Anyone with triples tried any sim racing?
Curious if you can get decent performance and how well it works. I have vr but I always long for triples in 3d. I feel like I will never know how awesome it will look. I have a 1080 ti. I will also ask in sim racing forums , but I do not see many people there mentioning 3d vision. I run Assetto corsa a lot along with Raceroom, Automobilista, Project cars 2 I am not worried about since its vr is fantastic however that would probbaly look insane with triples 3d tbh.
Curious if you can get decent performance and how well it works. I have vr but I always long for triples in 3d. I feel like I will never know how awesome it will look. I have a 1080 ti. I will also ask in sim racing forums , but I do not see many people there mentioning 3d vision. I run Assetto corsa a lot along with Raceroom, Automobilista, Project cars 2 I am not worried about since its vr is fantastic however that would probbaly look insane with triples 3d tbh.

#1
Posted 09/13/2018 01:37 AM   
I do, as I game in a cockpit I had to try it despite not being big into driving games. I have played dirt Rally and some of the grid autosport games and assetto . I also use a racing wheel. Although I can't imagine it being very enjoyable unless you can maintain a high frame rate and you pretty much needs SLI for that in surround 3d imo. I had alot of fun in Dirt rally and it made the game way better, so immersive with a racing wheel and 3d vision and the graphics are reasonable so I got a decent frame rate too. It's probably way more doable at this point if you play at a 1080p verticle res.
I do, as I game in a cockpit I had to try it despite not being big into driving games. I have played dirt Rally and some of the grid autosport games and assetto . I also use a racing wheel.

Although I can't imagine it being very enjoyable unless you can maintain a high frame rate and you pretty much needs SLI for that in surround 3d imo.

I had alot of fun in Dirt rally and it made the game way better, so immersive with a racing wheel and 3d vision and the graphics are reasonable so I got a decent frame rate too. It's probably way more doable at this point if you play at a 1080p verticle res.

i7-4790K CPU 4.8Ghz stable overclock.
16 GB RAM Corsair
EVGA 1080TI SLI
Samsung SSD 840Pro
ASUS Z97-WS
3D Surround ASUS Rog Swift PG278Q(R), 2x PG278Q (yes it works)
Obutto R3volution.
Windows 10 pro 64x (Windows 7 Dual boot)

#2
Posted 09/13/2018 03:19 AM   
I guess that would be a problem running triple 1440p monitors lol. I will just keep dreaming then ;(
I guess that would be a problem running triple 1440p monitors lol. I will just keep dreaming then ;(

#3
Posted 09/13/2018 03:27 PM   
Running triples in 3D would require some crazy levels of grunt for a modern racing title. I think most high end users now race VR for any racing title that has it, but they should really give 3D a try - they might be surprised. I race using a wheel and 3D on 65" LG OLED and I love it because I do not have to lose any graphical fidelity, like you do in VR. I have tried Project Cars2 in VR, but to me its 1000x better in 3D! Looks incredible with those maxed graphics in 3D, so immersive I could never go back to 2D. Only concession I had to make was dropping to 1440p from 4k. I just wished we had more racing fans that were shaderhackers in here :)
Running triples in 3D would require some crazy levels of grunt for a modern racing title. I think most high end users now race VR for any racing title that has it, but they should really give 3D a try - they might be surprised.

I race using a wheel and 3D on 65" LG OLED and I love it because I do not have to lose any graphical fidelity, like you do in VR. I have tried Project Cars2 in VR, but to me its 1000x better in 3D! Looks incredible with those maxed graphics in 3D, so immersive I could never go back to 2D. Only concession I had to make was dropping to 1440p from 4k. I just wished we had more racing fans that were shaderhackers in here :)

#4
Posted 09/13/2018 03:59 PM   
I've played a few racers in 3d on my screens and they were really great. I'm only running 1070 SLI but the performance has been fine. That's due to a combination of good scaling and also the important fact that 1920x1080x3 = 6,220,800 pixels and 2560x1440x3 = 11,059,200. You can do the calculations but that's nearly twice the amount of work (in very simple terms, talking about fill rates) and is a part of the reason why I still haven't upgraded to 1440p unfortunately. I think you'd probably need 2x RTX2080 (or TI) in SLI/Nvlink to get the same or better performance in 1440p surround. We'll find out soon enough.
I've played a few racers in 3d on my screens and they were really great.

I'm only running 1070 SLI but the performance has been fine. That's due to a combination of good scaling and also the important fact that 1920x1080x3 = 6,220,800 pixels and 2560x1440x3 = 11,059,200.

You can do the calculations but that's nearly twice the amount of work (in very simple terms, talking about fill rates) and is a part of the reason why I still haven't upgraded to 1440p unfortunately.

I think you'd probably need 2x RTX2080 (or TI) in SLI/Nvlink to get the same or better performance in 1440p surround. We'll find out soon enough.

GTX 1070 SLI, I7-6700k ~ 4.4Ghz, 3x BenQ XL2420T, BenQ TK800, LG 55EG960V (3D OLED), Samsung 850 EVO SSD, Crucial M4 SSD, 3D vision kit, Xpand x104 glasses, Corsair HX1000i, Win 10 pro 64/Win 7 64https://www.3dmark.com/fs/9529310

#5
Posted 09/13/2018 05:46 PM   
Shift-E , I have a 4k 55' 3d tv and tried sim racing on it but with a gamepad since I would have to rearrange my room for my wheel/cockpit setup. But yes it does look quite good. I am thinking about trying to get that properly setup , but my monitor is noticeably smoother so I am unsure if that would be a fair enough trade off, I just need to spend more time on it.
Shift-E , I have a 4k 55' 3d tv and tried sim racing on it but with a gamepad since I would have to rearrange my room for my wheel/cockpit setup. But yes it does look quite good. I am thinking about trying to get that properly setup , but my monitor is noticeably smoother so I am unsure if that would be a fair enough trade off, I just need to spend more time on it.

#6
Posted 09/13/2018 09:31 PM   
Been racing sims on triples, 3D Vision, and Track IR (Track IR about 60 or 70 percent of the time) for many years now from Asus VG248QE, to BenQ XL2720T, to Dell S2716DG. I play all the racing games you mentioned plus others (I love GT Legends especially it's "vanilla" single player, and it's multiplayer "Altbierbuden" version). For 3x 1440P and 3D Vision, a 1080Ti is fine with all of the older ones and hit or miss with the new ones. I have a 1080 Ti. I have many racing games/sims; I can run benchmarks for you on a bunch of them if you'd like. Let me know if you'd like me to do so.
Been racing sims on triples, 3D Vision, and Track IR (Track IR about 60 or 70 percent of the time) for many years now from Asus VG248QE, to BenQ XL2720T, to Dell S2716DG. I play all the racing games you mentioned plus others (I love GT Legends especially it's "vanilla" single player, and it's multiplayer "Altbierbuden" version).

For 3x 1440P and 3D Vision, a 1080Ti is fine with all of the older ones and hit or miss with the new ones. I have a 1080 Ti. I have many racing games/sims; I can run benchmarks for you on a bunch of them if you'd like. Let me know if you'd like me to do so.

#7
Posted 10/20/2018 08:45 AM   
That's the kind of answer I was looking for :D , I was curious how assetto corsa would run
That's the kind of answer I was looking for :D , I was curious how assetto corsa would run

#8
Posted 10/20/2018 03:46 PM   
[quote="jhgator1777"]That's the kind of answer I was looking for :D , I was curious how assetto corsa would run [/quote]OK, I'll do Assetto Corsa benchmarks for you and you'll have them within 24 hrs. Any other games? I can bench the following for you: Assetto Corsa Automobilista F1 2017 GTR 1 GTR 2 GT Legends IRacing Live For Speed Netkar Pro Project Cars 1 Project Cars 2 (via the demo as I don't own it) Race 07 / GTR Evo (+ all add ons known as Race Injection) RaceRoom RFactor 1 RFactor 2 Pretty sure that's all of them.
jhgator1777 said:That's the kind of answer I was looking for :D , I was curious how assetto corsa would run
OK, I'll do Assetto Corsa benchmarks for you and you'll have them within 24 hrs.

Any other games? I can bench the following for you:
Assetto Corsa
Automobilista
F1 2017
GTR 1
GTR 2
GT Legends
IRacing
Live For Speed
Netkar Pro
Project Cars 1
Project Cars 2 (via the demo as I don't own it)
Race 07 / GTR Evo (+ all add ons known as Race Injection)
RaceRoom
RFactor 1
RFactor 2

Pretty sure that's all of them.

#9
Posted 10/21/2018 11:32 AM   
good post, i play 3Dvision with benq w1070+, and it's magic with AC and Rfactor2 !!!
good post, i play 3Dvision with benq w1070+, and it's magic with AC and Rfactor2 !!!

#10
Posted 10/21/2018 12:23 PM   
the only other one I play on that list is Raceroom and PC2 in vr, I imagine Raceroom framerate could be decent with low settings, and PC2 does not support 3d sadly and I am not a big fan of the physics on that one so it doesnt get much of my attention.
the only other one I play on that list is Raceroom and PC2 in vr, I imagine Raceroom framerate could be decent with low settings, and PC2 does not support 3d sadly and I am not a big fan of the physics on that one so it doesnt get much of my attention.

#11
Posted 10/21/2018 04:29 PM   
PC CPU: 8700K @ 4.9 GHz GPU: 1080 Ti @ 1925 (average) MHz core, 11,340 MHz mem RAM: 16 GB (8 GB x 2) DDR 3200 @ 16-18-18-38-2T Storage: OS on main system SSD, game on gaming SSD OS: Win 8.1 64-bit Monitors: 3 x 1440p + 3D Vision Nvidia GPU Driver: v397.31 Nvidia driver settings, all default except: - max pre-rendered frames: 1 - power management mode: prefer max performance Benchmark description: One lap with 15 total cars at Spa circuit from cocpit view using AC's built-in benchmark. It's from a standing start and there are usually 5-8 visible cars in front and 2-5 visible in the mirrors, on average, during the lap and more for the first 2 or 3 corners. "High" is what I'm calling the settings in the pictures below: [url=https://imgbb.com/][img]https://image.ibb.co/da4SMV/20181022-0709300000000000000000000000000.jpg[/img][/url] [url=https://imgbb.com/][img]https://image.ibb.co/n0YMgV/22222222222222222222.jpg[/img][/url] [url=https://imgbb.com/][img]https://image.ibb.co/fcCmFq/3333333333333333333.jpg[/img][/url] [url=https://imgbb.com/][img]https://image.ibb.co/cZWfaq/5555555555555555555.jpg[/img][/url] "Max" PP means the following changes: - overall effect quality: ultra (+2) - glare quality: ultra (+2) note: motion blur and depth of field quality are off for all tests because Assetto Corsa's motion blur is "incompatible with triple screen setups" and I decided to disable DOF quality. PP: off - avg:94  min:8,30  max:124 PP: high - avg:70  min:32,17  max:119 PP: max - avg:56  min:12  max:110 "Max" settings means the following changes from "high" (pics): - shadow resolution: ultra (+1) - smoke generation: ultra (+2) - reflection quality: high (+1) - reflection rendering frequency: ultra (+3) PP: off - Avg:81  min:8,30  max:117 PP: high - avg:61  min:8,30  max:110 PP: max - avg:50  min:7,30  max:109 "Medium" settings means the following changes from "high" (pics): - world detail: very high (-1) - shadow resolution: medium (-1) - high quality mirror reflection: off - reflection quality:  low (-1) - reflection rendering frequency: low (-1) PP: off - avg:101  min:7  max:132 PP: high - avg:75  min:17  max:124 PP: max - avg:60  min:17  max:114 Notes: - I tried FXAA instead of 2x AA for every test. FXAA would always be 1 fps less on avg frames and 2 or 3 less on max frames. It did seem to be a bit more consistent in the minimum framerate (explained below) - the minimum framerate would usually give a real low number in the 7-10 range then a high number in the 25-30 range on the second try of the same benchmark so I would ignore the real low minimum numbers - unlike most benchmarks, you may want to ignore the minimum framerate in this test because the frames only hit this low for the first second or so. I'm guessing it's all the smoke from the tyres of all the cars starting...either that or some sort of glitch occurs because I NEVER saw the game crawl down to 10 fps or anything like that during all my tests so ignore those real low minumum framerates. Conclusion: AC easily runs at 60 fps and well beyond using very good graphics settings with a 1080Ti on 3x1440p screens running 3D Vision. P.S. I'll do Raceroom later tonight
PC
CPU: 8700K @ 4.9 GHz
GPU: 1080 Ti @ 1925 (average) MHz core, 11,340 MHz mem
RAM: 16 GB (8 GB x 2) DDR 3200 @ 16-18-18-38-2T
Storage: OS on main system SSD, game on gaming SSD
OS: Win 8.1 64-bit
Monitors: 3 x 1440p + 3D Vision

Nvidia GPU Driver: v397.31

Nvidia driver settings, all default except:
- max pre-rendered frames: 1
- power management mode: prefer max performance

Benchmark description:
One lap with 15 total cars at Spa circuit from cocpit view using AC's built-in benchmark. It's from a standing start and there are usually 5-8 visible cars in front and 2-5 visible in the mirrors, on average, during the lap and more for the first 2 or 3 corners.


"High" is what I'm calling the settings in the pictures below:
Image
Image
Image
Image


"Max" PP means the following changes:
- overall effect quality: ultra (+2)
- glare quality: ultra (+2)
note: motion blur and depth of field quality are off for all tests because Assetto Corsa's motion blur is "incompatible with triple screen setups" and I decided to disable DOF quality.


PP: off
- avg:94  min:8,30  max:124

PP: high
- avg:70  min:32,17  max:119

PP: max
- avg:56  min:12  max:110



"Max" settings means the following changes from "high" (pics):
- shadow resolution: ultra (+1)
- smoke generation: ultra (+2)
- reflection quality: high (+1)
- reflection rendering frequency: ultra (+3)

PP: off
- Avg:81  min:8,30  max:117

PP: high
- avg:61  min:8,30  max:110

PP: max
- avg:50  min:7,30  max:109



"Medium" settings means the following changes from "high" (pics):
- world detail: very high (-1)
- shadow resolution: medium (-1)
- high quality mirror reflection: off
- reflection quality:  low (-1)
- reflection rendering frequency: low (-1)

PP: off
- avg:101  min:7  max:132

PP: high
- avg:75  min:17  max:124

PP: max
- avg:60  min:17  max:114



Notes:
- I tried FXAA instead of 2x AA for every test. FXAA would always be 1 fps less on avg frames and 2 or 3 less on max frames. It did seem to be a bit more consistent in the minimum framerate (explained below)
- the minimum framerate would usually give a real low number in the 7-10 range then a high number in the 25-30 range on the second try of the same benchmark so I would ignore the real low minimum numbers
- unlike most benchmarks, you may want to ignore the minimum framerate in this test because the frames only hit this low for the first second or so. I'm guessing it's all the smoke from the tyres of all the cars starting...either that or some sort of glitch occurs because I NEVER saw the game crawl down to 10 fps or anything like that during all my tests so ignore those real low minumum framerates.


Conclusion: AC easily runs at 60 fps and well beyond using very good graphics settings with a 1080Ti on 3x1440p screens running 3D Vision.



P.S. I'll do Raceroom later tonight

#12
Posted 10/22/2018 05:40 PM   
Hi, yes me too ;-) PC CPU: 4790K @ 4.6 GHz GPU: Geforce 1080 Ti Monitors: 3 x 1440p Dell S2716DG Assetto Corsa and pcars works fine in 3d surround. Iracing needs a lot of CPU Power, but its ok too. For me 3d surround is the best way to race, its awesome.
Hi,

yes me too ;-)

PC
CPU: 4790K @ 4.6 GHz
GPU: Geforce 1080 Ti
Monitors: 3 x 1440p Dell S2716DG

Assetto Corsa and pcars works fine in 3d surround. Iracing needs a lot of CPU Power, but its ok too.
For me 3d surround is the best way to race, its awesome.

#13
Posted 10/25/2018 02:18 PM   
[quote="jhgator1777"]the only other one I play on that list is Raceroom and PC2 in vr, I imagine Raceroom framerate could be decent with low settings, and PC2 does not support 3d sadly and I am not a big fan of the physics on that one so it doesnt get much of my attention.[/quote] fyi, PC2 does have a WIP 3D fix posted in the Project Cars 2 thread. It has some minor issues, but 90% of the time it looks perfect. I understand though if you are put off by the physics (they had a big update to the tire model a while back), as PC2 is not for everyone. I just think it looks amazing in 3D..
jhgator1777 said:the only other one I play on that list is Raceroom and PC2 in vr, I imagine Raceroom framerate could be decent with low settings, and PC2 does not support 3d sadly and I am not a big fan of the physics on that one so it doesnt get much of my attention.


fyi, PC2 does have a WIP 3D fix posted in the Project Cars 2 thread. It has some minor issues, but 90% of the time it looks perfect. I understand though if you are put off by the physics (they had a big update to the tire model a while back), as PC2 is not for everyone. I just think it looks amazing in 3D..

#14
Posted 10/25/2018 05:01 PM   
I like Pcars2 3Dvision, but unfortunately I do not roll over in 3Dvision because there are still some problems with the fix which are annoying, it's a shame because it is beautiful, and the immersion is very good.
I like Pcars2 3Dvision, but unfortunately I do not roll over in 3Dvision because there are still some problems with the fix which are annoying, it's a shame because it is beautiful, and the immersion is very good.

#15
Posted 10/27/2018 12:16 PM   
Scroll To Top