As requested! Samsung 57 Ultrawide versus Triple Screens Simracing FOV comparison

[@ddoroslovac]

Had triple 32s. Bought the G9 57. Returned it for triple 43s

[@DrAlanQuan]

When you purchased the 57, did you have the impression that it would give an equivalent racing experience as your triple 32s? Sounds like you ended up with a fine upgrade though, congrats!

[@magnusenamd]

Are you much more satisfied with 3 pcs 43 inches versus 32 inches 3 pcs? Guess those 43 you have now are 16-9 screens?

[@brentschmogbert]

@@magnusenamd yes

[@deesee76]

@@DrAlanQuan i certainly did. I imagined it would be wider but dumb enough, i did no research as usual. that’s why i bolted two more 4K monitors on either side.

[@ddoroslovac]

@@DrAlanQuanI was looking to upgrade the image quality as my 32s were getting old. The G9 was going for a great price during Prime days so I took the chance knowing I would lose FOV. Once I had real world experience with the ultra wide, I recognized that the FOV benefits from a triple setup outway the image quality and lack of bezels on the G9. With my 43s, (16:9) I gain extra immersion by increasing the in car view making it more realistic and life sized

[@dustinfletcher5562]

They all need to be same distance to eye for a proper fov comparison. That fluro rig is fire 🔥 😍 👌

[@DrAlanQuan]

Yeah they do, and I'm getting a ton of feedback about that hahaha For a number of reasons I didn't feel it was practical to do a perfect comparison, but I will promise this. If I do get the opportunity to do a follow up, it WILL be a perfect comparison. And yeah, fluoro yellow is indeed killer hahaha

[@fullpace_simracing]

no they actually don't. the aspect ratio doesnt change.

[@SimracingPC]

What is the point of the comparison if the 57 inch montior is positioned that far away? I wonder what a triple screen setup mounted 3 metres away would look like 😛

[@jon-racekraftsimulations]

As he said, its mounted far as to clear the motion system.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hey man, these are 4 real world rigs set up to their own spec. All of them are set up well, and run well for their intended purpose. It's a true field test with good cockpits. Your 3 metre away set up - yeah I've seen people run triples in unideal conditions like that and they get understandably lackluster results! How much more FOV do you think moving the 57 closer would yield? An extra 5 degrees, maybe? Not enough to change the driving experience significantly.

[@regibson23]

​​@@jon-racekraftsimulations yeah but it's apples and oranges. Moving it closer still won't make it even close to triples. But it would have been nice to see.

[@SimracingPC]

@@DrAlanQuan The 3 meters were obviously an exaggeration to show that the test setup doesn't make much sense. Just enter the data into a FOV calculator. 57 inch screen, 1000R curvedradius with 60cm vs. 100cm distance (in the video it is probably even more). We are NOT talking about a few degrees more FOV here. Don't get me wrong, I usually really like your videos. But this comparison really offers absolutely no added value. The rig simply does not allow the monitor to reach its full potential and is a misconstruction when combined with this monitor.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Thanks for sharing that. I have to admit, I got a bit lazy with this video. I don't know how long it is until my wrist recovers fully, and I also don't know how much longer RaceKraft are going to have this monitor available and I wanted to grab the opportunity to test that monitor and get the video out because so many people have asked for it. And since my wrist is bad that means no driving (no new scenarios) and no heavy lifting (no mechanical adjustments to cockpits) which led to this video which I still feel is useful if a bit flawed. If the 57" monitor is still available once my wrist is back to 100%, I promise I'll do a flawless and fair comparison 👍

[@hamiltonspeed]

I have a single 34” and this video helped me realize triples is the only upgrade worth it from an FOV perspective

[@DrAlanQuan]

That's definitely my opinion. I would be quite disappointed to spend good money switching from a 34 to a 49 when it doesn't provide much difference I do get a lot of comments from people happy with their super ultrawides, and that's great - but having touched and felt and used all the different configurations, for me it has to be triple.

[@MontyDGrt]

Great video. I was on the fence on getting the 57" monitor. You saved my some $. Keeping my 3X 4K screen.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Triples are good! The 57 is a nice screen but doesn't produce the best driving experience if you have the space for triples. And the price... I'm glad you saved some money! That's been one of the aims of being on KZbin, to help people out. It means a lot that you reached out :)

[@amigoz3201]

Tested today 57" samsung and frankly if someone will tell you it is better than 32" tripples then he is idiot or payed by samung or etc!

[@2CVSUPERGT]

57" + tobii eye look to be a good compromise. 57" is quite wide enough for a good fiel of view and bezel less. I've seen a video on youtube (ATS G9 Tobii eye) that show something more than correct with a simple G9 49".

[@DrAlanQuan]

That setup is still too expensive for me. Nice equipment and compact, slick packaging - but very expensive

[@marco88mx5]

I don't understand a comparison where the distance is not the same in all devices. Pointless video

[@DrAlanQuan]

I'll provide my perspective and maybe that can help. I filmed 4 real world rigs, set up to their own specifications (one is my personal rig, tailored to my exacting needs, another is built to sim centre spec which must suit a number of different body types etc) and compared them. That's it. I'm not running a monitor testing lab. I'm just sampling 4 real world cockpits and seeing what they have to offer. Optimising the single screens would yield an extra few degrees of FOV, but the shortfall is still something like 60 degrees. It's not going to magically be comparable to any triple set up. Also I have wounds and stitches in my hand, cut me some slack lol

[@HybridHanger]

@@DrAlanQuan ​ but you're comparing FoV. For calculating the correct FoV, you of course know that distance from the user's eye to the monitor is a critical variable, and yet you left this variable wildly unconstrained. This makes absolutely no sense.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Again - Hand. Stitches. Cut. Slack. Haha. Also it was 7 months between tests and it slipped my mind. Such is life. The next one will be perfect

[@tehsimo]

Wut, the wheel is so much farther away from the 57... does that not make the comparison completely pointless? Not sure what you were thinking here.

[@DrAlanQuan]

I agree it's not a rigorously scientific test, but I wouldn't call it pointless. You can acknowledge an experiment's shortcomings but still appreciate the results and the insight they provide. As for what I was thinking? My hand is recovering from surgery, I was thinking what can I do to remain connected to my hobby while respecting my recovery. And that means no driving and no heavy lifting, so filming existing and well set up cockpits it is. Anyway my findings were that the 57 is nice but it's still just a single screen and it still has all the limitations that a single screen has, it just comes with a whopping $3k price tag

[@harrymorris613]

Agreed, very disappointed that the monitor was so much further, this video isn't helpful at all.

[@DrAlanQuan]

@@harrymorris613 the thing is, the monitor isn't pushed THAT much back. A few extra degrees of FOV are definitely on offer with a closer monitor, that's for sure. I feel like my race scenario comparison provides a useful starting point, and you can use your imagination to fill in the blanks left by my video. In no world does any single screen provide the information that a triple offers, and I think that's fairly (if imperfectly) demonstrated here

[@justinchin0]

The resolution is the same if it's 1 inch vs 1km away. The image on screen will not change. 🤷

[@tehsimo]

@@justinchin0 you have a fundamental mis-understanding of perspective and FOV.

[@Darren_Martin]

Aaaand WE'RE BACK!!! Good to see you Alan. Hope your recovery is quick. Maybe that ring on the finger will help speed it up. Lol

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hi Darren, thanks for the warm welcome! Yes the ring has certain magical powers that are hard to describe 🥰

[@IA100KPDT]

Thanks. Best video to compare all the different screens.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Thank you!

[@williamfullerton8105]

This was perfect and answered my question. I have triple 32's and was hoping the 57in would solve all my issues with NV Surround that I HAVE to use to play American Truck Sim and AMS2 since I cant figure out how to set it up without NV Surround. And it would have freed up more DP ports on my PC... But I can see I will not get anywhere close to the FOV I get with my triples and I am now going to pivot to just building a new PC for all my other PC related hobbies other than sim racing and truck driving.

[@DrAlanQuan]

I'm really glad you found it useful. Being able to see and experience the different configurations has been so helpful for me, but not everybody has the same opportunities which is why I made the video and I'm glad the portrayal of the experience manages to get across! Have fun with the new build :)

[@jeremyakins5x]

I love that you used the dirt street stock in this, that’s my main car.

[@DrAlanQuan]

I love the dirt street stock. I was getting a bit bored of racing open wheelers and tried the dirt street stocks and it was absolutely the breath of fresh air I needed. Instantly bought all the tracks for the season then and there

[@AdamsOlympia]

I've been on the fence for a long time on this, but you've finally sold me on triples for sure! ... About to place my order for a Sim Lab P1X with integrated triple mount. Just gotta figure out what monitors to pair with it ... I'm running a i9/4090, which might be overkill for 1080p x3. Would 1440p or 1600p be a good choice for sim racing?

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hi man, sorry about the late reply. Triples are the easiest, most regret-free purchase ever. As for which monitor, your PC will run any reasonable triple set up well - as long as you're not doing triple 57s you're going to be A-OK

[@juliorosas86]

Awesome content. The algorithm finally seems to work now :). I have a 49 HG90 and I was thinking about upgrading to a 57. After what I just saw, absolutely not. The 57 has a ridiculously high resolution, only the next generation high end GPUs will be able to handle that pixel density properly. Excellent channel about simracing, it's going to grow like wildfire. Greetings

[@DrAlanQuan]

49 to 57 has got to be the worst value for dollar purchase somebody can make. Yes the newer screen is very nice but for racing, the 49 gives 99.99% of the same experience in my opinion. I literally didn't know the 57 was a 57 the first few times I walked past it. I thought it was a 49.

[@Mr_Latte_UK]

The BEST way to experience the 57" G9 with sim racing is simply by adding a Tobii eye/headtracking unit. This works in all lighting conditions, requires no hat or sensor. Simply works with (Opentrack software) and lets you look wherever you want within the car like VR but just without 3D. So triples are not needed whatsoever and this is something you should try out. Other factors to consider with the G9 are that it may also have superior brightness/contrast and improved HDR than a lot of 32" 16:9 displays. Triple 4K is still not ideal but the dual 4K is more achievable and being a single display in 57" ensures you get a much higher PPI than either 1440p based monitors or larger 4K Tvs being used as triples.

[@deesee76]

if you have time, can you post a video on this with the 57 inch and eye tracking? i went quad 4K with this monitor and i have a YT short on my setup. prefer my rig to take less space or buy a new monitor mounting solution.

[@DrAlanQuan]

I'll see if I can test one, enough people have recommended head tracking solutions that it's worth at least trying. I'm still not a fan of the price tag though

[@Mr_Latte_UK]

@@deesee76 Search for reviews on the Tobii, you will also find it being used by those that play Star Citizen / Flight Sim / Truck Sim - Some titles support both eye and headtracking. Really though its just like VR and with support in "opentrack" this brings support in over 200 titles. Here are some videos to seacrh for that covers it "Revisiting Tobii in MSFS - Solutions and Alternatives" also "Tobii Eye Tracker 5 Review: Ultimate ETS2 Enhancement?" and "Best head tracking in 2024? TrackIR 5 vs Tobii Eye Tracker 5 | Honest comparison" With this, now you not only have extra FOV but freedom to look where you want - So it brings advantages over triples and lets us achieve better framerates.

@jon-racekraftsimulations well done guys. Well explained and something we get asked often enough too. Will forward this on as an explanation.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Thank you for the support! I'll see if I can do a comparison that better controls all the variables so we can do a truly fair evaluation of the strengths of each.

[@OzzCyrus]

another great video dr. would be good to hear your thoughts about setting up fov on triple 32's. thank you

[@DrAlanQuan]

Great idea! I've shared my philosophy on setting up triples on Reddit and gotten absolutely trashed because it's a bit different to what others do. I'll see if I can put it down on video and see what KZbin has to say! Thanks :)

[@OzzCyrus]

yeah reddit can be like that sometimes but i wouldn't worry about it :) Yeah it would be great to get your opinion and thoughts whenever you had the chance. thanks Dr

[@anthonynguyen1336]

great video! I returned my 57" and I am looking for triple 32s. any recommendations for similar price points?

[@DrAlanQuan]

At a similar price point you can get really nice 32s, nicer than what I have. Probably 4K IPS screens. You could also go budget 43" triples for the same money. I don't have personal experience shopping for screens of that price, I went with budget 32s that came in at half the price of the 57" - so I can't give any specific recommendations from my own experience. Thanks for commenting and have a good time finding your screens :)

[@Shredzac]

I ran a G9 57 in parallel to a Quest 3 for 2 months. Ended up selling the G9 57. Yes, VR is more finicky but it is completely worth the extra 20-100 seconds per session to set it up. For drifting, the extra FOV and immersion is completely worth any extra hassle.

[@DrAlanQuan]

The odds of me buying a Quest 3 this year just keep getting higher and higher... Would you say your expectations of the 57 were met by the actual performance of the screen?

[@Shredzac]

@@DrAlanQuan I was impressed by the screen itself. Brightness, refresh rate, resolution. And makes the sim rig look badass.

[@Shredzac]

I would have kept the g9 if I didn’t need to adjust my driving when switching between VR and the G9. Because sometimes I wanna just sit down and drive. The issue is the depth perception is different and all my usual reference points for where the ass of the car is became different when switching between VR/Ultrawide

[@DrAlanQuan]

​@@Shredzacyeah I can definitely see that being an issue. I'm guessing you got the 57 before the Quest 3 and didn't know how much you'd prefer the VR over the screen?

[@Shredzac]

@@DrAlanQuan Exactly this. Part of the sim experience, sometimes just gotta take the plunge and experiment!

[@nicolaslopez3987]

Hi, thanks for the video. While I agree with the conclusion, think the comparison is unfair and shows the 57 worse than it is in reality. Each setup should be mounted at the same distance from the viewer with ideal Fov setup. In particular, the 57’ should allow you to see more of the cockpit/dash than the 49’ (as with 32 vs 27). Your video shows a larger vertical Fov on the 49..

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hi, it looks like you posted this reply twice and I responded the other post. I agree completely with you, I was surprised about the FOV difference due to the positioning - I honestly thought the 57 would do ok since it is a bigger screen but it turns out not big enough to counter the additional distance. It's a side effect from filming different parts of the video 7 months apart. I'll do it perfectly next time!

[@jamesmason1146]

probably going to be a stupid comment but, ultrawide is 32:9 and triples is 48:9. theoretically the car should come into view on the ultrawide once halfway across the triple. at 48 seconds the full right screen has a car, it makes no sense that this wouldn't appear on 32:9 unless the field of view was different. I'm imagining from the angular change on the view there is a screen setting that has been adjusted on the triples but the same consideration hasn't been made on the ultrawide? Unless I'm missing something? great video though.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Not a stupid comment! I think your focus on aspect ratio is leading to a false expectation. It's not about the aspect ratio - it's about the screen curving outwards and reaching past the driver's ears. You could make a 48:9 ultra ultrawide which is the same as triples, but unless the curve is the same and can reach past the ears, you'll still have less FOV from a single screen So my visualisation I feel is still accurate. You'll only see someone on the 57 when they are most of the way across the side screen on the triple - not half way

[@jamesmason1146]

@@DrAlanQuan That's a fair point. it would be interesting for you to match the car widths as triple ultrawide to triple normal the car has just been stretched and actually the car is wider on ultrawide so there seems to be an inconsistency in setup to me. Additionally shown by less sky visible which suggest that as oppose to providing more FOV( which the sky would still be as visible just with more side view) the image has been cropped from 16:9 to 16:4.5 then upscaled, if you understand what I'm trying to depict. I'm currently torn between triples or a curve, airing towards curved just for convenience of one cable would be interesting to understand this further.

[@DrAlanQuan]

@jamesmason1146 hi, nothing has been cropped or stretched. The discrepancy is down to varying monitor to driver distance, as well as varied side monitor angle. If I'd controlled those factors, the comparison would be more fair and the differences more accurately shown - but it was not practical for me to reconfigure the monitors in my testing. If I get a chance to redo this, I'll control as many variables as possible. But triples are better, that much is clear. It's up to you what screens you want to make triples with 👍

[@Elpedro_gaming]

Useless comparison. The fov on 57 inc monitor is around 125 deg. In your video even the 49 has more fov 😂

[@DrAlanQuan]

Thanks. If I get an opportunity to do it again I'll control the test factors better

[@nicolaslopez3987]

@@DrAlanQuanlooking forward to that, thanks!

[@magnusenamd]

Hi, what fun. This is exactly what I wrote about with you a number of months ago. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that I settle for 57 inches. But I don't think it's enough, because it's like two 32 inch screens. But compared to 49 inch ultra wide, this should be quite a big lift and a bit more like 3 screens. But now I'll see how wrong or right I get.......................Now I've seen and I'm surprised the 57 wasn't a bigger lift over the 49 inch. Now you didn't have the screen as close to you as you had with the 49. But it still wouldn't be enough. Unfortunately, 3 screens apply. I'm curious what you think it would take for single screen to be nearly as good as 3 screens? How big will it be and would R800 be enough? But how expensive would it be then too. Over 80 inch ultra wide screen with R800 would be twice as expensive against 57 I guess.Thank you for doing this. Good job. Hello from Magnus from Sweden.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hi Magnus 👋 Honestly, for a single screen to meet my preferences it would have to match my triple 32s in shape - the geometry is really a very good balance for FOV but also compactness. So that would be approximately 85" R650 and yes, I anticipate that would be very expensive! Lucky that 3x 32 inch screens are cheap and good 😀

[@DSolo59]

You are right, but with trackir, fov is far less of a concern as you describe and makes the racing experience on 34/49/57 inch ultrawide absolutely incredible

[@regibson23]

Ugh

[@DrAlanQuan]

Yeah a lot of people talk about TrackIR - I haven't tried it but I have seen videos of it in action and the idea of the camera rotating in response to my head turning just sounds like a headache waiting to happen. Maybe I'll try it and love it some day, but I'm glad I have triples and don't need to faff around with a workaround like that

[@LeoDavidson]

Triples are obviously better for racing, if the game supports it and you have enough spare ports on your GPU. Even if you put the ultrawides right in front of your face, you aren't going to see things on the sides. The comparison was useful and shows that quite clearly, even if the distances weren't all completely the same. I plan to switch from ultrawide to triple screen once I have a dedicated sim-racing PC with enough GPU ports. Couldn't do it on a multi-use machine due to lack of ports and also the absolute pain of having to switch settings in the NVidia control panel depending on if the game does or doesn't support triples (and HOW it supports them). It really is about time games had native multi-monitor support, FFS.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hi Leo, thank you for your considered and well reasoned comment. Your existing situation is a great example of an ideal application for a single ultrawide monitor. A multi purpose machine and/or one that isn't well equipped to run the number of displays you ideally want. I'm right there with you about the native multi monitor support. Seriously. It's been 20 years since it started to become a thing. iRacing has a pretty good implementation and I enjoy configuring it - it's straightforward and predictable. No other sim I've used comes close in my hands

[@olivierpau64]

Hello and thanks for your greats vidéos. And what do you thing if WE try G9 57" and AT Each side 32" ? Can you test it or what do you think about that ? Thanks Mr Quan 😊

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hi, since every sim's triple screen configuration that I know of is based on uniform screen sizes, mixing monitor sizes and shapes is too much effort for me. Other people have done it, I don't want to even try it. Also 57 flanked by two 32s is going to be EXPENSIVE, so for me I don't see the point. Triple 32 is already perfect and relatively cheap.

[@LukeVesty]

I have a 49 inch super ultra wide. While I accept that triples offer FOV benefits, you at least have other indicators and cues for situational awareness in iRacing. You have your relative to let you know when a car is closing so as to be ready, you can hear when a car is side by side, plus your spotter tells you "car left, clear left" etc. I don't remember the last time I had a side by side collision with someone because I didn't know they were there. That said, I think triples probably allows you to race more closely side by side with a confidence you'll not have on a single ultra wide. For me I just can't get past the massive bezels in my field of view that comes with a triple monitor setup. It really takes me out of the experience and it's a constant reminder I'm using computer monitors rather than sitting in a cockpit. The ASUS bezel free kit is a really cool innovation that alleviates much of this concern, however.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hi Luke, I can definitely understand how there's more tools available to us than just monitors to race. Honestly, being in Australia I still want to leave tons of space when racing others because of potential netcode incidents, it's not like I'll put my car within an inch of another just because I can see them there. I do think super ultrawide monitors have a place in the market - you pointed out reasons why it suits you and that's completely fine. I've had an interesting experience with bezels - when the screens are close and the bezels further out to my peripheral vision I don't even notice them. When I move the screens a bit further away and the bezels are a bit more central, I freaking hate them and the bezel delete kits are an absolute godsend. Thanks for sharing your 2c!

[@LukeVesty]

I have said to many fellow racers on discord that I dream of the day someone releases a giant, semi-circular 100 inch monitor! 😂

[@DrAlanQuan]

​@@LukeVesty I too dream of that day, and the fact that I will not be able to afford it hahaha

[@LukeVesty]

@@DrAlanQuan 😃

[@Jeffery_USBP]

VR

[@m.budiman347]

do you prefer 32 inch monitor VA or IPS for best visual racing sim ?

[@DrAlanQuan]

I've only used triple VA monitors, so I can't give any personal comparison. As I understand it, IPS is more expensive and 'better' - but I'm very happy with VA

[@burg0110]

IPS all the way.

[@nicolaslopez3987]

If you can choose, IPS all the way

[@youngbeliz6177]

Hi nice video !!! What is the model of 32 inch triple

[@DrAlanQuan]

Thank you! Those are Gigabyte G32QC

[@youngbeliz6177]

@@DrAlanQuan thank you

[@Leogou]

Just food for thought, but how about a 57 w/ 2 32s on the side? I see the UW and monitor combo occasionally

[@DrAlanQuan]

This topic comes up a lot, and I just don't understand why people want to make life harder for themselves with mismatched screens - mounting, colour calibration, resolution/bezel correction etc is all complicated by mixing screens. The 57 + 2x 32s combo I will 100% leave to somebody else to play with, it is not interesting to me :)

[@tehsimo]

Don't think iRacing supports this kinda setup. the 3 camera projection UI only allows 3 matching screens.

[@Leogou]

@@DrAlanQuan I won’t argue that it doesn’t over complicate things. It definitely does. Just merely a theory I see sometimes and occasionally tempted to explore myself. Would love to have the best of both worlds which in theory it could create.

[@DrAlanQuan]

​@@Leogou one of my commenters actually runs this set up, he sent me this link kzbin.info0Yg9xftVJos?si=uspW4jF2oFJs8MUv I haven't looked too deep into it but you might find some answers in his channel

[@Leogou]

@@DrAlanQuan oh it actually fits exactly how I expected. That looks really promising. I’m on a 4090/13700K so rendering the screen size is likely not a problem for me. Thanks for sharing!

[@tonybucca5667]

Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder can BOTH see you just see MORE with triples. Just built my 2nd PC for AC,ACC, and upcoming ACE. I'm researching now, and this post heavily influenced my decisions.

[@tehsimo]

I don't think anyone is arguing that an ultrawide gives you a wider view than triples.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Thanks Tony, what CPU and GPU did you go with for your new PC build? I'm still running the 10600K/3070, it's enough for me so far

[@tonybucca5667]

@@DrAlanQuan I got the Ryzen 9 7950X3D and a 4070 ti Super. I'm a photographer who's doing a lot of drone shooting, so I figured the 7950X3D would be better for me.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Nice build! Sounds like you have enough horsepower to have every single monitor choice available to you including VR :)

[@tonybucca5667]

@@DrAlanQuan I want to have enough UMPHHHH for a motion seat!

[@Drivewithbob]

To be a honest comparison you need them to be setup exactly the same on the same rig with very close if not same eye to screen distance. On my 57inch with eye to screen distance of 625 I can see the passenger side mirror. U can't even see the door on your example lol #givemeabackmy4mins

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hey man, I agree that in an ideal world I would equalise all the factors (distance of centre monitor to driver, and angle of side monitors, as well as software settings like driver height, steering wheel on, graphics detail settings etc). I chose the less labour intensive route of using 4 well set up, real world rigs as is and accepted the compromises that come with it. And besides, your 57 which is well set up can see the passenger mirror? Both triple set ups show the entire window. The set up differences account for a few degrees of FOV at most, and the FOV gap from super ultrawide to triple screens is something like 60°.

[@Jahuzzi]

⁠@@DrAlanQuango watch philip geppl iracing open wheel fov comparison.. His fov is waaay better on the 57. Also your 49 is a bit off. I see you prefer triples but what is the point of these videos if it's so biased?

[@DrAlanQuan]

@@Jahuzzi everything is biased, I don't think it means it's not worth showing or discussing especially when I try to disclose any shortcomings of my presentation. What a world to live in, if nobody ever shared anything that was not perfect. I would love to do a ruthlessly objective and controlled comparison. Maybe when my hand is better I'll give it another go

[@compeng2013]

Can you use third party software like DisplayFusion to emulate triple monitors on a single ultrawide to see how it performs compared to triples? Might be the best of all worlds

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hi, it sounds like you know easy more on this topic than me! Sounds doable, I'm just a simple guy with simple taste. 3 screens, no extra software. Since the screen is in use at RaceKraft I doubt I'll be able to install the software to test. What do you use?

[@antjones2281]

One thing you could try on the super ultra wide is creating a custom triple wide resolution and running it letterboxed.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Yeah you can do that. I wouldn't 🤣 I don't want to race with letterboxes making the screen smaller, or with a fisheye perspective especially on my $3k screen I'll take my $1.5k triples with the better everything, thanks 😂

[@tomh1404]

Is it because the 57" is set to be in a different time zone being so far away, is it set to the same 5120 x 1440 resolution as the the 49" and not the 7680 x 2160 its capable of, or some combination of both? I think everyone agrees that triples have the best FOV, but I also think that many of us want to see a legit comparison of the 57". I own both the 49", and the 57" (on work stations) and can say from 100% first hand experience the 57" has a significantly higher amount of real estate in both height and width. It honestly looks like the extra 2500+ pixels isn't even there compared to the 49?

[@DrAlanQuan]

Resolution means nothing for FOV - screen size and distance to the viewer are all that matters. More resolution only gives a clearer picture, no FOV effect whatsoever. As I've mentioned in my other comments, this was not a perfectly controlled objective comparison. It wasn't practical for me at the time to do so - it would certainly be better if I could control all those variables but the take home message I got from this was - yes the 57 is bigger, but not big enough to overcome other factors like distance to viewer. That means it's a bit better, but not game changingly so - and at the asking price, I don't see value there. Sentiment among commenters is quite split. Some agree with my view, some are super disappointed that my testing methodology wasn't more tightly controlled, some are super adamant that the 57 is light years ahead of the 49.

[@tomh1404]

@@DrAlanQuan Gotcha, makes sense since they are both the same aspect ratio? Its just the distance setting in iRacing that is throwing this all completely off?

[@DrAlanQuan]

Pretty much. All the screens were calibrated correctly for their given install dimensions - the issue is that all the rigs and all the monitors were at up differently from each other. Distance to driver and side screen angle are two factors that iRacing takes into account for its calculated automatic FOV - but you can directly change the FOV as well

[@tomh1404]

@@DrAlanQuan Makes sense. I have yet to try iRacing so I was not aware. Well, I sub'ed and I look forward to you hopefully doing a further in-depth of this comparison. Off to go check out your other uploads!

[@FrogImperium]

3:48 you lowkey cooked my mans, filming his mistake lmao 😭😭😭

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hahaha yeah I saw it when I filmed it and went "yes, perfect" 🤣

[@amirulshyakir9221]

how about ultrawide with head tracking? interesting to see if this solution would be on par with triples

[@DrAlanQuan]

I haven't tried it but it would definitely make for an interesting video project!

[@eagletrippin]

32:9 ratio is the most important spec here -- it is the literal equivalent to only two widescreen monitors.👎 But it is a sleeker, cleaner aesthetic, and a far simpler setup for your rig, which has its value, too.👍

[@DrAlanQuan]

Very elegant summary, I like it

[@mikebal7777]

I'm not sure what is being portrayed here. You don't need any testing to know that if you run 3x16:9 monitors, its going to have a significantly wider FOV than a single 32:9...

[@DrAlanQuan]

Sounds like you know exactly what is being portrayed here 😂 I've seen a lot of talk about the 57 being a game changing monitor that's almost as good as triples so I tested it.

[@sethoselken9562]

triple 40" ultrawides might be the ticket?

[@DrAlanQuan]

Speak to Jon at RaceKraft, his personal rig has something similar kzbin.info/www/bejne/qoXQZJeZn7eZnJosi=3hgEnE-DsZbUxQaL And yeah, it is quite awesome Bigger monitors AND more of them = good 😂

[@sethoselken9562]

@@DrAlanQuan optimum opted for the same 45" triple setup. I am considering the 40" ips ultra wide triples given they are flat panel and same height as 32" 16:9 so can be tucked close to steering wheel shaft. Whereas the 45" might not render as well cuz of curve. Can get the 40" ips for $490 cdn. Right now I have the g32q VA gigabyte like your triples. Considering buying two more local listing or just going triples 40" IPS. Just scored a sapphire toxic extreme 6900 xt for $400 cdn. I want to try triples. Triple ultrawide makes sense to me if the vertical height at least matches a regular 32"

[@laegers]

You have the single monitors mounted to far back. They should be 3" from the back of the wheel. The closer you have the monitor to your eyes, the higher FOV you can run. Not a good comparison but you still are not going to beat triples for fov. Wish the g9's were 800r like the LG.

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hi. Each of the monitors was mounted the way they were for a reason. The 49 was so close to the steering wheel my fingers sometimes touched it. The 57 was mounted a bit further back to clear the motion system. That's a real world consideration that needs to be considered, but yes not a perfect apples to apples comparison.

[@derodge]

How are you doing Dental medical practice with a screwed up wrist?

[@DrAlanQuan]

I'm not, I'm taking some time off work which is why you're getting this reply within 5 minutes ❤️

[@antjones2281]

Tell me the wrist injury wasnt sim racing related. 😅

[@DrAlanQuan]

Dentist related! Turns out using your hands for a living full time can put quite a strain on the body. Look after your body, man!

[@stevo905]

57 + track ir is for me the best solution..

[@DrAlanQuan]

Not bad. A bit expensive for me

[@britishgaminglivingthedrea5148]

Use my 49inch samsung with a head tracker with only having a small room works fine

[@DrAlanQuan]

Sounds like a perfect use of space 👍

[@Zappafrank55]

I switched to a 65" 4k TV and cannot go back. I sit about 30 inches away. The vertical and horizontal coverage puts you in the cockpit. Only VR beats it.

[@DrAlanQuan]

That's a big screen 😂 very luxurious to dedicate a screen that size to the rig. Bravo!

[@koen2062]

noted i need a 57" odysey paired with two odysey G8's LOL

[@DrAlanQuan]

💰

[@coletonsmith7472]

fov aint even the same if u look at steering wheels no steering wheel even visible on 57 because fov is so much further forward so it hurt how long u can see cars

[@DrAlanQuan]

That is correct. It wasn't practical at the time of filming to control all the variables 100% so this comparison is not ideal, but I feel like it gives a good starting point for anybody making their purchasing decision

[@ewenblack4174]

Triple 32’ is the only way to go

[@DrAlanQuan]

Triple 32 (and above) ;)

[@ewenblack4174]

@@DrAlanQuan looks like I saw more on the 32’s in that vid than those 35’s

[@GTALLDAY16]

@@ewenblack4174I did too. Barely but it was more noticeable then the 49 to the 57.

[@pmx360]

If you use telemetry on the monitor, the super ultra wide will make it worst because wont be on your natural field of view.

[@DrAlanQuan]

I'm not sure I understand. Overlays can be placed anywhere so I can't see why that would be an issue on a SUW monitor - can you please elaborate? Thanks

[@MrMindikyo]

57" shows less picture than 49" LOL another inrelevant comparsion

[@DrAlanQuan]

Some might call it an irrelevant product 😂

[@deesee76]

Hi Alan, thanks for your videos and wished there is a shop I can visit in Melbourne where I can get advice on putting a sim rig together. Bought the 57 inch DUHD on gumtree a few months ago for a bargain after watching a dozen videos and last weekend I finally finished my setup. I then added two more 144hz 4K curved monitors to the side of the Samsung g9 to give me a full wrap around curve setup @ 15360x2160 - absolutely perfect but killing my 4090 😅. thanks god for DLSS. kzbin.info0Yg9xftVJos The monitor mounting solution i went for is a not optimal and i’m looking for a cleaner solution where i can mount Four 32 inch monitors horizontally or in my case 2x 32 inch and 1x 57 inch. any advice?

[@DrAlanQuan]

Dang, that's the biggest resolution number I have ever seen in my life hahaha I had a look at your short and it looked quite well set up but I guess you didn't show any of the nuts and bolts. As for a shop in Melbourne, the www simrigs.com.au showroom is an option. They carry Simagic and VNM gear and honestly between those two you are well sorted for everything. I think he'll be able to source a custom monitor mount for you too

[@deesee76]

@@DrAlanQuan awesome. thanks buddy

[@deesee76]

@@DrAlanQuan thanks for that, much appreciated. missus gonna have a fit my man cave is changing by the second!!!

[@jon-racekraftsimulations]

The RaceKraft/Simrigs Team can help for sure. send either derek, or i an email from the contact page of the websites and we can sort you out :)

[@boothys_sim_racin]

I disagree, ultrawide helps train situational awareness. I don't have space nor the gpu power to run triples at a decent frame rate so I'm very happy with it. And if ya gonna race dirt as your example, dirt 410 sprintcars ya won't be seeing much out the right side unless you got VR. Both have advantages and disadvantages, I'm happy to on the odd occasion flick the toggle switch to look to one side but very rarely even do that

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hi Boothy thanks for sharing your perspective. Your comment about it training situational awareness is an interesting one that I hadn't considered. Kind of like a 'diamonds only form under pressure' type of deal. I definitely get that triple screens are a luxury (space, cost, processing power) but by that definition the 57 is also a luxury (cost and processing power even more so than triple 2K screens). I wouldn't mind running a single 49" screen but I know I prefer the luxury of 3 screens

[@Nocturno83]

Half the price of triples???!! Only if you settle for 1080 monitors 😅

[@DrAlanQuan]

My 3x 1440s ~AUD$1600 Samsung 57 ~AUD$3200 So.... Yeah

[@Nocturno83]

@@DrAlanQuanAh well, in the US the Samsung 57 is usually $1700 USD. While a decent 32" monitor is around $500 to $800 USD X 3. So....yeah....

[@DrAlanQuan]

I got budget Gigabyte G32QC monitors and they're fine. They were around $280USD ea which is well, well under your estimate If you want to pay more go for it, but the budget option is there and works really well

[@Nocturno83]

@@DrAlanQuan You're right, the budget options are there. I guess I've just been spoiled by racing on my 55" LG C2 4K oled. All jokes aside, I liked your video. Only thing that threw me off was the "half the price" part.

[@lramirez]

I still don't understand the people who demand. You do the favor of being able to put this equipment together and see some differences and still they complain. I hope I am not the only person thanking you. It gives me an "idea" to make a decision on my future purchase, I will go for the Triple 32”. If you are not happy buy the 8 Monitors + PCs and make your own comparisons. THANK YOU.

[@DrAlanQuan]

You are a wise and kind person, and I am grateful for your appreciation. Your comment about giving you the idea is exactly in line with my goal with the video. I'm not telling anybody what to do, I'm just showing what I see and how I feel about it - and the information is all here for you to assess, examine, and make your own decision. Some of the comments are really supportive, some are thought provoking, but sometimes yeah, I'm just receiving complaints and instructions 🤷

[@justinchin0]

Great video!

[@DrAlanQuan]

Thanks Justin for spreading the positivity :) What do you race with?

[@justinchin0]

@@DrAlanQuan mostly gt7 on a 32" 1440p monitor. My gaming pc has a 40" monitor but still working on the setup so my wheel can be with my 40". Doubt I will be looking to do a triple setup anytime soon but I'm no pro Sim racer so single monitor if fine for now.

[@DrAlanQuan]

​@@justinchin0nothing wrong with single monitor especially if you're racing on a console. I raced for a year on a single 24" screen with GT Sport and it was amazing 👍

[@Sideways_Singh]

this baby monitor stuff makes no sense, isnt the point of triples or ultrawide immersion? why would u not get triple 55 inch monitors or tvs n have way more vertical field of view which makes it significantly more immersive

[@DrAlanQuan]

Compromise! 32s are a sweet spot in cost, utility, immersion, and compactness. I do NOT have the luxury of building a triple 55 inch rig. I do think it would be awesome, but alas I am just a humble dude with limited space

[@Sideways_Singh]

@@DrAlanQuan ya true but even a single 55 would be really good n then u can save up and add the other 2 later.

[@noobifye7542]

me with my 24 inch monitor💔

[@DrAlanQuan]

I had loads of fun on my single 24 for a year before I upgraded :)

[@MIKEDRIFT]

Vr is way better than flat screen.

[@DrAlanQuan]

I'm hoping to give VR a good go this year 👍

[@deathstrike8992]

Seems like those that have the 49”/57” ultrawides are mad. But even if the distance to wheel were adjusted the difference is marginal. You simply don’t gain the FOV and hence immersion you get with triple 32”. And this video is helpful to at least alert people doing their research before buying that this is the case.

[@DrAlanQuan]

I think your comment is spot on. There's definitely some improvements possible to my methodology to get absolutely comparable results, but basically you can just imagine if the triples were a bit worse, and the ultrawides were a bit better - are they even on the same playing field? I think not. There's a lot of good reasons to go single screen but field of view WILL suffer. Thanks for watching :)

[@nicolaslopez3987]

This is true. His conclusions are true, I think people are mad because it is biased so it raises suspicion. But triples are infinitely better, and cheaper, it’s not even a question. The only pros of SUW is space, and easy to setup

[@dealscale]

Cant beat triples period

[@DrAlanQuan]

👏

[@Jeffery_USBP]

VR

[@Rene_Bo]

Yeah really not a comparison, just your opinion - which is fine. I reverted from triples 32 to 49”. Ease of use and performance gain is next level. Not going back

[@DrAlanQuan]

I've heard of many people who've done the same move as you, and are happy with the choice. Each configuration definitely has its strengths. After receiving the feedback about the unequal comparison, I'm going to try to redo it with absolutely equal parameters and we'll see how it looks

[@antjones2281]

I find it hard to believe anyone really thought simply enlarging the screen would provide any difference to FOV. Its the same aspect ratio regardless of size.

[@tehsimo]

This is incorrect. Look at the size difference between a bottle cap 2cm from your eye vs 20cm. This is the effect a larger monitor has. A wider FOV.

[@dark4yoyo]

The reason it didn't change here is because the 57" is so much further away from the wheel compared to the 49" and triples. There's no point in a bigger monitor if you put it that much further away

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hey guys. The 57" monitor has a curve where the edges of the screen reach out about 120mm further out than the centre screen. The triple 32s screen edges reach out about 500mm give or take, and it's this extra reach that gives the extra FOV When you scale up the curved single monitor it just doesn't reach out much further. Let Samsung make a curved 100" super ultrawide that does actually have edges that reach out about 500mm - the edges of the screen would reach your ears on the sides, but the screen at the edges would be so far away from you that they would appear very narrow in terms of height. Triple screens get the screen part your ear but also still close to your eyes.

[@JohnnyGification]

Why do super ultrawide people in here cry so much? The facts are the facts. Alan does not make the facts, the screens do. 😂. "Well you could try this and that and this. You didn't do this. How could you do this to this screen if you didn't try this". My goodness. 😂

[@DrAlanQuan]

Hahaha thanks for being in my corner. It's good to have you here ❤️

[@Mr_Latte_UK]

Here are some facts from an owner of both the 49" and 57" models: The G9 57" has one of the higherst PPI of any gaming display It offers PIP / PAP connectivity It can be a superb 21:9 display It has superior image quality, brightness and contrast to many other cheaper 16:9 monitors. It even has higher performance to the 32" G8 This is the first display that titles like the old GRID series can be played today in 8K via 7900XTX @ 240fps The monitor is a superb upgrade to the 49" models with its improved image, resolution and sheer scale With headtracking, you do not need to waste framerates on a 3rd display Fewer and fewer titles continue to support native triples It is much less hassle to setup a G9 with headtracking than configuring and wiring/connecting triples Neater and simpler installation too

[@tehsimo]

@@Mr_Latte_UK The G9 57" has some of the worst image quality I think I've ever seen on a monitor. The backlight bleed is actually ridiculous. Must be some side internal reflections coming from the curve. It gets truly spanked by an OLED in every way, except the 240hz thing, but even a 4090 can't provide that signal yet.