it's just like the front pillars in your car... and the outer two monitors are pretty much just for peripheral vision anyway.
 
I got an Obutto r3volution home cockpit seat with 3x Samsung 27" screens at a total resolution of 7680x1440, powered by 2x GTX 770 4GB cards. It works very well and performance (everything max with MSAA) is decent, too (usually 40-60fps unless there is the usual stuttering around stations or when transitioning from space to the inside of the station). A triple screen setup is kind of perfect for ED since you got the side panels and the center panel in the cockpit so every physical screen has an actual 'purpose'. It's also very immersive. You do not notice the bezels when gaming so it's pretty stunning how you feel like you're really there in your cockpit flying in space.
If I had to build a new triple screen setup now, I believe I'd go for 3x ASUS 27" VN279QLB. It's got a reasonably responsive VA panel, has received very favorable reviews and comes with super-narrow bezels. Seems like the current perfect choice for a nVidia Surround or AMD Eyefinity setup. I've actually had a single one of those on my other (work) computer and can confirm that it is a very decent display.

thought you had 3x ultrawides looking at the horizontal resolution, totally missed the 1440 vertical res, so 3x 2560x1440 then?
wouldn't the asus' be a step down in resolution, thought they were 1920x1080? though have to admit those were the ones i was looking at if i went triple screen or maybe step down to the 24" version if a bit too pricey.
 
Currently running a LG 34UM95 34" 21:9 3440x1440p monitor.

Huge amount of screen space and running it with my GTX780ti i'm getting 60fps.....

Though the cost of the monitor was expensive, I preferred one large screen instead of 3 smaller ones, as having bezels in the middle just ruins it for me.

Though it might not matter what screen you want..as next year we should be getting the 1st consumer version of Oculus Rift.
 
One option (I believe is) not mentioned here is a decent 4k monitor that supports multiple inputs. The idea would be to run 2 x 1080p screens side by side on the 4k monitor if you don't have a powerful enough graphics card yet, and if you do, just run a single 4k screen! Running two pictures side by side means you would not suffer from the bezel issues you usually get when positioning just two monitors next to each other.

I believe a decent 4k monitor can be bought in a 40" size for about £600, which would be about the same cost as 3 decent sized regular monitors, take up less space on the desk, take less power and fewer sockets, and you'd be able to run the desktop in 4k or have up to 4 separate desktops at the same time when you finally realise it's time to quit Elite. The only reason I haven't done this yet is my investment in the Rift!
 
Tried briefly with 3 monitors, but nothing beats an Oculus Rift DK2 for the experience... In particular, using a hat to open up UIs really kills it all. In the rift, you turn your head left of right and here they are...

Since I got one, I can't play without it... Actually stopped playing all other games ;)
 
I went for a single monitor because it would be more wife friendly, so it's an Asus XB280hk which is a 4k 28 incher. No complaints so far, but I'm waiting for CV1 like many others.
 
I run on a single 52" lcd Samsung high def monitor/tv on a slightly oversized and VERY cluttered desk lol. Sound is put through a Yamaha HTR-6063 Dolby 7.2 receiver with Polkaudio speakers with 2 Polkaudio 12" self powered front firing subs. I couldnt see the advantage of having 3 monitors lol. I run in 1920x1080 and average 55 to 60 fps with and Amd 1090T 6 core @3.2 Ghz (not overclocked) 8 gig ram and a 2 gig GeForce GTX 650Ti card. One healthy monitor should be more than enough.
 
I have a 27" Yamakasi Catleap that I purchased for 350 a couple of years ago off Ebay. The monitor has an ips panel with outstanding image quality. The 30" version (Yamakasi Sparta) is on my xmas list.

I considered going with 3 27"s, but decided it better to go with a bigger monitor and leave room on my desk.
 
I run on a single 52" lcd Samsung high def monitor/tv on a slightly oversized and VERY cluttered desk lol. Sound is put through a Yamaha HTR-6063 Dolby 7.2 receiver with Polkaudio speakers with 2 Polkaudio 12" self powered front firing subs. I couldnt see the advantage of having 3 monitors lol. I run in 1920x1080 and average 55 to 60 fps with and Amd 1090T 6 core @3.2 Ghz (not overclocked) 8 gig ram and a 2 gig GeForce GTX 650Ti card. One healthy monitor should be more than enough.





This is an older pic with a game I used to play. And yes... yes... I know my desk is bad lol. This is with my old Altec Lansing pc speakers instead of the newer home theater setup I have now.
 
Last edited:
thought you had 3x ultrawides looking at the horizontal resolution, totally missed the 1440 vertical res, so 3x 2560x1440 then?
wouldn't the asus' be a step down in resolution, thought they were 1920x1080? though have to admit those were the ones i was looking at if i went triple screen or maybe step down to the 24" version if a bit too pricey.

Yes. Triple 2560x1440 setup. I got the triple monitor stand from Obutto to go along with the cockpit.
As for the ASUS, yes, the res would be lowered to 5760x1080 in a triple setup. The greatest advantage, aside from the thinner bezels, would be much better performance obviously. Elite Dangerous is tame and as I said actually works fine with 2x GTX 770 4GB at 7680x1440 but there aren't many other games/sims where you could say the same :) . 7680x1440 is harsh and eats GPU power alive. It's ~40% more pixels than at a single screen 4K resolution so it's really demanding. I'd say if the main focus is gaming/movies and not work/productivity (I have a separate PC at my desk for that), then triple 1080p screens would be a more reasonable option for the time being.
It doesn't look like there will be any huge leaps in graphics technology so 7680x1440 was maybe a bit of a too future-proof bet on my side. Oh well, as I said ED runs fine. Else I play some FSX which runs like crap no matter the hardware anyway :D and some Star Citizen which actually works quite well most of the time (lacking SLI optimization still).
Anyway, due to the near perfect thin bezels and the better performance, if I wanted to build a new 3x screen setup for gaming right now, yeah, I'd buy 3 of those ASUS screens. Can always swap them for something higher res or an OR CV once that becomes available and once nVidia/AMD catch up with current monitor technologies (anything 4K+, multi-monitor or even 1440p in some cases at the highest detail levels is still a tough match for even the highest end current GPUs). It would be the perfect 'wait&see' solution. You'd get something that's nice and can wait and watch how the whole OR CV thing develops or how the FreeSync vs GSync "war" and better 4K display support pans out.
 
I would love to have something like a ultrawide curved monitor with the vertical size of my 16:9 27" monitor but double the horizontal space and curved.
But then again. It is not the time for those yet. Would be too expensive. And later, a Oculus Rift might be the better way to go.
 
Back
Top Bottom