A comparison of monitor set ups

Over the years I have had many different monitors, with many different set ups. Of which I use for gaming and also for professional work. So I figured I would give pros and cons to each different type of set up that would be universal to any set up using the same configuration not just my specific hardware.

Eyefinity with 3 exact same 24" 1080p monitors

Pros:

1. Lots of screen space

2. Fun for certain types of games(racing, 3rd person shooter/rpgs, some First person shooters)

Cons:

1. Many games don't support eyefinity even with 3rd party software

2. Needs SLI or Crossfire, or really high end card to obtain decent framerate on AAA games

3. Programs such as chrome will expand to all 3 screens unless using a snap grid like hydra grid(ati), does not snap to each monitor like if you have just 3 screens with no eyefinity

4. Micro stutter is more noticeable on sli or crossfire

5. LOTS less desk space

6. (ATI specific) Needs active adapter for at least one monitor

Conclusion: While eyefinity can be alot of fun for games, the number of games that use it is small, and the number of games that use it well is even smaller. It can cause alot of hassle outside of games for just everyday tasks, and can make multitasking harder even. I specifically had a harder time with this one because it doesn't really leave space for speakers and I'm big music person.

Single 30" Monitor

Pros:

1. Higher Resolution(2560x1600)

2. 16:10 Aspect Ratio(better for games, although some ports don't expand for the 16:10 aspect ratio)

3. Lots of retail space

Cons:

1. Requires card that can drive double resolution of 1080p, not as taxing as eyefinity though

2. Expensive no matter what monitor you get

3. Hard to find fast response monitor for a reasonable price

Conclusion: This is personally my favorite set up by far(although part of that is that I splurged for a wide color gamut and fast response monitor). Many other set ups come with alot of hassle, this one keeps it simple while giving a hybrid of screen space to performance. The increased resolution really makes a difference. The Aspect ratio is more pleasing to the eye when playing a game(golden rectangle). Great for professional use if you spend the money for a color accurate one.

4k Monitor

Pros:

1. Most retail space of any single monitor

Cons:

1. Many games do not support 4k and some outright won't play

2. Requires 2 inputs normally

3. Actually 2 vertical screens for most 4k monitors resulting in weird displaying sometimes when fullscreening

4. Technology is not there for picture quality or response time

Conclusion: I would only get a 4k monitor if you need more space or want to see something larger than even a 30" screen, and even then I would still advise a 30" screen because most are not much larger and you will take a larger performance hit. Good for meetings if you need to display to a group of people.

Two 24" 1080p Monitors

Pros:

1. Lots of retail Space(Less than eyefinity, but more than 30"

2. One of best solutions for multi-tasking

3. Lots of retail space for the money

4. Same performance as single monitor for games since it displays on main screen

Cons:

1. Less desks space(takes up more than single 30")

Conclusion: This is a great solution for people who don't want to spend a lot of money but want extra retail space. Also great for multitasking such as watching a video while playing a game or keeping track of a stream while streaming. There really isn't any reason to not get a second monitor unless you don't have the desk space, it makes it easier to do a multitude of things.

If you have anything to add that I may have looked over or if you had a different experience let me know.

@edinsftw: A couple points:

"Many games don't support eyefinity even with 3rd party software"

Most 3D games do, even if the level of support varies between games. If a given game engine supports it, pretty much every game that uses that engine does. I've encountered very few 3D games that don't, although sometimes UI scaling is an issue (enlarged UI elements because of the much wider "frame").

"LOTS less desk space"

Can be mitigated with monitor arms or gaming cockpits, but at additional cost.

"(ATI specific) Needs active adapter for at least one monitor"

I understand what you mean, but if this is a guide for the uninitiated then the above statement is not very clear. The reality is that no more than two monitors can use DVI or HDMI on a single card. The third monitor (or any combination of the three) need to use DisplayPort or an "Active" DisplayPort adapter. Contrary to the name, these adapters are neither externally powered nor are they expensive (around $30). I instead opted for all DisplayPort monitors. Some ATI cards (like mine) have five miniDisplayPorts.

"Programs such as chrome will expand to all 3 screens unless using a snap grid like hydra grid(ati), does not snap to each monitor like if you have just 3 screens with no eyefinity"

Technically this is true, but switching between a normal 3 monitor mode and a single Eyefinity display is as easy as hitting Win+P on your keyboard, so this really isn't a big deal. I play games in Eyefinity and I run my 3 displays in non-Eyefinity mode the rest of the time. You make it sounds like if you want to use Eyefinity, that you have to stay in that mode all the time which is absolutely not the case.

-Byshop

The main problem with 3 monitors is clutter. I got rid of 3 monitors and just use two now. I put my 2nd monitor way on the side at the edge of my desk.

Yes, most games can technically use eyefinity, but not successfully. The problem i most encountered is with UI as you said. Most commonly health bars might not be in the central screen because they scale based on a percentage of resolution. Another problem that is present is FOV. Many times if a game doesn't have an FOV slider it can result in distorted images in the non-central monitor. Another problem yet again is competitive games, mobas, strategy games, and some FPS have safeguards against eyefinity and either display nothing on the extra 2 screens or spread the central screen image across all 3. Many can't be fixed, some can, but its not engine dependent, its how they implemented it within the engine and what type of camera they used within that game engine.

Yes, monitor arms or gaming cockpits can work, but many monitors(specifically older models) do not like monitor arms unless you want to drill into your monitor or buy a separate brace. To me a gaming cockpit really only works if gaming is really the only thing you do in it. Both of these solutions are added on top of the cost of already buying 3 monitors, and generally run $250+. Mostly the desk space comments were meant to be in comparison to other monitor set ups.

Yes, if you are using all display ports or have one display port you can negate the cost of the more expensive active adapter. If you run 3 DVI like I had to, you actually must get a USB powered active adapter. In my experience most people do not have a displayport monitor unless they bought monitors within the last 2 years or so.

Yea technically you can switch between profiles for your graphics card. The problems I encountered while doing this not just on my computer, but also on my friends, is that if you have a multiple card set up it can cause problems such as: BSOD, one graphics card getting disabled and then having to re-enable, freezing, hydragrid losing its grid. This was tested on ATI 4000, 5000, 6000, and 7000 series graphics cards. I do not know the case for Nvidia surround for these problems. I feel that most of this was software issues that could even be resolved by now.

With all this said, i just don't think the outcome even comes close to justifying the money you need to spend for 3 monitors plus the power to run it and all the hassle you get. Don't get me wrong, it can be lots of fun, and many times a more engaging experience than a single monitor. I would say getting a large monitor with better color accuracy and higher resolution is more engaging overall. If I was going to do eyefinity again, I would spend at least $5000 to get it the way I would want it. I would use 30" monitors also because one thing I didn't like about the 24" is that it felt too elongated especially if you weren't sitting close to the monitors and the 16:10 ratio and larger size would really help. Even then the monitors would cost $1000+ each to make it worthwhile. This would also increase how often I would have to upgrade my computer, but if you can afford that, do it because that would be awesome.

@edinsftw:

FOV issues and UI scaling can often be fixed pretty easily through INF file switches.

VESA mounts for monitors have been around since the late 90s. The oldest monitor I own has a VESA mount on it and it's 9 years old, but even still it's a question of what are we talking about? Your initial post seemed like it was aimed at people looking to purchase new hardware since you are comparing 4k monitors and 2560x1600 30" displays.

"Yes, if you are using all display ports or have one display port you can negate the cost of the more expensive active adapter."

Most PC gamers would not consider a $30 part to be "expensive". Most gamers spend more than that on their keyboard.

"To me a gaming cockpit really only works if gaming is really the only thing you do in it."

That's -very- debatable. While they are not for everyone, I use mine as an ergonomic workstation. It's much easier on the back for long working sessions.

"If you run 3 DVI like I had to, you actually must get a USB powered active adapter."

That's actually not true. While you might have spent north of $100 for your adapter, you only need a powered adapter for a display requiring Dual Link (i.e. above 1920x1200). In your own example, the monitors you theorized for your Eyefinity setup were 1080p, which means just a simple, unpowered Active adatper would work. Here's one for $43:

http://www.startech.com/AV/Displayport-Converters/Active-DisplayPort-to-DVI-Adapter~DP2DVIS

If you go HDMI, they generally run under $30.

"Yes, if you are using all display ports or have one display port you can negate the cost of the more expensive active adapter. If you run 3 DVI like I had to, you actually must get a USB powered activeadapter. In my experience most people do not have a displayport monitor unless they bought monitors within the last 2 years or so."

DisplayPort monitors are newer, for sure, but again who are you writing this for? You sound like you're describing a scenario in which the reader is debating purchasing new hardware in which case this is a moot point.

"Yea technically you can switch between profiles for your graphics card..."

No, that's not what I'm talking about. Switching AMD display profiles doesn't work well with Eyefinity.

In Windows, you have a few basic display modes that you can switch between that relate to additional monitors. Normal (primary only), Duplicate (mirrored displays), Extended (proper multimonitor), etc. When you create an Eyefinity display group, it replaces the "Duplicate" mode. If you want to disable Eyefinity, hold down the Windows Key and hit P until you switch to "Extended", then release the Windows key. This will turn off Eyefinity and switch back to a conventional multi monitor mode. When you want to play Eyefinity, use Windows Key + P to switch back to Duplicate and you are back in Eyefinity mode at your previous settings. You don't need to swap profiles, you don't need to re-create and tear down the Eyefinity display group manually every time you want to switch. As I said, it's as simple as hitting Windows Key + P.

"With all this said, i just don't think the outcome even comes close to justifying the money you need to spend for 3 monitors plus the power to run it and all the hassle you get. "

That's personal preference. This is me:

I have a number of different mounts I can swap in for flight games, driving games, or just KB and Mouse on an articulated tray that sits in my lap. Those are Dell u2711 27" 2560x1440 monitors being driven by a single AMD Sapphire 7990.

-Byshop