• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

What's best, 3 * 22" or 1 * 27"

T

Triggaaar

Member
With particular regard to flight sims and car racing games, what looks best:

3 * 22" monitors, at 1680*1050
1 * 27" monitor at 1920 * 1200 (or so)

I like the idea of having side screens for peripheral vision, but then the extra height of the 27" display is also appealing. Obviously the 3 screens give a larger overall resolution and will require more processing power, and I'll take that into account.

Has anyone had the chance to compare set-ups like these, and come away with any pros and cons?

Thanks

PS - For trifinity, I am limited to 1680 * 1050, because of a monitor I already have, and want to keep
 
Last edited:
I had a similar quandary (I owned one 24" and one 22") and went with 3x22, selling my 24" in the process. I had a Dell Ultrasharp IPS 1920x1200 and downgraded to 3 Acers (TN panels to boot, it's not the horror story you hear about so long as the 3-way array is in Landscape and not Portrait).

Multitasking, immersion in games, etc. lean in favor of the 3-way. For games that can't go 3-way (too intense, or just not compatible), use the center monitor.

I do miss having true 1080p movie/TV watching ability, but many movies scale differently than 1080p anyway (2.35 aspect ratio, not 1.78).

Note that games won't slow down to 33% of their single-monitor speed. It's more like 40-60% depending on the game; to be conservative, multiple by 0.45 (i.e., assume that you will go only 45% as fast in tri-monitor as you would in single-monitor). Resolution scaling is NOT linear, in practice, for framerates.
 
Thanks for the reply.
blastingcap said:
I had a similar quandary (I owned one 24" and one 22") and went with 3x22
Click to expand...
So...
are you completely sure you made the right choice or do you think a 27" screen could be as good?

Multitasking isn't a concern - I currently have 2 screens, and if I went for a 27" I'd keep it at 2 (27 & 22) which would be enough. Or 3 22s would also do the job, but no better (for me - I'd probably find the 27 22 a little better).

I don't ever intend to watch a movie on the setup, so no worries there. I'm just concerned that 3 22" screens doesn't give much vertical image, and a 27" could be as good (and less work for the GC = cheaper card(s) or better fps).

Note that games won't slow down to 33% of their single-monitor speed. It's more like 40-60% depending on the game; to be conservative, multiple by 0.45
Click to expand...
0.45 is what I'd previously read, thanks.
 
I don't think I could give up my 2nd screen, but for 90% pf things, I'd prefer the single 27". Is there any reason you can't keep your 22 as well?

To me, 22 is too small as a primary display.
 
Triggaaar said:
Multitasking isn't a concern - I currently have 2 screens, and if I went for a 27" I'd keep it at 2 (27 & 22)
Click to expand...

Yuriman said:
I don't think I could give up my 2nd screen, but for 90% pf things, I'd prefer the single 27". Is there any reason you can't keep your 22 as well?
Click to expand...
I'm keeping the 22" whatever. I appreciate the first post says 3 * 22" or 1 * 27", but that's purely regarding what looks best for sim gaming, since if I got a 27", my 22" would be off for games.
 
Between the two I'd personally go with the 27". What I really like though is a 32-37" with a secondary 19" non-ws monitor as a secondary.
 
Money you will pay for 3x 22" can probably get you a 40" LCD TV....

Personally I'm not a fan of "eyefinity' and prefer 1 big screen over 3 or 6 monitors.
 
Vdubchaos said:
Money you will pay for 3x 22" can probably get you a 40" LCD TV....

Personally I'm not a fan of "eyefinity' and prefer 1 big screen over 3 or 6 monitors.
Click to expand...

This is not a bad idea if the TV is far away, but up close a screen that big at only 1080p is going to looks pretty bad, the pixels are much larger and will look more jagged than a 22-26" 1080p screen.
 
Rifterut said:
This is not a bad idea if the TV is far away, but up close a screen that big at only 1080p is going to looks pretty bad, the pixels are much larger and will look more jagged than a 22-26" 1080p screen.
Click to expand...

correct, I wouldn't want to sit in front BUT pull the desk away....and also have a nice TV/multifunctional display

Or you can go all out and get a nice 720p Projector :biggrin:

Either way, I would do everything possible and some LONG LONG LONG before even thinking about getting 3 displays/eyefinity set up. Just have 0 desire for that.
 
Vdubchaos said:
Money you will pay for 3x 22" can probably get you a 40" LCD TV....
Click to expand...
I already have one of the 22" screens. A 40" LCD would be awful for my needs, it needs to be PC monitor quality.

correct, I wouldn't want to sit in front BUT pull the desk away....and also have a nice TV/multifunctional display
Click to expand...
I don't need or want a TV. I've got a 50" plasma in the living room, a 32" LCD in the bedroom, and a 26" about a metre from my PC monitors (for other people to see).

Either way, I would do everything possible and some LONG LONG LONG before even thinking about getting 3 displays/eyefinity set up. Just have 0 desire for that.
Click to expand...
Why the dislike of eyefinity?
 
Doesn't Dell have 22" 1080P DisplayPort monitors now?

I would go with the 3 screens, if only because that's what I plan on doing myself very soon!
 
Thanks for the repies.
Vdubchaos said:
Most 22" are TN panels, most 40" TVs are IPS panels.

Unless you are talking size of pixel, TV should actually be better quality.
Click to expand...
Although IPS panels are better than the alternatives, it's not always that straightforward. My VA panel gives better colour accuracy than most ISP panels, although I'm not sure about the response times.

I haven't looked into the use of TVs as a monitor, but they are cheap by comparison, include free tuners, and aren't generally used as monitors. I assume there's a reason for that. Whether it's the resolution, or suitable viewing distance I don't know? If a TV was the best solution, that's what I'd get (who wouldn't?).

Anubis said:
id get 2 24s running 1920*1200
Click to expand...
I think I'll be happy with productivity either way, it's only game I'm not sure about (as you can imagine by the range of opinions in this thread), so it's either 1 screen or 3 (two's no good), and if it's 3, it needs to be 1680 x 1050.
 
I don't find too much difference between high-end VA and IPS panels. If I had to note differences it would be slightly richer colors on most IPS displays, while VA displays don't have issues with off axis blacks getting faded.
 
I prefer one big 27", like I have now to be honest.

I do have a 20" connected to though so I have access to Internet while using the bigger monitor for gaming only.
 
Last edited:
Rifterut said:
This is not a bad idea if the TV is far away, but up close a screen that big at only 1080p is going to looks pretty bad, the pixels are much larger and will look more jagged than a 22-26" 1080p screen.
Click to expand...
Yeah and the thing is.. the horizontal viewing angle that's filled by the monitor is pretty easy to compute (as long as you assume you're looking straight on it and exactly from the middle). Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I really hope I get a sine rule still right 😉

Let a be the viewing angle in ° from a given distance d and a monitor of size s and aspect ratio ar:
width = vAr * 2.54 * s / sqrt(hAr^2 + vAr^2)
a = 180 * width / (4 * dist^2 + width ^ 2) and


For a 24" 16:10 monitor from 75cm away that's ~58.65°, for a 40" monitor with 16:9 that'd mean that sitting further than 128cm away it would be worse. Doesn't sound that great.
 
I think if you play lots of games on amd surround view maybe 3 monitor is better than 1 big one. But otherwise I personally would just get that one huge one, which means any game you play on it will benefit from the extra size.
 
As you can see, lots of different people have lots of different answers. There is no "best" overall, just "best" for a particular person's needs. Personally if I were you I'd get 3 27" monitors and sell the 22" but you said that's a no-go.
 
Red Storm said:
Doesn't Dell have 22" 1080P DisplayPort monitors now?

I would go with the 3 screens, if only because that's what I plan on doing myself very soon!
Click to expand...

UltraSharp U2211 for $209 after coupon code: 75HV0XZ$HN?52F (exp 11/24) free shipping

1920 x 1080
 
blastingcap said:
Personally if I were you I'd get 3 27" monitors and sell the 22" but you said that's a no-go.
Click to expand...
The main game I'm wanting the set-up for is the yet to be released WWII flight sim, Bob SoW (from the makers of IL2). The system specs haven't been released yet, but it's going to need a fast PC. Running 3 27" screens (with the associated resolution) will need a lot of GPU power. I also can't afford 3 27" screens, 1 won't be cheap. My 22" is an Eizo Coloredge CG222W, which I need for photo work, so I can't replace it with an inferior (colour reproduction wise) 27".

sgrinavi said:
UltraSharp U2211 for $209 after coupon code: 75HV0XZ$HN?52F (exp 11/24) free shipping
Click to expand...
That's a nice sounding deal, but alas, I'm in the UK.


LokutusofBorg said:
I'd go up one step and get 3 x 1920x1200 monitors if you can find them cheap enough, or 3 x 1920x1080.
Click to expand...
That would be nice, but as above, I need to keep my 22".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top