What looks best for IL2 (& therefore SoW) - 3 22" screens, or 1 27"?
 

I'm planning my PC acquisitions, and my main dilema is guessing what would be best for SoW, Eyefinity with 3 22" screens, or 1 27" screen. I already have 1 22" screen (which I need to keep), so if I'm going for 3 screens, they can't be 24" or 27". But I could move my 22" display to the side (for when I'm not flying) and get something like a 27" monitor for SoW.

Can anyone with some experience of either set-up give advice?

Thanks

well, will your graphic card be able to handle the 27" resolution with BoB........................

Well, put simply, you'll get a hell of alot better peripheral view using 3 monitors. Going up on just the monitor size will only give you a larger picture. It's all a matter of preference but who wouldn't want better peripheral view in IL-2? All the wide mods just stretch the picture when looking around and makes you kinda feel you're looking through a wide lens, instead of real view.

YouTube has some good vids on eyefinity and IL-2.

Thanks for the replies.Well we don't yet know what BoB would like, but I haven't bought the GC yet (which is why I'm asking this question anyway) and I anticipate getting a fairly quick card. A 27" (with high res) should require less processing power than Eyefinity anyway (less total resolution).

Well with standard IL2, you have wide, normal and gun view, and I switch between them a fair bit. Having a larger screen will allow you to see the wide picture and have to zoom in less. I don't know if SoW will allow an even wider view, which would suit large monitors, but if not, then I agree with you. I would like more view, and depending on the SoW settings, a larger monitor might give you more vertical view for a given physical size (ie, if the size of your gun site is an inch on your screen, a larger monitor will give you more vertical view than 3 small monitors). Not sure if Oleg has commented on the view settings.

I've been on youtube searching for eyefinity IL2 this morning, and came up short. I saw a lot of Dirt2 demos though.

I have a 26'' Acer and is pretty good...
Three 22" I don´t know.
You will have 5760x3060 resolution.People who has three monitors use to have 2 or 3 SLI setup and this is $erious business...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDu9NZHkRUE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1NE8n42EQA

A squadmate is running 3x22" monitors on a single 5850 in eyefinity. Depending on the card model ofc the main reason to why most Nvidia guys run 2-3cards in multi screen setups are mostly the lack of outputs. Even a GTX260(which is still a good card) can run triple monitors alone with a TH2Go set. It's when you start messing with multi-24"> @ 1920x1200/1080 each, that things start to get really demanding.

Ofcourse, it's never wrong to have the extra horsepower but what you really need and what people think you need are often two different things.:)

3 22" (at 1680x1050) would be 5040 x 1050. I believe it requires about double the GC power of a standard screen. Depending on what SoW needs, it's not out of the question.

No doubt SoW will be very demanding, and it might require SLi/CF to run 3 screens, we'll see. But I thought this would be a good place to see how people have found the comparison between a large screen and 3 smaller screens. Thanks for those links - I watched the second one this morning, but it didn't show any in cockpit footage which is what I'm after. The other one is useful, and it seems there are more like that, I'll check them out.

Well obviously we don't need these things :)

*to run it. :grin:

I'm running a 27" monitor and haven't gone over to an eyefinity setup. Mainly because it would require using three 27" monitors for me to see enough of a visual improvement over what I've got to make it worthwhile. And even then it wouldn't be worthwhile because I'd have to spend a fortune on not just the monitors (even if I could find ones to match what I've got) but also on an SLI or Crossfire solution to give me (maybe) the framerates I'd want at that combined resolution.

I have no doubt it would be more immersive than what I've got, bezels and all, but I just can't justify the expense as I'm not that much of an enthusiast.

Three 22" monitors in portrait mode would be bigger than one 27" monitor, but it wouldn't be an amazing difference, and I'd have the bezel issue to deal with, and it's possible, depending on what frame-rates and image quality I wanted, that even three 22" monitors might tip me over that point where I require a multi-card setup.

Three 22" monitors in landscape mode (whose overall width would be just over double that of a 27" monitor) would give me a lot more peripheral vision on the sides (which could lead to complications in itself), but the vertical height would actually be less than what I'm already getting with a 27" monitor, resulting in an overall look that I just don't think I'd like. It could also require a multi-card setup, and...all in all, in terms of complications and costs (actual and potential), I just couldn't be @#!%ed.

Thinking about it, by the time graphics power and overall display resolutions increase to the point where I don't even think twice about jumping on board, because the immersion's so much better and the price is low enough, this 27" will have to look like what a 17" monitor looks like now in comparison. Which could be more than ten years from now at the current rate the technology is being trickle fed to us plebs...

Sorry, going all tangential again.

A single 27" monitor would be better IMO.

But having said that, I also highly recommend cutting out some cardboard, one 27" monitor size, and one 3x22" monitor size (bezel spaces included), and supporting them on your desk to actually see what it is you're dealing with.

Interestingly enough, looking at those distances here myself, they pretty much correspond to the same amount of head movement I use while using TrackIR. I think, for immersion, if I had multi-screens, I'd want to have to look further than that, ie. I'd have to turn my head more than 45 degrees before the TrackIR started to have to move the image for me. Not sure 3x22" would be wide enough for that.

If I already had a 27" monitor, I wouldn't be asking the question, I'd stick with a single 27" (another 2 27" and GCs required at this point would cost too much for me). And if I had 3 22" monitors, I'd stick with that. Hoever, I have 1 22" now, so it's either buy 2 more, or buy a 27" - allowing a little more graphical power for the three 22" set-up, the total cost will be about the same for me.

If I went for 3 22", it would be in landscape mode, and I'm sure I'd like it (doesn't seem to be a problem with the examples on youtube), but whether it's better than a single 27" I'm not sure :)

The difficulty I'm having is comparing the two options specifically from the in cockpit perspective. I'd love the width of 3 22", as it allows you to use your peripheral vision without having to keep moving your head left/right, as with trackIR (which I'll also be using). But I'd also love a bit more height too, hence the dilema. If my main game was a car racing game, it would be 3 22", without doubt - perfect. But in my Spit I need to keep looking up for them bad guys.

I'm really not sure what's best, so I might just get a 6970 (if it's not too pricey), get the game, find out my FPS on 1 22" and then see what my options are.

ill take One 27 in 1900*1200" over 3 22 1900*1080" any day

better consider this ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yT6O...eature=related

Oh dear, not the Ostendo CRVD or Alienware 2880 x 900 rear-projected DLP screens. The resolution is too low. :)

I'm using 1x 23" displays as centre and 2x 23.6" side displays. The view is great and TrackIR solves the look-up 'problem'. The TrackIR view-change left/right in game I could cut in half and use the corner of my eye, as it were... much more realistic.

3x1920x1200 would be better that the 1080 ones. A dream is projectors, of course. One could start wit 2, as matching the edge of the projected images together is possible, unlike 2 monitors.

From the measurements I've taken, I don't think three 22" monitors, even in landscape mode, would actually stretch into your peripheral vision. It would show more of your in-game pilot's peripheral vision, if that's what you're looking for, but even then I'm not sure you'd see all of it.

If you want the monitors to stretch into your real life peripheral vision (which I think you'd need bigger monitors for anyway), then, just like in real life, you're still going to have to turn your head to discern any details in that range. Then you'd have to turn your head about 90 degrees to use your TrackIR to see behind you, depending how close you sit to the monitors.

But if you just want the monitors to stretch into your virtual pilot's peripheral vision (which I think 3x22" will only do to some extent) then you'd just have to move your real eyes to see the details therein, at the risk of them becoming tired from looking to their extremes all the time. Then you'd just have to move your head about 45 degrees to see behind you with your TrackIR.

I'm just not sure 3x22" will give you the extra width you're looking for, in-game, without distorting the image and having your wings pointing about 45 degrees in front of you, if you know what I mean.

Having a distorted image is a good point, something I'll need to check out. I don't want it to look like my wings are heading out front.

I have a 22" minitor in front of me now, with a 19" monitor to my left, which is in my peripheral vision. As you say, I'd have to turn my head to discern any details, but that's fine, and as much as I like trackIR, it would be better to just turn your head to look at something, rather than rely on the way trackIR works. It would just mean a large horizontal dead zone, picking up as you start to look towards the outside of the side screens (I wouldn't just look to the side with my eyes).

I have a 25.5" 1920x1200 and 3x 24" 1920x1080 and the 3x24" eats the 25". I have posted a bunch of pics in the screenshots forum.

Once you've had eyefinity you won't go back!

S!

You know you hear a lot of "I don't think 3 screens would be better" what you never hear, however, is someone with three screens saying that a single screen is better :)

Bottom line, once you go three screens you will never, ever go back to single screen. It is so much better words don't even come close to describing it.

I have three 23" Dell monitors with the sides arranged at 45 degrees. I sit 24" from the middle screen and the two side monitors are very close to filling my peripheral vision.

I just ordered new parts for a computer with a 980x and 3 gtx580 for multimonitor simming. Right now I have 3x22 screens and am contemplating 3x27,1080p or 3x30. 3x27,1080p makes more sense financially and it pushes less pixels. On the other hand monitors last a long time. Good chance that the next generation graphics cards will run 3x30 at 2560 by 1600 without any hiccups. It also looks like 30 inch 2560x1600 monitors are not going to get below $1000 any time soon so they keep their value long term. I've seen a guy on the simhq forum that runs 3x30 monitors with gtx580 dualsli in portrait mode. If his setup runs CoD ok I'll go that way. Otherwise I'll go 3x27 in portrait mode. No need to spend $3500 for a CoD slide show.

If I were you though (budget wise) I would just get 2 more 22 inch screens and run it of one 6970. Cheapest solution. My 3x22 1680x1050 monitors are pretty imersive. Let me give you one advice. See if if you find someone with a multimonitor setup and fly RoF or Il2 for a while with track ir. Been reading a lot about people with motion sickness issues... My wife just gets sick standing behind me in RoF dogfighting on 3 monitors and track ir. I myself had to get used to it. Using also trackir I had to slow down my headmovements. If I need to look 90 degrees left I just glance left to my angled left monitor and only slightly move my head with track ir. Big movements off the normal axis feel unatural. This also happens on a single screen but really gets amplified on a multimonitor setup.

Well that's not a fair comparison. 3 22" is not as good as 3 24", and 1 27" is better than 1 25".

What, one card? They won't run a modern game at that res. The best cards can run 1 screen at that res with high settings, but next gen GCs won't be twice as fast as the current cards, but they'd need to be to run 3 screens.

As 3D becomes the more standard, and average screen size continues to increase, those monitors will get cheaper. It never ceases to amaze me how large TVs just keep getting cheaper and cheaper.

Well I did get a 6970 for a fair price. Hopefully we'll soon be finding out how well that can run BoB (CoD etc), and whether it could run either 3 screens or 1 at 2560 x 1600.

No chance of finding a friend as geeky as us lot, but interesting point, thanks.