I currently run 3 x 24" 1080p monitors. I have a 1080ti GPU
I am thinking about going for 27" Monitors.
Should I get 1080p or 1440p?
I am thinking about going for 27" Monitors.
Should I get 1080p or 1440p?
Tripple monitor upgrade 1080 or 1440
- Thread starter Petro1head
- Start date
A GTX 1080ti is borderline for 1440p triples IMHO because 1440p has 70% more pixels than 1080p. There's no spare capacity if, for instance, you decide to have 40 opponents instead of 30 on a track that's known to be an fps-killer. Not without making compromises, either on refresh rate or image quality.
That's why I've been waiting to see benchmarks from the 2080 series, because I think that's what it will take to make triple 1440p be comfortable with a single card.
Edit: also, if going to 1440p, I think it's more worthwhile going to 32" 16:9 monitors for the expanded fov over 27" monitors. Not 35" or 36" widescreens because they're just 27" monitors with extra side pixels. Yeah, I know you're coming from 24" monitors so 27" probably seems huge, but trust me on this
That's why I've been waiting to see benchmarks from the 2080 series, because I think that's what it will take to make triple 1440p be comfortable with a single card.
Edit: also, if going to 1440p, I think it's more worthwhile going to 32" 16:9 monitors for the expanded fov over 27" monitors. Not 35" or 36" widescreens because they're just 27" monitors with extra side pixels. Yeah, I know you're coming from 24" monitors so 27" probably seems huge, but trust me on this
Last edited:
Thanks for your reply, interesting idea, the only problem I may have with 32 is space available as the rig is in the loft but it does sound fabA GTX 1080ti is borderline for 1440p triples IMHO because 1440p has 70% more pixels than 1080p. There's no spare capacity if, for instance, you decide to have 40 opponents instead of 30 on a track that's known to be an fps-killer. Not without making compromises, either on refresh rate or image quality.
That's why I've been waiting to see benchmarks from the 2080 series, because I think that's what it will take to make triple 1440p be comfortable with a single card.
Edit: also, if going to 1440p, I think it's more worthwhile going to 32" 16:9 monitors for the expanded fov over 27" monitors. Not 35" or 36" widescreens because they're just 27" monitors with extra side pixels. Yeah, I know you're coming from 24" monitors so 27" probably seems huge, but trust me on this
. I realize that I may have to compromise going the 1440 route whill I have the 1080ti but my thinking is if I get 1080 and in 6 months time upgrade to 2080ti I will kick myself as I will also upgrade to 1440. Most of the races I do have up to 10 people.I have VR but to be honest am selling it as I prefer the triples and will wait for VR to become higher rez
I ran 27" 1080p triples off a 1070 with little problem. My settings were on medium or high. Therefore, obviously, a 1080ti would be fine. 1080p on 27" is terrific and I don't think it is worth going to 1440p unless you go bigger. Of course, I can't personally speak to running bigger 1440p triples.
I get a little bit of the "screen door" effect with 1080p on 27". 1080p at 32" starts looking chunky whereas 1440p on 32" is finer-grained than 1080p on 27".
Go for the Samsung 49 inc curved monitor. I buy it last week, and all I can say perfect!
Oh, I couldn't agree more. That's what replaced my triples and absolutely loving it!
Mr Latte
Premium
The future seems to be Curved UltraWide panels than going with triples.
No screen borders and with upto a 1800R curve, these are very pleasing to the eye even at the expense of some lost field of view over triples.Titles are coming with the support of these panels but with none of the stretching, you may get on triple monitors.
Samsung has been King recently with its 49" model that appeared in 2017. They introduced another model of this just recently without HDR and Freesync with some other features that costs less. These are both 1080p based models.
This is now also available in a 43" size with 32:10 ratio and a 1200p based display.
MSI/Asus seem to have models appearing later this year that are based off the 2017 Samsung 49" panel. It seems odd they are going with this as we see 1400p based models are due in 2018/2019
Speaking of which .....
Phillips 499P9H (1440p Based 49" 32:9 Display)
Phillips has just unveiled their 49" 1440p model at IFA in Germany a week ago.
It uses Samsungs upcoming 1440p panel that may feature in their next 49" based model too.
Some are being touted for business use and productivity aspects but have 100Hz - 144Hz support depending on the model.
What has not yet been confirmed is if we will see true 10Bit HDR panels being used with at least 600 nits brightness for much better output of HDR. This was limitation in the 2017 original 49" model as it and others used 8bit panels with limited peak brightness.
We may get more info on this model in time...
No screen borders and with upto a 1800R curve, these are very pleasing to the eye even at the expense of some lost field of view over triples.Titles are coming with the support of these panels but with none of the stretching, you may get on triple monitors.
Samsung has been King recently with its 49" model that appeared in 2017. They introduced another model of this just recently without HDR and Freesync with some other features that costs less. These are both 1080p based models.
This is now also available in a 43" size with 32:10 ratio and a 1200p based display.
MSI/Asus seem to have models appearing later this year that are based off the 2017 Samsung 49" panel. It seems odd they are going with this as we see 1400p based models are due in 2018/2019
Speaking of which .....
Phillips 499P9H (1440p Based 49" 32:9 Display)
Phillips has just unveiled their 49" 1440p model at IFA in Germany a week ago.
It uses Samsungs upcoming 1440p panel that may feature in their next 49" based model too.
Some are being touted for business use and productivity aspects but have 100Hz - 144Hz support depending on the model.
What has not yet been confirmed is if we will see true 10Bit HDR panels being used with at least 600 nits brightness for much better output of HDR. This was limitation in the 2017 original 49" model as it and others used 8bit panels with limited peak brightness.
We may get more info on this model in time...
Last edited:
I already have a widescreen curved monitor but prefer the triples as I feel it more immersive.
However I did wonder about triple curved screens?
32" would be nice but just too big for the space I have and far hike in cost
However I did wonder about triple curved screens?
32" would be nice but just too big for the space I have and far hike in cost
Last edited:
Mr Latte
Premium
Yeah but is your model Ultrawide or Super Ultrawide?
Quite a difference between 32:9 and 21:9
Take a 35" 21:9 and have it sit 24" from you and that gives you a 68 degree hFOV. Certainly rather limiting.
Now take a 32:9 where the 49" is the same as the aforementioned 35" regarding the height of the screen - you now get 89 degrees (I bumped mine out to 93).
Still can't look out the side windows, which I'm sure is what Petro1head is referring to as immersion. The lack of bezels is a plus for the 32:9, but all single screens can accomplish that; the only bonus 32:9 has over a 45"-65" TV is refresh rate while the TV will give you vertical FOV to help read instruments and avoid using virtual mirrors in tall cars.
It's all about compromises... if Petro1head is like me, he prioritizes looking out the side windows compared to no bezels.
Oops, wrong thread.
Very sorry.
Very sorry.
Last edited:
Oh, I hear you. I belonged to that camp and was pretty adamant about it. But then I started to see these 32:9s come out and folks posting pics. I even took black paper and covered up the outside half of my 27" triples and surprisingly did not miss the extra fov. I did my homework and now am a happy owner.
Of course, as has been said, to each their own which makes this crazy hobby fun and fascinating!
Sorry to resurrect.
I ended up getting 27 1080p triples
however i recently gave VR another go in the form of the Rift S and although its an improvement over the Rift i just not get away with how clostaphobic if felt compared to Triples.
so i wanted to revisit this to see if opinion has changed. I would be looking at 32 and will make this fit
i suspect you are going to say 1440p over 1080p due to increased monitor size and with the RTX 3000 series cards about to be released should be better with 1440p Or maybe a used 2080ti
I ended up getting 27 1080p triples
however i recently gave VR another go in the form of the Rift S and although its an improvement over the Rift i just not get away with how clostaphobic if felt compared to Triples.
so i wanted to revisit this to see if opinion has changed. I would be looking at 32 and will make this fit
i suspect you are going to say 1440p over 1080p due to increased monitor size and with the RTX 3000 series cards about to be released should be better with 1440p Or maybe a used 2080ti
Last edited:
