3x27" monitors - a step too far?

[redrabbit29]

I'm planning a new build. Mainly this will be used for a variety of things such as:

- Programming
- Pen Testing
- Running several VM wares
- University work - such as essays, internet research
- General stuff

I'm not a gamer, but wouldn't mind trying out that area as the computer should be good enough to run the latest ones.

...

I've got it in mind that I'd love to have 3 screens. One main one in front, one to the left and one to the right. All mounted on screen mounts attached to the desk.

I think this would be particularly useful for coding and running VMs as one screen could have one on, the other may have a web page, or something, etc...

The cost is obviously an issue, I'd guess each screen would cost about £200-£250.

Any thoughts?

P.S. I know nothing about what screen resolution to go for, or what brand, model, what else I should be looking at. I've just started some basic research.

 

[this_is_gav]

If you're not going to game game there's nothing wrong with going for the cheapest monitor you can find (ideally IPS rather than TN) for the side monitors - they don't have to be the same resolution as the main one - 1920x1080 is the obvious choice. I've got a 27" 2560x1440 monitor centrally with a 24" 1920x1200 monitor to the left of it and it's about as far as I'd want to go in terms of turning my head, and I struggled to get them both fully in view with the bracket I have, so I bought a 2nd single bracket. Resolution (DPI) is subjective, but I'd consider a 4K 28" screen too small, so a 4K screen wouldn't fit in my setup.

Having three monitors hooked up requires quite a versatile setup regarding connections. Most good monitors have a few options (DVI/DP/HDMI) but you'd need to make sure your graphics card has the outputs to match.

An alternative you might consider is a larger 4K monitor or a 4K TV as a single monitor rather than having a surround system (have a look at the Mini-Review: Samsung 40KU6400 as a monitor thread).

Personally speaking I wouldn't consider a 4K monitor at less that 34" - you'd need extremely good eye sight or excessive scaling from the operating system (Windows 10 is still rather poor at scaling with legacy software).

If 4K is out of the question then 2560x1440 is a good resolution for productivity - ideal for the central monitor - or dispose of the side monitors and consider an ultrawide (3440x1440).

 

[hughtrimble]

Don't forget to invest properly in the screen mount - don't skimp when it comes to getting something to hold screens of that size reliably. Nothing worse than mounts that gradually droop!

 

[gazjam]

A (long!) description of my own experience having been in exactly the same position before.

3 monitors are fantastic, especially for work - you'll never look back.
I ran my PC as a 70/30 mix of work and gaming.
I work in Cad/3d modelling, graphic design and digital painting.

Had three identical Dell 24" 1920x1200 16:10 monitors and being able to have 3 things going on in 3 seperate screens really made work a breeze.
The monitors being the same I was able to triple-screen game with Nvidia surrtoo, which as a driving game nut was excellent!

However....things changed recently?

Triple screen gaming, whilst cool, wasn't really what I was about and I also began to wish for a bigger screen for work...more desktop area that kinda thing.
So...looked into replacing my triple screen setup with one big superwide (or even a big 4K screen?) as a replacement for the 3 screens.
Ruled out superwide screens as even on the big 37" ones the screen height wasn't that big compared to what I'd been used to, and I liked the 16:10 screen ratio as it really made a difference over 1080p for my work.

So bought a 30" Dell 16:10 monitor thinking job done...big main monitor for work and as I dont do triple screen gaming a nice big 4Kmonitor for gaming!
Reality was different though!

Beside screen quality control issues with the Dell, it being 4K the screen resolution didn't match up with the 2 24" Dells either side running at 1980x1200.
Icon size, window size and most importantly text size was way out...ruining the illusion of one massive wide panel.
I tried scaling the 4k text to match better in Windows but was extremely blurry in comparison.
So back to the drawing board and the Dell went back, not good for me.

24" 1980x1200 16:10 is seen as the 'sweet spot' for text size, screen ratio and general usability by a lot of folks, particularly in the Cad field.
I had 3 of those...so how to get that bigger main screen but not lose that sweet spot?
Then I found the perfect big main monitor....perfect.
BOOM!
https://displaylag.com/benq-bl3200pt-review-32-large-wqhd-monitor/

A 1440p Monitor geared towards Cad and design which (whilst having a different screen resolution to my 24" Dells at the side) has been sized accordingly at 32" to give as close a match as possiple to DPI, icon size and most importantly native text scaling (no blur) as a 24" 16:10 screen.
Basically, it feels like exactly the same 24" monitor as the Dells at the side...but with much more desktop space.
One massive screen panel effectivly, but you can still lock 3 programs to the seperate screens for productivity...Perfect.

Excellent for gaming too...the big 32" 2560x1440 really makes games immersive and is much better than triple screen gaming in my opinion.
Gaming on the 4K Dell wasn't in reality anywhere as good, text and user interface being far too small imo on a 30" screen.
40" might be the sweet spot for 4K in that area, but who wants that on their desk!!

All of this, and the Benq monitor is close to half the price of the 4K Dell I had.

I was thinking about a triple screen mounting arm as well, had one when I had two screens... but a shelf like the photo shows works a lot better than you'd think.

Generally though I'be looking at 24" and up, preferably 1920x1200 (not 1080p) for work, or 27" 1080p.
Going bigger would be outside your budget and these sizes are plenty big.

Hope this ramble helps mate, feeling wordy this morning.

 

[Pantsu]

I used to have a 3x27" setup a few years back. It works nicely, but I've since moved to a 40" 4K screen + one 27" next to it. Triple screen gaming was a bit of a pain in the end, and one larger screen is very immersive in its own way, without the support issues. With three large screens you'll also have the problem of having to turn your head quite a bit, and at least personally I didn't end up using the third monitor all that often. Having two is super useful, but a third one not so much. That's why ended up with my current setup with one large panel and a smaller one to the side.

 

[ScoTTyBEEE]

I've used two 27" monitors for a long time. One 120hz 1080p for gaming and general use, and another 1440p for work.

I keep looking at different setups, maybe going for a widescreen, or 43" 4k, but in reality I think I'd be paying a lot of money for a setup that is less useful.

As mentioned, 2 screens is the sweet spot I think, 3 just seems a little excessive.