Now that Multi monitor support will appear in SU10 (and I accept this may not be perfect yet, but further improvements should hopefully follow over time), I want to upgrade my home cockpit screen/s.
Currently I use one monitor, plus others for LittleNavMap/Air Manager.
Initially I was considering something like the Samsung Odyssey G9 49".
Looking at recent YT videos of MSFS with multi monitors however, I am impressed enough to reconsider whether 3 x smaller monitors may be the way to go.
I appreciate that this is a subjective matter, and some folks may prefer one over the other.
What I am hoping is that there is someone out there who has used/tried BOTH these options, and can give some insight into what swayed their decision of what to stick with for the future.
For space reasons, the largest monitors I could consider in a triple setup are 3 x 32".
All comments from anyone who has seen and/or used BOTH setups would be much appreciated.
Regards to all, Alasdair (aka FlyBasher…)
Before VR I had 3 40" 1080p TVs. Before that I had a 55" 1080p TV. With both setups I used headtracking, a separate gauge/ dash monitor, and homemade button boxes. The 3 screens were much better than a single screen. Except for the “stretching” of the image. That was, in part, the fault of DCS I think, but heard FSX had the same issue.
VR blows them both away though.
I fly the Odyssey G9. It’s a wonderful monitor. One thing though. The vertical view is a bit low for me. I would have liked a bit more height for better immersion.
But I use it a lot as 2x 27” monitor with no bezels, so this was the best one to suit both purposes.
I’m using 3-32" 4k monitors. Personally, I’d stay away from the wide-view curved screens.
32" inch is a great size in 4k.
Apart from my 1080p HDTV monitor we have a 55" TV which I really wish I could use as my own all of the time. Then my desired set up would be to set up a full width window at the top with a line of popped out instruments and gauges across the bottom quarter. Unfortunately my wife won’t let me fix it as low down as I would want to so I’d only get neck ache with this set up.
It would be interesting to find out what the performance penalty is while using triple monitors in MSFS. I had a triple setup with xPlane and I liked it a lot, but in xPlane it was a performance hog because of the way it was implemented…xPlane ran the application 3 times, one for each of the screens. Rough approximation was: 1 screen - 60fps, 2 screens - 40fps, 3 screens - 20fps with rig I had at the time (1080p screens).
Now MSFS implementation is likely different and possibly more efficient performance-wise. That notwithstanding, with the upgrade you will be pushing a lot more pixels and that will come at a cost. I doubt 3 x 4K monitors would be usable even with a beast of a computer.
I switched to a 49" 5120x1440 for MSFS and am quite pleased with it…especially with the Tobii eye trracker. Having made the investment in this monitor, I won’t be going back any time soon. I still have the 3 monitors and may give triple mons in MSFS a try once it becomes mainstream.
Hi to all who have kindly responded - very much appreciated.
After further research I am currently leaning towards the 3 x 32" 4k monitors - partly because of the point made by GhostlyFriend that the vertical view on a 49" curved monitor might be a bit low.
I am not using the SU10 beta version, so will wait until SU10 “normal” is released - I can then find out what the likely “hit” will be on performance/fps when running 3 x 32"4k monitors.
My system is fairly powerful (I think/hope - I am no expert and simply followed advice of a knowledgeable friend when purchasing it recently).
Specs are: Graphics cards - Nvidia RTX A4000 (x2, so I have 8 DP ports); CPU - Intel Xeon W-2295 @ 3GHz; 64GB of RAM; Motherboard is Dell 06JWJY vA01; DirectX 12; Windows 11 Pro for workstations; MS Store version of MSFS.
Assuming I am correct that these specs are fairly good, I hope the option of running 3 monitors will not cause a major drop in performance.
I do fly in VR from time to time, but really enjoy using the home cockpit peripherals (Honeycomb Alpha and Bravo, TM Rudder pedals, FlightSimBuilder GNS 530 or their G1000s x 2, Logitech/Saitek Multipanel and Radio panels x 2, with 3 x Logitech FIPs as “backup” gauges for the glass panels).
So whilst I love VR, I do most of my flying in 2D.
Roll on SU10 being fully released!
If anyone thinks my specs are not enough for 3 x monitors, please say so now, so I do not waste time and finance on purchasing something that will end in disappointment!
Regards, Alasdair
Hmm…was not familiar with either your processor or GPU so I did some cursory checking around. What was your main use case when you bought that machine…gaming or productivity? While it is a fine productivity work station, it’s not really ideal for gaming/MSFS.
It was hard to find good comparisons between your CPU and the more common units used in “gaming” rigs but it seems to be somewhat comparable to about a 10th gen higher end unit…we’re at 12th gen now and soon to be 13th. So not great for what you are trying to do.
Your GPU is, once again, not designed for a “gaming” environment…more for rendering complicated engineering drawings or editing videos etc. Having 2 of them doesn’t help either, since MSFS will only recognize one of them. Techspot did a review of the A4000 and concluded that in the “gaming” environment it came out at about the level of the RTX 3060ti or 3070. These are decent cards for MSFS at 1440p, but I think 3 x 4k would not work acceptably even at very low settings in the sim.
I don’t know what resolution you are running at right now, but if not 4k, see if you can try out a single 4k monitor at the settings you like and go from there.
I am surely no expert on this stuff, and perhaps others more knowledgeable may step in, but at this point I would not invest in 3 4K monitors.
Very helpful comment - thanks.
I like your suggestion of trying out a single 4k monitor to see how my system copes.
Will do this and then reconsider.
Regards, Alasdair
Let us know how you make out as you move forward. Best of luck!
I decided to get the deal at Costco Wholesale for $1500 on the LG 65 in OLED 4k TV with G-sync support paired with my RTX 3090ti. Don’t know if I, can or what to get two more monitors, but maybe in the future. VR headset is not my thing.
Flight Simulator Flight Simulator - Album on Imgur
Have a look at The 5 Best 4k Gaming TVs - Summer 2022: Reviews - RTINGS.com They have great reviews for gaming TVs.
I have an RTX 2070 Super and I7-9700K with AOC 27 inch curved 1080 monitor using nVidia DLDSR 2.25 all ULTRA TLOD 75-150 with resultant 55-85 fps (complex scenery) … just purchased ASUS 31.5 inch 4K 60hz monitor … lots of possibilities using 2 screens now … DLD(SR) 4.00x and downscaling from ~4000x8000 to 2000x4000 (in MSFS) and trying different GeForce filters for color, hue, contrast, brightness, sharpness, very good effects but FPS down to 25-40 … 
I’m about to enter the “triple setup”, currently in research stage.
These are my current views/experiences on the various options:
VR
Pros: Super immersive, not as expensive as triples. Takes up very little space. Can fly any plane (as compared to if you build a C172 cockpit, flying an airliner may feel odd).
Cons: Due to sweet spot, you need to move your head more than you naturally would, when looking around. Weight on head. Heat on face. Need to dial down graphic settings in sim to run at a decent FPS. Need to get your charts into the sim somehow, no more charts on paper or 2nd monitor or writing notes on paper. And perhaps the worst for me: Controls… fiddling with either VR controller or mouse, fumbling around to find a switch and then count in the dark “1-2-3-4 from the left, there’s my cabin light”.
SuperUltraWide 49" (3840x1080)
Pros: Fair price. Versatile, good for office (I have one of these both at home and at the office) and gaming.
Cons: Vertical, it’s short, could use more height when flying. In MSFS, the sides are stretched. If you only use for periphal vision, you won’t notice too much. But if you turn your head or eyes to the sides, boy, it’s stretched out.
TrackIR and such
Pros: Cheap way of expanding and “make your screen feel bigger”. Useful when leaning forward to zoom in on gauges, or stretch your back to look over the glareshield etc.
Cons: Unnatural movement. If you want to look 90 degrees left, you can’t cause there’s no monitor there. So you set up curves. Like you move your head 30 degrees left but it translates to 90 degrees in game (example, I don’t have the actual values with me right now). However, you now need to either move your eyes in the opposite direction or at least fixate them before your head is turned too much, so your head ends up turned left but eyes are looking right. It takes some getting used to, and I believe this is probably the cheapest and easiest way to enjoy flight sim compared to just a single monitor with keybinds to change views. This is how I drove Truck Simulator for years.
Triples
My plan is to go 3 x 55".
Pros: For now, I’ve tested with my SuperUltraWide upfront, a small screen on one side and a 40" TV on the other side. It’s not ideal with different size monitors in MSFS, actually it’s almost useless with the current “Multi monitor”-implementation in Experimantal tab. They need to add a “zoom setting per monitor”. Anyway, it’s good enough to play around with. And with this, you can move your head/eyes totally natural, as you would in a real cockpit/car. Also, able to build physical cockpit you like, use all the buttons switches without needing to “feel around”.
Cons: Expensive. Takes up a LOT of space! Generates heat… and don’t get me started on the electricity costs. Need to dial down graphics settings to run 3 big monitors.
Simming is a game of compromises 
Be careful going big - I just sold three 4K 50" panels and got three 32" 1440p ones. Even my i12900K and RTX3080ti could not run triple 4K, it just worked with a 2K-4K-2k setup but then in driving/racing sims it fell apart badly and results were terrible.
Exactly. I have no intentions of running 4K on all 3 screens at this time. Maybe with 4090 or something. But not now.
From what I can tell, 50-55" is the size to go for “real life like”. Smaller than that, it will be a compressed view. Which can be fine on it’s own as well.
It all comes down to distances and angles, fields of view, point of view etc.
VR is easier in that regard 
Yes - the view on my 32" screens is exactly the same as the view was on my 50" screens - the only difference is that the screens are a little closer to the head/eyes - the FOV is the same.
Yes, I would have stuck with VR if the image quality was there on the G2, i’ll wait a bit before trying it again.