Triple Monitor Setup

Farore

Farore

Farore

Associate
Joined
11 Aug 2007
Posts
536
Location
Preston, Lancashire
Hey guys,

Looking for a triple monitor set up. Currently own a Dell 2406FPW-HC. Should I get 2 more, or sell it and buy 3 new monitors? I'm tempted with the latter, so am looking for recommendation on what to get.

I would like 3 monitors for multi screen gaming and PC usage. :D I want to spend a max of £1,200 but at the same time don't want to settle for anything less than 24" on each panel.

I have read the review for the HP 24" screens and am not impressed with the response time. Should I still consider them?

Regards,

Farore
 
I own a HP LP2475w and whilst I can't speak for its response time (connected to a Mac and I don't play games on it) it does have awesome colour reproduction and is a quality monitor. The S-PVA Dell 24" equivalent is said to bad input lag which is worse.

Tbh, the response time on the HP shouldn't be a huge issue in contrast with the image quality you get. The best option for you would have been the NEC that was recently discontinued.
 
you are going to be stuffed if you are trying to play games. Graphics cards are not designed for such resolutions (5760x1200) and Matrox digital triple head only takes 1650x1050 x3 as a max.

Softh is a nice option, but its limited.
 
System_ofa_Down said:
you are going to be stuffed if you are trying to play games. Graphics cards are not designed for such resolutions (5760x1200) and Matrox digital triple head only takes 1650x1050 x3 as a max.

Softh is a nice option, but its limited.
Click to expand...

Not even SLi GTX 260's Max Core ?

And what's a Matrox digital triple head? :) I was planning on connecting 3 monitors over two graphics cards.

And what are these discontinued NEC's? :)
 
Last edited:
i think he mean 20wgx nec 20" which is one of the best screens ever made.

You can game at uber high resolutions, just not the latest games on max quality, stuff like HL2 and deadspce work fine , strategy games work fine as well. Don't expect crysis to work.

SoftTH doesn't support SLI, you'll need the matrox triple head for that

sid
 
I have three 24" monitors (all Samsung 245B+).

Ignoring the cost of the triplehead for the moment, is there much of advantage in having one 3840x1200 "display" and one 1920x1200 display versus three @ 1920x1200?

(don't play games much; mostly do 3D/multimedia app stuff)
 
3840x1200 helps in that the crosshair isnt split over 2 splits. It helps in the immersion and sheer desktop space.

However there some downsides.


If only nVidia would take more interest in it. :(
 
That Matrox triple head seems only to support a maximum of 1024 verticle pixels and 1280 horizontal for each pannel... :\ Is there only one model or something?
 
Burned_Alive said:
Dont buy a Matrox Triplehead2go (or dualhead2go), they are awful contraptions. Do it the right way and get dual gfx cards.
Click to expand...

except you can't game on three screens that way.

For desktop work, get dual gfx,

for games get the triplehead

my advice - get both. so you can swap inputs to have best of both worlds.
 
I've been considering this myself lately, was thinking 3 of those lovely 22" dells with triplehead2go at max rez but videos on youtube show FPS on crysis of about 20-30 with a 295 plugged in. Anyone have any idea what would be needed to get decent FPS out of it? 2x 275/85?
 
sid said:
except you can't game on three screens that way.

For desktop work, get dual gfx,

for games get the triplehead

my advice - get both. so you can swap inputs to have best of both worlds.
Click to expand...

You can actually do triple head gaming without a matrox triple head to go.

You can use some software called 'softth' basically software triple head.

Look it up on youtube, it works with loads of games and is free.
 
kylew said:
You can actually do triple head gaming without a matrox triple head to go.

You can use some software called 'softth' basically software triple head.

Look it up on youtube, it works with loads of games and is free.
Click to expand...

Erm, I have a triple setup and tried softTH.

No part of using that is "basically" its a buggy beta software that may/may not work. I only managed to get it to work in 1 game. Its good for testing but not for serious use by any means of the imagination.
 
sid said:
Erm, I have a triple setup and tried softTH.

No part of using that is "basically" its a buggy beta software that may/may not work. I only managed to get it to work in 1 game. Its good for testing but not for serious use by any means of the imagination.
Click to expand...

Okay? You said you can't game that way, which was obviously wrong.

As for basically, are you able to read? 'softth' basically software triple head.

I didn't say the software is simple and easy to use, but it's far better than spending around £200 on a lacking piece of hardware.

I would have got a third screen and a triple head to go a long time ago if it wasn't so restricting.

The software works, and it works very well providing you can set it up. If you can only get it working with one game then you're doing it wrong. Once you have it set up it's very easy to use.

When I've used it on my PC, I have had a lot of issues with it, but it was because I was trying to get it to run over 2 monitors instead of 3. Configuring it for 3 is a lot easier than 2.

It's free software, there's not much for you to complain about.

Go look up softth on youtube to see just how many games people have got to work with softth.
 
I'm sorry but theres no way a buggy beta software is better than something built for the job.

Its a faff to use by even geek standards. I don't need to look it up , I'm well aware of it. Just because some person with a specific setup got it to work doesn't mean it works for anybody else. Its stupid for you to suggest otherwise.

In any case I don't really game on the three screens so I've got a second gfx but if thats the primary motive of the OP then triplehead is the way to go .
 
triple head for gaming, works fine for office use as well tbh, just set it to maximie each window only on one third of the screen (a check box) and they still act like seperate screens, except for the task bar.

Gaming wise though, there isnt much, if anything, that will run the latest and greatest games at max all on a 3x 1680*1050 res. thats 5292000 pixels it needs to power, my 30" thats 2560*1600 is 4096000 pixels. My quad SLI will struggle with crysis if i put all details on max, dx10 af and aa etc. Although, to be fair, everything else runs smooth as butter on it....cept for cod with its stupid no likey quad sli = RAGE!

But yea, if your looking at running 3 monitors, get 3 * 22" as otherwise the pixel size will be quite large and it wont look as good (if you get 24" for instance), but youll be needing to spend a lot on graphics horsepower, unless youd ont play games that are that demanding, or mind sacrificing image quality.
 
sid said:
I'm sorry but theres no way a buggy beta software is better than something built for the job.

Its a faff to use by even geek standards. I don't need to look it up , I'm well aware of it. Just because some person with a specific setup got it to work doesn't mean it works for anybody else. Its stupid for you to suggest otherwise.

In any case I don't really game on the three screens so I've got a second gfx but if thats the primary motive of the OP then triplehead is the way to go .
Click to expand...

So because you can't get it working, it's not worth it? Yeah right.

Have you even given any consideration to the fact that because it's FREE there's no harm in trying it out first?

You never know, they might just get it working for what they want it for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom