Long post, the usual warnings apply: this is my opinion, based on my experience.
My rig setup (the relevant bits anyway):
16GB Crucial Ballistix 2600
i5-8600k (not O/C yet)
GTX1070 O8C
1x Acer Predator XB271H 1080p TN 144Hz G-Sync monitor
Logitech G29 wheel + pedals + H-shifter
Under test:
Triple 27" monitors
Oculus Rift
Driving games in the test:
- Assetto Corsa
- Assetto Corsa Competizione
- DiRT Rally
At the weekend I spent in excess of 30 hours trying both VR and Triple monitor setups back to back
The triple setup consisted of my own 27 inch monitor as centre, a G-sync 144Hz TN panel, and two other bog standard 1080p 60Hz IPS panels used as side monitors, which I borrowed from work.
I don't have a sim racing chair/rig, that might be in my wish list at some point. I only have a desk.
The triple set of monitors, on their own stands, the centre around 65cm from my nose, and the two side panels at a 45 deg angle, giving a vFOV in assetto of 29 degrees.
I had the triple set for a couple of days prior, and the first impression I got firing up AC was "Wow, this is so much better than a single monitor!", I was more consistent around the familiar tracks I raced on recently and I was really enjoying being surrounded by screens showing me a 1:1 view of the virtual world.
The only limiting factor was the fact that, using Nvidia Surround, the "triple" as I will call it, is limited to 60Hz (because of the side panels in use).
Still, even at 60Hz, the action is butter smooth: at all maxed out I can push 100 minimum FPS in Assetto Corsa. AC/C needed some tweaking, but got it to a stable and still nice looking 80-100 FPS stable (everything pretty much on MID in the graphics section).
When playing AC/C, g-sync is enabled for the centre monitor, so if the FPS drops below 60, the centre monitor adapts, and the side monitors really don't matter that much.
I also enable Fast Vsync in the Nvidia 3D control panel, so I don't get any tearing and next to no lag.
The centre monitor is a fast 1ms G-t-G panel, and the input lag was basically undetectable.
Driving was nice, I was wearing my glasses comfortably, I was able to drive for hours without needed to take a long break from the screen, resolution sharp, even in AC/C, all good.
The negatives:
1 - The sheer size of the screens: 27 inch screens on their own are not huge, but are quite demanding in terms of desk space. Three of them need some seriously wide desk.
2 - The FOV: I could only achieve 29 degrees vFOV because I could not get the monitor to its usual place behind the logitech g29 wheel base.
3 - Going back and forth using the Nvidia surround software between three screens and surround with the correct alignment, frequency, etc. was a PITA!
The first two negatives can be easily corrected: a set of monitor arms can quickly resolve the desk space issue, and the screen distance issue as well.
In fact, I think I could achieve my usual 36 degrees vFOV quite easily, with the side panels at the ideal 60 degree angle to the centre, which basically means a whole 180 degrees of vision covered!
The last point can probably be easily addressed using a Powershell script to automate the process, so a minor nuisance.
Now on to the Oculus Rift.
I borrowed it from a colleague, and although I was given the full set of head unit, and two handhelds and two cameras, I just limited myself to the 'seated' experience and set up one camera directly in front of the monitor, just behind the steering wheel base.
After installing the Oculus software, and going through the initial setup, two things became obvious.
First, this is a seriously cool piece of kit. It's science fiction for the masses. I was really eager by this point, couldn't wait to experience seating in a car in a virtual world and look at all the amazing detail around me.
Second, I really am going to struggle with this device. Several issues: bear in mind I have autism and sensory issues, so you might find the following a non-issue.
1. Fit: to find the 'perfect' fit was a struggle, although I think I got it ok in the end. Just got me a bit frustrated.
2. Mist on the lenses: whenever first wearing the unit after a long break, a fine mist would form on the lenses, due to my breathing through the nose. I just had to wait about 5 minutes to allow for the fine layer of steam to evaporate from the lenses: this was probably due to a big gap between the nose and the foam under the visor. I am sure there's a workaround for that, but after two days, I was very frustrated by it. It was actually putting me off wearing it for a quick game!
3. Wearing contacts: I normally wear glasses when spending time on a computer for longer than a few minutes. Glare is an issue for me, exacerbated when wearing contacts, and also my eyes dry up quite a bit: the Rift was making this all a bit too much for me.
I could not wear it using my regular pair of glasses, and so if I ever bought one, I would have to get myself some inserts taylor made for the Rift.
4. The cable: it's a long annoying cable protruding from your face, going all over the floor and getting stuck in any little gap between me and my rig. Basically this is something I would need to design some cable routing for, I would not be happy otherwise.
Anyway, on to the actual experience of driving with the Rift: very similar if not the same of what others reported.
I first fired up Assetto Corsa, and got to understand how to configure the software so I had a decent experience. I lowered the detail down to an acceptable level that would give me a minimum 90FPS so to get the smoothest experience, and I must admit, when I first got in the car, the experience was great!
I could see all the detail inside the car I didn't even know existed, the little things like stickers and buttons, and handles, and the stitching on seats etc...
All of that was really cool. I mean, it was quite sharp.
Then I started driving and got a bit disappointed in a coupele of areas; after 15 hours with it, these are my findings.
1. Driving feels good in Assetto and even better in AC/Competizione. You have depth perception that is obviously better than a 2D monitor, infact I remember experiencing the same when I used to play driving games on the Nintendo 3DS.
In Dirt Rally, I am sorry to say, I nearly vomited. I could not drive up and down for more than 5 minutes without fearing being sick. I know you can get used to it but still... and no, my FPS never dipped below 90, ever.
2. Another thing that reminded me of the Nintendo 3DS? The graphics! It was like driving a Virtual Reality Gamecube...
The car and any objects in my immediate vicinity was actually looking quite good, textures and all, but as soon as I was looking into the distance, I just couldn't help notice the limited resolution.
Yes I tried setting the pixel density to 2.0, 1.5, eventually settling for 1.2
Yes the graphics get a bit sharper, but then I did a test: two hot laps of Laguna Seca, in a couple of cars (mx-5, praga r1, lambo GT3) and see what laptimes I was getting.
So, VR was allowing me to get better lap times, like most poeple have noticed, but here is the thing: once I got that better lap time, and improved my breaking and exit speeds, switching back to the triple monitor setup, I was able to maintain the gains made in VR.
So although VR can give a slight advantage on a Hotlap, or unfamiliar track, I think the triple is more suitable to an endurance event.
And this was even more obvious when considering that the graphics levels on a triple were just so much more detailed.
By the end of the weekend, I was happy with the experience, but I had found my answer.
Going down the Triple monitor route is for me better, right now.
My eyes don't go crazy because of the glare, the detail is much sharper, everywhere.
With the Rift, after the novelty factor wore out (after about maybe 5 hours or so?) I was tired of looking at the car details, details I would not even bother to look at during a race, and instead I was getting annoyed at the lack of detail of anything that wasn't in my immediate vicinity.
Plus the frame rate is really something to watch out for: when it dips below 88 FPS and the device locks into 45FPS ASW mode with frame compensation, I didn't like it AT ALL! Especially when it was dipping in and out of the ASW range.
I guess if you cap the FPS to 45... and put up with a little more input lag.
But I'm sorry, I can't justify spending 400 GBP (500 USD?) on a device I will struggle to use for more than an hour at a time, makes my eyes go funny because of the glare, irks me somewhat because of the fitting and that resolution OMG! You get two screens, which are actually 1080×1200 per eye, but that's not 2160x1200: more like 720p!
Would I buy the Vive Pro, with the increased resolution? Maybe, but at twice the price?
Would I use the Rift on occasion for simracing? Yes.
Would I use the Rift just to cruise in my virtual car? Maybe a couple of times, until the novelty wears out, or a new driving game comes out.
I think, if I was to wait say one or two years, pick up a seriously beefy graphics card, and wait for the VR headsets to mature and actually give that resolution that the games are capable of, then yes, I would pick one up.
Until then I'll stick with a Triple. I can buy two 144Hz monitors. And see all of the 5760x1080 pixels, and all of the 80 to 100 FPS I get from AC/C now.
P.S.
I didn't mention anything about Superwide (21:9) screens in my post. Why?
Because after playing about with the FOV in a triple setup, I realised, given the angle curvature of a superwide, even with a 36 degree vFOV, I can't see the mirrors!
It's a good fall back if you don't mind giving up some of your field of view, but you'll never achieve 180'.
I don't know if Assetto Corsa Competizione will support triple screen setups. I sure hope they do, as the current configuration means having three screens next to each other in a line, which is not great is it?
