Triple Monitor Setup vs. Ultrawide

[unknownindividual]

There is a Craigslist offer for 3 Dell s2340's for $260 and I want to know if I should get it or an ultrawide. Here are some pictures from the seller.

[Enderman]

most people on this forum including me would refer an ultrawide over multimonitor

[unknownindividual]

Just now, Enderman said:

most people on this forum including me would refer an ultrawide over multimonitor

Why is that

[shadowbyte]

I have an ultrawide, and I suggest the triple monitors

Why?

It's so much easier, especially when testing other systems, to have multiple monitors. Plug one system into one, and you can still retain access to yours on another.

Also, there is defined window separation, which is great when you want to play a game and monitor your PC at the same time, which is impossible on an ultrawide.

Finally, you have 3 monitors. If you ever need one somewhere else, take one and move it. It's so much better than having one large monitor.

that said, I love my ultrawide, especially for games, but want a second monitor for other things while I have a main task on my ultrawide.

[comicsansms]

I like multi monitors, you have more work area 16+16+16 : 9 = 48 : 9 compared with 21 : 9 for an ultra-wide.

[Enderman]

11 minutes ago, unknownindividual said:

Why is that

no bezels

more elegant

takes up less space

easier to run (3440x1440 is less than 3x 1080p)

looks less squat

less cable mess

easier to mount or have on a desk

 

[Apathetik]

I'd say that very much depends. For standard productivity. I'd almost certainly go with the triple monitor setup. If you're mostly interested in gaming, I'd go with an ultrawide, which will generally give you less hassle than dealing with a surround config unless you plan to get a Pascal card, which hopefully make the experience much more pleasant. 

[unknownindividual]

3 minutes ago, Enderman said:

no bezels

more elegant

takes up less space

easier to run (3440x1440 is less than 3x 1080p)

looks less squat

less cable mess

easier to mount or have on a desk

 

 

Just now, Apathetik said:

I'd say that very much depends. For standard productivity. I'd almost certainly go with the triple monitor setup. If you're mostly interested in gaming, I'd go with an ultrawide, which will generally give you less hassle than dealing with a surround config unless you plan to get a Pascal card, which hopefully make the experience much more pleasant. 

Forgot to say its mostly for productivity and some productivity

[Enderman]

7 minutes ago, unknownindividual said:

 

mostly for productivity and some productivity

wow thats a lot of productivity

[unknownindividual]

Just now, Enderman said:

wow thats a lot of productivity

Meant productivity and gaming lol my bad running on 2hrs sleep

[Apathetik]

4 minutes ago, unknownindividual said:

 

Forgot to say its mostly for productivity and some productivity

Going to assume that second 'productivity' was supposed to be gaming . 

 

But yeah, I'd definitely go with the 3 monitor setup instead of ultrawide. The difference in area is by no means insignificant ( 1440p is ~4.9m pixels, 3x 1080p is like ~6.2m). But for me, I find even with window snapping. I still prefer to have multiple screens to put full sized windows onto if necessary. 

[DrMacintosh]

3 monitors over ultra wide. Ultra wide is killer to productivity. I have 2 1080p panels and one 1024p panel, if I were to have two ultrawides in place of them....my work would be less efficient. There would be too much window resizing and just "blegh" A multi mon setup is also better for gaming (imo). I have a weaker GPU, the R9 380, so running anything higher than 1080p on a single panel is not recommended.....but because I have 3 screens that are separate....I can game on my center screen and use the others for other windows and applications without hurting performance all the much. If I had an ultrawide setup, I would have to play in windowed mode (barf).....not full screen (technically fullscreen windowed, but you get the idea) or run at a higher resolution because a 1080p 21:9 is gonna look like trash. 

[The_Denks]

Whenever you see a LTT or a JTC build in the background, you always see multi-monitor.

Plus, with Simultaneous Multi Projection with Pascal, there is almost no benefits to ultrawide over multi, but s many benefits to multi over ultrawide

[mrchow19910319]

I used to use unreal engine 4 do some level design stuff, I find that 2 monitors can really up your game when it comes to productivity, if you use it for work, go get the triple monitor set up. 

[Apathetik]

2 hours ago, UberGamerKing said:

Whenever you see a LTT or a JTC build in the background, you always see multi-monitor.

Plus, with Simultaneous Multi Projection with Pascal, there is almost no benefits to ultrawide over multi, but s many benefits to multi over ultrawide

Or just double down and go for 3 ultrawides.

[DrMacintosh]

15 minutes ago, Apathetik said:

Or just double down and go for 3 ultrawides.

rip.gpu rip.deskspace

[Mark77]

Another vote for the multi screens over the "ultrawide".  If you hit "maximize" on, say, a VLC player, on an Ultrawide, it will literally take up the whole ultrawide screen (which, of course, will be at some weird aspect ratio, not the 16:9 that most content is created at!).  While if you do that on a multi-monitor setup, it will just take up one screen (you can, of course, manually drag it to span multiple screens if that's what you really want!).

 

Plus there's some redundancy if something fails. 

 

$80 a piece for s2340's, IPS displays, can you really go all that wrong?  I'd take it if you have the desk space. 

[Zyndo]

ultrawide vs 3x 1080p is largely about what you want and need. If you're doing alot of work, triple monitor is the way to go (for all the reasons listed above). then even when you want to game, you can use one of the monitors for proper gaming, or even all 3 of em if you don't mind the bars in the middle of your screen (which I personally hate).

Heres a rough list of pros and cons to 3x monitor vs ultrawide. This will be a quick list and not cover everything, but at least it should help point you in the right direction when making this decision

3x Monitor Pros:

Most computer content is designed for 16:9

MUCH more on-screen workspace (48:9 vs 21:9)

Redundancy in case a monitor fails

Exceptional multi tasking capabilities.

You can still game on only one monitor if you discover a game doesn't have good triple monitor support or you computer cant handle it

Greater field of view in games (assuming you use all 3 monitors)

 

3x Monitor cons:

Takes up ALOT more desk space

Typically doesn't look as clean (cable management, misaligned monitors, etc. but this point IS subjective)

Consumes slightly more electricity

Higher pixel count results in more work for your computer to handle (especially whilst gaming)

Often feels less immersive when gaming due to

 

(Curved) Ultrawide Pros:

(Arguably) provides a much more immersive experience when gaming due to curved panel

Less taxing for your computer to handle

Consumes less electricity

Typically is more aesthetically pleasing than 3x (but again, this is subjective)

Assuming you go the 3440x1440 route you get sharper images, especially in games.

 

(Curved) Ultrawide Cons:
21:9 is less universally comparable with computers. While it has gotten better in recent years (especially in games), you're still going to run into alot of side bars/sizing/scaling issues.

Less multitasking and less on-screen workspace

Assuming you go the 3440x1440 route, higher pixel density means your mouse will move slower (unless you buy a higher DPI mouse) and your on screen text will often be drawn smaller.

TL:DR

Basically what it comes down to is your specific needs. If you primarily do work, then 3x is better. If you primarily do gaming, then the ultrawide is better. Of course there are exceptions to this statement, but generally that's how it is. I personally do alot of gaming, and am currently saving for the Acer x34 or Asus PG348Q, but I know tons of people who absolutely love their multi-monitor setups.