I just recently switched to VR from triples and I won’t go back. VR feels so much more engaged and enjoyable. I can’t spot apexes and braking points so much easier in VR.
Another big difference to mention is physical space requirements. The space requirement of triples is pretty large compared to VR / single monitor. That is a big factor for a lot of people. I personally love VR and my G2 headset, but also because of where my rig sits I couldnt even physically fit triple monitors. Also the heat factor of VR, using a windsim kit really helps keep you cool in VR. Having that headset on for awhile is a sweaty mess without it.
Long read, Marc said it best about compromise. Quality, Immersion and Information Intake VR you sacrifice information and buttons. Going to pit can sometimes be a big stress for me in VR, in competitive play. A quick answer for me would be if its competitive and events are under 1hr, lets say for no need for tire change, refueling, drifting, rallying. go VR. but if you need to pit, stream, hit buttons, toggle, drive endurance etc. go screen (ive done two 24hr(2-3hr stints), dozens of 2hr/3hr Q/R endurances, a 12hr, all in VR and it was fine) APEXV2R gave me a real introduction to sim racing with VR and Screen. As soon as I tried VR, I was blown away and made the decision. I feel it is the best way to demonstrate your ability, since you are inside the car. With VR I get the same feelings from karting, track, racing, motorcycle. With a great PC, it really does feel real imo. I'm still amazed 9 months later. It did hurt with streaming, not only with engagement, but when the stream had glitches it was incredibly annoying and especially with this weight on your head, looking in and out at your screen to fix whatever issue. Also viewers are looking at lesser resolution since you are streaming the mirror or w/e. I will be going back to APEXV2R to test VR and screen since it has been almost a year with VR and I can drive at a good level. I want to begin driving competitively on iRacing, ACC, AC league races and future titles, so I will see how my VR speed translates to screen.
VR is the way to go. It took me a couple of days to get used to it but once it clicked I never got any hint of sickness from it again. So do not be put off when you try it at first because you're going to get motion sickness for sure. And it'll hit hard as well. But go incremental and stop when you start feeling unwell. You'll notice that you're going to be able to handle it longer each time and at some point your brain will click and you'll be doing donuts for days without any problem.
If budget is your concern, go with VR first. It will give you the biggest immersion bang for your buck. Then build out a quality triple setup with all the bells and whistles. If using VR, I would suggest a wheel with good button layout as you have to go by feel.
Well I own a 12th gen i7 and an rtx 3080, as well as a Reverb G2 headset, and I doubt about the 2K triples being more taxing on the PC than the reverb G2 at full 100% Resolution. VR is really taxing on the CPU for some reason, seems to be cuz it renders the game twice a frame, (and the GPU obviously at such high res) specially on ACC, and you have to maintain a stable 90fps if you don't want to get stutters and probably get a bit sick or dissoriented, which is not easy with full grids at that resolution at any modern title besides IRacing, for almost every sim-racing title I have to lower almost all eye-candy to keep those 90fps running smooth. With the screens I guess you can run Freesync or G-Sync and it would be fine if you're not super picky. I'd love to know more about your thoughts on this topic! Also, another key factor about VR added to the weight/discomfort is heat and sweat, those screens inside the headset get hot, and if you live in a place where it's moderately hot, you'll be completely wet after a 45-60 minute session, specially on your face, which is a bit of a pain specially if the lenses start to fog a little and blurr your already kinda deficient view of the game. Also in my case it really contributes to making me feel sick a lot easier than if I'm fresh, so playing longer sessions is a pain in the butt in VR, in the summer it's almost unbearable where I live (+ I have a motion rig which might make the sweating even worse) even after several years of VR racing (I was an Oculus CV1 user) So just a quick heads up for anyone considering VR, as you said, try it out first, and even if it feels nice then (first experience is impressive) be wary of long term discomfort. Summing up, VR makes Simracing more intense, which is super cool but has definitely shortened my racing sessions. I'll be trying out triples soon to see if I can play for longer sessions without loosing as much immersion and perception as if I was going back to a single screen, definitely VR is super cool and immersive so there's no way I'm going back to one screen after that! Overall great video anyway, and really cool rigs! Keep it up!
@@tech-eddy Thanks! I finally found a set of 27" FHD 60Hz triples + a triple monitor stand for 300$ second hand, best purchase ever. I'm playing ACC at 130-140% Resolution Scale with high-epic graphics no problem, it looks so much better than the G2. I'll be upgrading to QHD 165Hz G-Sync triples as soon as I have the money but for now my simracing enjoyment has returned. Overall comments if you're interested: - Playing at 60Hz after using VR at 90Hz for so long did feel weird for the first laps, I definitely think the sweetspot is around 100fps, I could definitely notice the 60Hz and playing with V-Sync adds stutters sometimes. That should be gone once I get some higher refresh rate G-Sync screens, and it should feel smoother than VR without the fps being terrible if they ever dip below 90. - Triples at 1440p should be more or less the same as playing 1080p triples at 140% resolution scale. So I'd say the GPU performance will be more or less the same than playing with the G2, with the added benefit of G-Sync so you don't have to set your gfx to maintain 90fps on the worst case situation, but just make it the average. - 1080p with 27" at around 55cm from my eyes was definitely a better experience than I expected, It looks way crisper than my G2. Doing some calculations, the PPD (pixels per degree) of FHD screens at that distance equal the PPD of the Varjo Aero, and I can definitely see it being that way. QHD screens should be almost retina, but I do still recommend 1080p monitors, specially if you're short on GPU power. - 27" is a nice sweetspot for triples, I'm unsure if I need anything bigger... I'd maybe prefer 32 since my Wheel Base is small and it would allow me to mount those 32 just behind it without leaving a gap, completely filling my view and making the inside cockpit scale a bit closer to 1:1, but 27 feel super good. - I was worried about the lack of immersion and judgement of distances going back to screens (it was particularly hard when I tried a single screen after playing in VR for so long) but it has been absolutely no problem. Playing with triples took just a couple of races to get used to, and I haven't got back to my G2 since then, the comfort just kills it for me. - Setting up the triples is a bit of a pain in the ass but once you're done, you're set for a long time. Only thing I can say is a complete sh*t is Nvidia Surround, it doesn't remember the config if you change the monitors connected to the PC, so if you use your PC in another screen other than your triples you might need to set it up again every time you switch. It's just a couple minutes but it sucks. - I could see myself enjoying the Varjo Aero if the fan inside and overall comfort makes it easier to wear for long periods, the resolution seems to be enough if it really equals 1080p triples, and the lenses and sweetspot should be way better than the G2. It should be the definitive experience. But atm paying 2300$ for that is out of range and playing with the triples is sooo comfortable that I don't see myself getting back into a headset for some time. Also the increased FOV of the triples has made me quite a safer driver. Hope it helps if anyone is on the fence!
I like VR for the immersive aspect of the experience but haven’t tried the triple monitor setup. This video has inspired me to try it. Either way, racing sims are a great way to hone your craft. I often drive a track in the closest car I can find to my own, (and with the same setup) to practice if I haven’t been to that track for a while and I know I’m going to be there in RL.
i ran triples a few years back but they were only 24in screens so i wasnt a fan. picked up a quest 2 at launch, having never touched vr in my life. was instantly blown away. currently im running a single 43in screen for titles that dont support vr. but the ones that do, thats how i play. i have to agree though, hitting buttons for setting up a pit stop etc can be a hassle. though if you have someone willing to help, many of the titles have the ability to do that from the screen with a mouse while not disturbing the actual person racing. vr is seriously a game changer though, and made me realize just how deficient i am on a screen lol.
4090's and newer headsets are quickly bridging the gap in image quality. I only race in VR but I have to agree that it's aways a hassle to setup and and I wish I could see my buttons and peripherals while driving. Maybe AR will fix that in the next Few years. With the higher end business Varjo headset, you can see part of the image in AR which is pretty cool.
I've been racing with Nvidia 3D Vision triple 1440p 27" monitors for around 6-8 years so I'm very used to 3D / stereoscopic gaming I guess that's why I was a little disappointed the few times with VR. I think 75% of what impresses people about VR is the 3D, the remaining 25% is split between the head-tracking, feeling inside the game, etc. Having said that, I just bought a Pimax 5K Super to take advantage of the Pimax trade-in offer for their incredible upcoming 12K and Crystal models. I can't imagine using any VR headset besides a a Pimax. Even at the Pimax's "small" FOV setting which is still 120-130 degrees h.FOV - more than any other headset on the market - I was very disappointed & bothered by the the black borders around the image. I then tried Pimax's "Potato" setting for fun as it's around 100 - 110 degrees h.FOV to see what it would be like using other companies' headsets and it's a joke, it's like I'm staring through binoculars or wearing tiny goggles blocking most of my vision. I have no idea how owners of other headsets can play like that, let alone enjoy the experience. I then tried the "normal" FOV which is 140-150 degrees h.FOV and finally it started to feel normal, natural, and playable. "Large" is even better at 160-170 degrees h.FOV. If "large" didn't exist, I'd be able to live with "normal" but if my only option was "small" or "potato", I would have immediately stopped using VR until a larger FOV became available. Some of the Pimax headsets also allow vert high refresh rates so smoothness and any VR-induced input lag will be minimized further. The 8KX can, so far, go up to 120 Hz and the 5K Super has lots of high options (120 Hz, 144 Hz, 160 Hz) all the way up to 180 Hz.
@@Manowarmx3 Then you have a racing helmet that's screwed-up and illegal. As most laws or rules require racing helmets to have a minimum of 180-210 degrees horizontal.
@@samburti8587 Touche! What i mean't to say is the vertical vs horizontal fov! Regarding side to side, you should be fine with 110° like the vive pro 2 or index with a few modifications
I was an avid VR racer/flyer from the CV1 days, had the Rift S and more recently the G2. I had triples from 2012 to 2015 when I took a break until 2017 and got the CV1. The immersion is unbeatable in VR but still there is that lacking visual quality. I recently went to triple 32" screens due to a medical problem that a Vr headset was aggrivating with my sinus' and although I do miss the VR for that "incar" feel I am happy with triples for my use case. I may take the suffering if VR can get to full FOV clarity in the near future.
I have a tripple setup, and I wonder if I could add head tracking of sorts to allow me to look around the A-Pillars and to allow me to look into corners and up and down when going over elevation changes. That would heighten immersion for my rig.
It sure would. We have tried it on a ultrawide monitor setup and it worked well. We will look into doing a review using head tracking and triple monitors.
Muhahahahaa!!! I got both!! and my triple covers enough of my FoV that they're similar. 4540 x 1440p across a 72" tv and two 42" tv's in portrait mode. and a rift s. its a poor mans set up but it still kicks ass and get 90fps on some titles. its more then enough for playing the games i play like planet coaster.
It's really a compromise. But I tend to break it down to: ease of use, and that from your own point of view. For instance, not everyone has a dedicated setup, and vr is a way to have a pit in a breeze. If I had a dedicated setup, I would probably use tripple setup, because of the way you are disconnected from the real world. But, I'm attaching my wheel to the desk and fit my pedals before driving. So, VR removes me from my computer so to speak.
I just recently switched to VR from triples and I won’t go back. VR feels so much more engaged and enjoyable. I can’t spot apexes and braking points so much easier in VR.
It's the exact opposite for me. I always had VR, but VR is so clumbersome and tiresome.
I prefer triples by a good margin.
Another big difference to mention is physical space requirements. The space requirement of triples is pretty large compared to VR / single monitor. That is a big factor for a lot of people. I personally love VR and my G2 headset, but also because of where my rig sits I couldnt even physically fit triple monitors. Also the heat factor of VR, using a windsim kit really helps keep you cool in VR. Having that headset on for awhile is a sweaty mess without it.
I've tried both and own both.
I recommend both haha
Long read, Marc said it best about compromise. Quality, Immersion and Information Intake
VR you sacrifice information and buttons. Going to pit can sometimes be a big stress for me in VR, in competitive play.
A quick answer for me would be if its competitive and events are under 1hr, lets say for no need for tire change, refueling, drifting, rallying. go VR.
but if you need to pit, stream, hit buttons, toggle, drive endurance etc. go screen
(ive done two 24hr(2-3hr stints), dozens of 2hr/3hr Q/R endurances, a 12hr, all in VR and it was fine)
APEXV2R gave me a real introduction to sim racing with VR and Screen. As soon as I tried VR, I was blown away and made the decision. I feel it is the best way to demonstrate your ability, since you are inside the car. With VR I get the same feelings from karting, track, racing, motorcycle. With a great PC, it really does feel real imo. I'm still amazed 9 months later.
It did hurt with streaming, not only with engagement, but when the stream had glitches it was incredibly annoying and especially with this weight on your head, looking in and out at your screen to fix whatever issue. Also viewers are looking at lesser resolution since you are streaming the mirror or w/e.
I will be going back to APEXV2R to test VR and screen since it has been almost a year with VR and I can drive at a good level. I want to begin driving competitively on iRacing, ACC, AC league races and future titles, so I will see how my VR speed translates to screen.
VR is the way to go. It took me a couple of days to get used to it but once it clicked I never got any hint of sickness from it again. So do not be put off when you try it at first because you're going to get motion sickness for sure. And it'll hit hard as well. But go incremental and stop when you start feeling unwell. You'll notice that you're going to be able to handle it longer each time and at some point your brain will click and you'll be doing donuts for days without any problem.
If budget is your concern, go with VR first. It will give you the biggest immersion bang for your buck. Then build out a quality triple setup with all the bells and whistles. If using VR, I would suggest a wheel with good button layout as you have to go by feel.
Great advice.
Well I own a 12th gen i7 and an rtx 3080, as well as a Reverb G2 headset, and I doubt about the 2K triples being more taxing on the PC than the reverb G2 at full 100% Resolution. VR is really taxing on the CPU for some reason, seems to be cuz it renders the game twice a frame, (and the GPU obviously at such high res) specially on ACC, and you have to maintain a stable 90fps if you don't want to get stutters and probably get a bit sick or dissoriented, which is not easy with full grids at that resolution at any modern title besides IRacing, for almost every sim-racing title I have to lower almost all eye-candy to keep those 90fps running smooth. With the screens I guess you can run Freesync or G-Sync and it would be fine if you're not super picky. I'd love to know more about your thoughts on this topic!
Also, another key factor about VR added to the weight/discomfort is heat and sweat, those screens inside the headset get hot, and if you live in a place where it's moderately hot, you'll be completely wet after a 45-60 minute session, specially on your face, which is a bit of a pain specially if the lenses start to fog a little and blurr your already kinda deficient view of the game. Also in my case it really contributes to making me feel sick a lot easier than if I'm fresh, so playing longer sessions is a pain in the butt in VR, in the summer it's almost unbearable where I live (+ I have a motion rig which might make the sweating even worse) even after several years of VR racing (I was an Oculus CV1 user)
So just a quick heads up for anyone considering VR, as you said, try it out first, and even if it feels nice then (first experience is impressive) be wary of long term discomfort. Summing up, VR makes Simracing more intense, which is super cool but has definitely shortened my racing sessions.
I'll be trying out triples soon to see if I can play for longer sessions without loosing as much immersion and perception as if I was going back to a single screen, definitely VR is super cool and immersive so there's no way I'm going back to one screen after that!
Overall great video anyway, and really cool rigs! Keep it up!
Perfect discribed. I doing the Same. Want also try now triples.
@@tech-eddy Thanks! I finally found a set of 27" FHD 60Hz triples + a triple monitor stand for 300$ second hand, best purchase ever. I'm playing ACC at 130-140% Resolution Scale with high-epic graphics no problem, it looks so much better than the G2. I'll be upgrading to QHD 165Hz G-Sync triples as soon as I have the money but for now my simracing enjoyment has returned.
Overall comments if you're interested:
- Playing at 60Hz after using VR at 90Hz for so long did feel weird for the first laps, I definitely think the sweetspot is around 100fps, I could definitely notice the 60Hz and playing with V-Sync adds stutters sometimes. That should be gone once I get some higher refresh rate G-Sync screens, and it should feel smoother than VR without the fps being terrible if they ever dip below 90.
- Triples at 1440p should be more or less the same as playing 1080p triples at 140% resolution scale. So I'd say the GPU performance will be more or less the same than playing with the G2, with the added benefit of G-Sync so you don't have to set your gfx to maintain 90fps on the worst case situation, but just make it the average.
- 1080p with 27" at around 55cm from my eyes was definitely a better experience than I expected, It looks way crisper than my G2. Doing some calculations, the PPD (pixels per degree) of FHD screens at that distance equal the PPD of the Varjo Aero, and I can definitely see it being that way. QHD screens should be almost retina, but I do still recommend 1080p monitors, specially if you're short on GPU power.
- 27" is a nice sweetspot for triples, I'm unsure if I need anything bigger... I'd maybe prefer 32 since my Wheel Base is small and it would allow me to mount those 32 just behind it without leaving a gap, completely filling my view and making the inside cockpit scale a bit closer to 1:1, but 27 feel super good.
- I was worried about the lack of immersion and judgement of distances going back to screens (it was particularly hard when I tried a single screen after playing in VR for so long) but it has been absolutely no problem. Playing with triples took just a couple of races to get used to, and I haven't got back to my G2 since then, the comfort just kills it for me.
- Setting up the triples is a bit of a pain in the ass but once you're done, you're set for a long time. Only thing I can say is a complete sh*t is Nvidia Surround, it doesn't remember the config if you change the monitors connected to the PC, so if you use your PC in another screen other than your triples you might need to set it up again every time you switch. It's just a couple minutes but it sucks.
- I could see myself enjoying the Varjo Aero if the fan inside and overall comfort makes it easier to wear for long periods, the resolution seems to be enough if it really equals 1080p triples, and the lenses and sweetspot should be way better than the G2. It should be the definitive experience. But atm paying 2300$ for that is out of range and playing with the triples is sooo comfortable that I don't see myself getting back into a headset for some time. Also the increased FOV of the triples has made me quite a safer driver.
Hope it helps if anyone is on the fence!
@@jimmixgs It is rare to see someone come from VR and leave so easily on screens.
Thank
I like VR for the immersive aspect of the experience but haven’t tried the triple monitor setup. This video has inspired me to try it. Either way, racing sims are a great way to hone your craft. I often drive a track in the closest car I can find to my own, (and with the same setup) to practice if I haven’t been to that track for a while and I know I’m going to be there in RL.
Thank you for your comment! Swing by the shop some time and check out the 3-monitor rig!
Just left a comment of my experience with triples after being a VR user for a long time if you're interested.
So how is triples? I run vr since years already
Well done 👍
i ran triples a few years back but they were only 24in screens so i wasnt a fan. picked up a quest 2 at launch, having never touched vr in my life. was instantly blown away. currently im running a single 43in screen for titles that dont support vr. but the ones that do, thats how i play. i have to agree though, hitting buttons for setting up a pit stop etc can be a hassle. though if you have someone willing to help, many of the titles have the ability to do that from the screen with a mouse while not disturbing the actual person racing. vr is seriously a game changer though, and made me realize just how deficient i am on a screen lol.
4090's and newer headsets are quickly bridging the gap in image quality. I only race in VR but I have to agree that it's aways a hassle to setup and and I wish I could see my buttons and peripherals while driving. Maybe AR will fix that in the next Few years. With the higher end business Varjo headset, you can see part of the image in AR which is pretty cool.
Well said!!!
I've been racing with Nvidia 3D Vision triple 1440p 27" monitors for around 6-8 years so I'm very used to 3D / stereoscopic gaming I guess that's why I was a little disappointed the few times with VR. I think 75% of what impresses people about VR is the 3D, the remaining 25% is split between the head-tracking, feeling inside the game, etc. Having said that, I just bought a Pimax 5K Super to take advantage of the Pimax trade-in offer for their incredible upcoming 12K and Crystal models. I can't imagine using any VR headset besides a a Pimax.
Even at the Pimax's "small" FOV setting which is still 120-130 degrees h.FOV - more than any other headset on the market - I was very disappointed & bothered by the the black borders around the image. I then tried Pimax's "Potato" setting for fun as it's around 100 - 110 degrees h.FOV to see what it would be like using other companies' headsets and it's a joke, it's like I'm staring through binoculars or wearing tiny goggles blocking most of my vision. I have no idea how owners of other headsets can play like that, let alone enjoy the experience. I then tried the "normal" FOV which is 140-150 degrees h.FOV and finally it started to feel normal, natural, and playable. "Large" is even better at 160-170 degrees h.FOV. If "large" didn't exist, I'd be able to live with "normal" but if my only option was "small" or "potato", I would have immediately stopped using VR until a larger FOV became available.
Some of the Pimax headsets also allow vert high refresh rates so smoothness and any VR-induced input lag will be minimized further. The 8KX can, so far, go up to 120 Hz and the 5K Super has lots of high options (120 Hz, 144 Hz, 160 Hz) all the way up to 180 Hz.
I have a vive pro 2 and it feels very similar to my racing helmet i use IRL.
@@Manowarmx3 Then you have a racing helmet that's screwed-up and illegal. As most laws or rules require racing helmets to have a minimum of 180-210 degrees horizontal.
@@samburti8587 Touche! What i mean't to say is the vertical vs horizontal fov!
Regarding side to side, you should be fine with 110° like the vive pro 2 or index with a few modifications
@@Manowarmx3 110 is junk. 130-140 is bare minimum and even that isn't fantastic. 110 is like looking through binoculars.
@@samburti8587 i respectfully disagree, but you are entitled to your opinion! ☺️
VR + motion sim is the race training sim. Otherwise, triple is just good for “playing” a game competitively.
I was an avid VR racer/flyer from the CV1 days, had the Rift S and more recently the G2. I had triples from 2012 to 2015 when I took a break until 2017 and got the CV1. The immersion is unbeatable in VR but still there is that lacking visual quality. I recently went to triple 32" screens due to a medical problem that a Vr headset was aggrivating with my sinus' and although I do miss the VR for that "incar" feel I am happy with triples for my use case.
I may take the suffering if VR can get to full FOV clarity in the near future.
Is it worth to upgrade to the G2 from RiftS ?
I have a tripple setup, and I wonder if I could add head tracking of sorts to allow me to look around the A-Pillars and to allow me to look into corners and up and down when going over elevation changes. That would heighten immersion for my rig.
It sure would. We have tried it on a ultrawide monitor setup and it worked well. We will look into doing a review using head tracking and triple monitors.
My VR makes me extremely nauseous, migraines and diarrhea nearly immediately and it ruins me for hours. Wasted so much money on my HP reverb g2.
90 fps ??
try with bass shakers
Muhahahahaa!!! I got both!! and my triple covers enough of my FoV that they're similar. 4540 x 1440p across a 72" tv and two 42" tv's in portrait mode. and a rift s. its a poor mans set up but it still kicks ass and get 90fps on some titles. its more then enough for playing the games i play like planet coaster.
Damn... I may just get VR.
3070 and G2 maxed out? Wow…
I doubt it.. I have a 3080 and run at 70-80% resolution definitely not on epic settings
It's really a compromise. But I tend to break it down to: ease of use, and that from your own point of view.
For instance, not everyone has a dedicated setup, and vr is a way to have a pit in a breeze.
If I had a dedicated setup, I would probably use tripple setup, because of the way you are disconnected from the real world. But, I'm attaching my wheel to the desk and fit my pedals before driving. So, VR removes me from my computer so to speak.