29" 21:9 (1080P stretch) or 27" (1440p) for productivity?

[Shift_]

I currently have a 23" 16:9 1080p monitor.

Would like to upgrade to a new monitor for productivity purposes (side by side windows reading PDFs on one side, word doc other etc...)

Which would suit my purposes better a 27" 1440p screen or a 29" 21:9 screen? They are approx the same price.

Idealy I'd like to get a 34" 21:0 1440p screen but I do not have the cash (or the desk space) for that.

 

[amenx]

Definitely the 27" 1440p. A 29" 21:9 screen is actually smaller in viewable area (2,764,800 pixels vs 3,686,400 @1440p). If you have a chance, check them out in a store for a size perspective. If its purely for productivity purposes as in your stated examples, then it would be your call.

 

[Deders]

2560x1080 is like having 2 1280x1024 monitors which can be handy but most people seem to prefer 1440p for productivity for the extra height.

 

[xthetenth]

I have a 3440x1440 and I consider it the holy grail of productivity monitors in large part because of the aspect ratio. If I weren't able to look at them in person, I would lean towards the 1440p despite that. Unless in person you notice a significant difference on the ultrawide that allows you to have three windows up at once, or one big one and one narrow one, 2560x1440 makes a noticeable difference in quality for displaying PDFs and word docs, and makes them much easier to read (although things are even a bit smaller than on your current screen, so you may find you don't get as large a screen size increase after scaling things up).

If you find you can run three windows on the ultrawide comfortably, then start comparing whether having to scroll less or having to switch between windows less would make more sense for your workflow as you work on that current 1080p. I'm emulating 2560x1080 right now, and it just seems to be too tight to comfortably fit three PDF/doc pages side by side, in which case getting the 1440p and optimizing for the two page work case seems optimal.

However, it's close, so I would definitely do what you can to see the things in person.

 

[cbn]

I currently have a 23" 16:9 1080p monitor.

Would like to upgrade to a new monitor for productivity purposes (side by side windows reading PDFs on one side, word doc other etc...)

Which would suit my purposes better a 27" 1440p screen or a 29" 21:9 screen? They are approx the same price.

Idealy I'd like to get a 34" 21:0 1440p screen but I do not have the cash (or the desk space) for that.

The 1440p is the better choice.

As far as the 2560 x 1080 goes, I would rather have two 1280 x 1024 monitors ( a lot cheaper and maximizing a window only fills one screen not the entire screen of a single 2560 x 1080 monitor)

 

[Deders]

The 1440p is the better choice.

As far as the 2560 x 1080 goes, I would rather have two 1280 x 1024 monitors ( a lot cheaper and maximizing a window only fills one screen not the entire screen of a single 2560 x 1080 monitor)

It's very easy to drag the title bar of any window to the side so it snaps and fills half the screen. Ultrawide is definitely preferable but more costly compared to 2x squarish monitors.

 

[xthetenth]

In my experience ultrawide is better than two monitors of the same resolution, especially for big screens like 27" ones. The bezels mean that to have three tasks visible, the far edge is much farther away than on an ultrawide. I usually have three tasks going and it hurts to work from home, where I have two 2560x1440 screens rather than my 3440x1440 at work.

However, that benefit is dubious compared to a taller screen of the same resolution and would take a specific workload to really make better unless the pixel height is plenty sufficient, like I feel it is on 1440 but isn't for 1080.

 

[smackababy]

I'd go with 21:9, and move up to one of those 3440x1440. I am actually looking for a good one of these to buy myself. The productivity is so much increasing!

 

[xthetenth]

If OP had indicated that was in his price range or that two 2560x1440 monitors were a possibility, I'd have recommended 3440x1440 in a heartbeat, because they're generally very high quality hardware as well as being a similar price to two 1440ps. However OP didn't.