
Ask HN: Dual monitors, or single 4k? - roryisok
I currently have a single 29&quot; LCD monitor which I&#x27;m finding a bit cramped. More and more I find myself with multiple tiled windows, and I&#x27;m starting to feel that 1920x1080 pixels is not enough anymore.<p>I&#x27;m a coder by trade and hobby, don&#x27;t really do any video or graphics stuff (the odd logo in Photoshop)<p>I&#x27;m trying to decide between getting a second 29&quot; monitor, or a higher resolution and probably larger replacement screen. What&#x27;s your setup? Which do you prefer? Is your average 4k TV good enough to work as a Desktop monitor?
======
tetraodonpuffer
I think multiple monitors is still better than one no matter the resolution, I
personally run 3 monitors, and when working I have the one on the right always
on email/chat, the one on the left switching between terminals and firefox,
and the one in the middle on emacs or intellij depending on language.

With i3 I have keyboard shortcuts to move the focus to any monitor and/or to
change workspace in any of them and/or to move windows between them, this
seems more usable than a single monitor no matter what the resolution of it
is.

If money was no object I think the best setup would be a 40" 4k in the middle,
a 27" 1440p portrait on one side, and a 27" 1440p landscape on the other side,
but I would rather have 3x27" than 1x40" any day of the week (and the 27" to
be 1440p not to have to deal with scaling)

~~~
cma
With a good tiling window manager (not osx or windows) you can do that kind of
spatial separation of concerns on a big 4k, (curved if you aren't doing any
kind of graphics work).

~~~
macintux
Unclear from your description as to whether you would think it sufficient, but
Divvy ([http://mizage.com/divvy/](http://mizage.com/divvy/)) does a good job
of spatial window management on macOS.

~~~
j45
Wondering if you had tried Moom as well? I ended up on it without much
research a few years ago and feel it might be a bit lacking..

~~~
macintux
I have not, sorry.

------
CoolGuySteve
I have a 4k 40" curved Samsung HDTV as my monitor, the UN40JU6700.

In terms of dimensions, it is physically less wide than the 2 24" 1080p
monitors I had before while having 4 times the resolution. It's also a similar
width and horizontal resolution to the 34" ultrawides that are on the market
now but significantly cheaper. The DPI is similar to a 27" 1440p monitor,
which might be tiny if you're coming from 29" 1080p.

I highly recommend using this DPI calculator to find a pixel size that's
comfortable for you: [https://www.sven.de/dpi/](https://www.sven.de/dpi/)

My workflow has definitely improved. I normally work with 2 terminals side by
side, but now I have 3 terminals or 2 terminals and a browser window. There's
no bezel in the middle to ruin that center terminal.

I keep my main applications along the bottom 1300 pixels or so with
email/music/monitoring along the top.

Virtual machines and laptop connections are significantly less finicky because
there is only one large display to configure.

The only negative to this setup is that the Samsung is definitely a
television. I need to turn it manually on whenever I wake my computer and DPMS
sleep doesn't take effect immediately.

On the other hand, I got rid of my speakers and now use HDMI audio instead.

Finally, if you're getting an HDTV, make sure your computer is compatible with
HDMI 2 and the television supports 4:4:4 color. You want 4k@60Hz via HDMI 2
and 4:4:4 ensures your text isn't blurry.

RTINGS is invaluable for finding a TV with the right color input and
latencies: [http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-usage/pc-
monitor/best](http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-usage/pc-monitor/best)

~~~
charleslmunger
What kind of input lag do you get with that setup?

~~~
CoolGuySteve
It's something like 20ms after a firmware update last year.

You need a GTX1080 to render games at 60fps and even then it's a struggle for
more modern ones.

------
codegeek
For me, dual monitors are a must. Just my preference. I cannot work with a
single monitor no matter what the resolution is.

One advantage of dual monitors is that if you ever have to do screen sharing,
you can quickly hide anything on the other monitor that you don't want your
clients to see while still being able to refer to it. Same goes if you are
recording your screen/screecasting.

------
j45
A few data points from a text/code/web based user..

\- The most productive I've been has been using 3 monitors, 1 for
messaging/research, middle screen for working, and right screen for
testing/launching, etc.

Consider if you have an eyeglass prescription the amount of strain you may
experience with any monitor size, pixel size, etc. The higher the
prescription, astigmatism, etc, the more factors you may have to consider.

\- Currently use 27" Asus at 1440p for the past few years. It was a big jump
at the time but now I'm used to it and want more space. Tilts, pivots, so I
got two to put them side by side. Not ideal, or bad either. The issue is the
screen area, and how low and high you are able to look comfortably and
productively.

\- Have a friend who got a Philips 40" 4K and said it was too big in terms of
the area you can look at without having to pivot your head a lot. Users with a
40'\+ 4K monitor report a border of the screen around the outside that is not
actively usable without for work but may be useful for other things like IM,
etc.

\- Asus has come out with a 31.5" monitor at 1440p that might be interesting
to you depending on your needs and eyeglass prescription.

\- Currently considering at one 33 to 38" 4K screen.

In some ways the three 19" 4:3 monitors I ran 10 years ago at 1200x1024 remain
the perfect balance between size and productivity, although it only.

------
dlevine
I've used 1 27" 1440p monitor for quite a while. When combined with a laptop
display, it gives me plenty of screen real estate. I typically split the 1440p
display into 4 tiles (1280x720) using SizeUp.

Recently, I've been using a 27" 4K display at work. I mostly just run it in
HiDPI 1440p (or one or two notches higher than 1440p). It looks prettier, but
is functionally equivalent to a 27" 1440p.

I've found that displays larger than 30" require me to turn my head, which is
non-optimal. Ultrawide monitors are especially bad (tried a 34" curved Samsung
for a little while). Ditto for multiple 27" monitors.

~~~
Nition
Recently I switched to a single 27" 2560x1440 monitor as well.

Before that, I was using two old matching 20" 4:3 monitors, one in 1600x1200
configuration, and the secondary one in portrait 1200x1600.

Sometimes I miss being able to easily throw something over onto the second
monitor, and the total screen real estate is a little less overall, but
generally windows-key + arrow snapping gets the job done pretty well when I
need to see two things at once.

Talking to some other devs where I work though (many of us work remotely), a
lot have two or even _three_ 27" monitors. I hardly even have the desk space
for that... unless I stacked them vertically maybe.

~~~
egeozcan
> I hardly even have the desk space for that

I'd suggest you buy monitor arms. They really save a lot of space and make
your setup way more ergonomic. I use 3 of these:

[https://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B00358RIRC](https://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B00358RIRC)

They also have dual-arms.

~~~
Nition
Yeah, I could make it work somehow if I really want to. Has anyone here tried
two monitors vertically like this?

[http://i.imgur.com/TY9km4h.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/TY9km4h.jpg)

I don't look at a secondary monitor nearly as much as my primary so I feel
like it could work, and I like that it's not super wide like dual widescreens,
but I also know it could be terrible for your neck.

~~~
patates
It wouldn't work that way. Bottom monitor needs to be higher for the well
being of your neck and then, top monitor would be too high. I can't see this
working long term.

------
ry4n413
I've had 40' 4k for about 3 years, it's awesome. I had to mess around with
setup because larger screen changed way I worked with stuff. But man, i can
see from column A to EP and around 400 pdf pages (really small text).

[http://imgur.com/a/kPRzq](http://imgur.com/a/kPRzq) ^ eventually what i
settled on, use 1920 as primary and if working on something would go on
bigger.

23 Left Dell (emails, windows I'm not ready to close) 40 seiki ( excel,
factset/bloomberg, chrome) 23 center hp (word, typing emails, reports) 23
right hp (xplorer2, network,file related)

~~~
dynofuz
Yup ive had a 39in 4k monitor for 4 yrs and its amazing. no black bar breaking
up visual flow. no multiple cables going into the comp. no issues with
widescreen or vertical layouts. no calibration issues between screens.

the only change i'd make is to get a curved 39in 4k monitor.

~~~
j45
Do you find you're able to look at, and use the edges of your monitor? If you
don't mind sharing the make and model of your current monitor that'd be great,
thanks

------
bluedino
4k is a mistake for computers. It sounds nice in theory but was implemented
wrong by the manufacturers. The typical 28" 4k monitor at native resolution
ends up having on-screen elements that are just too small for daily use, and
the pixel density isn't high enough to do the scaling tricks like Apple.
Scaling on Windows and Linux is, at best, "enough to be annoying". And
applying it to a laptop at 2x scaling causes everything to be too small.

I'm still using an Apple 27" Cinema display - it's not _4k_ but it's great
having 2560x1440. I wouldn't mind the PPI being a bit higher, maybe 25" would
be the sweet spot for that resolution.

I would not want dual 27" monitors, however - it's just too much sweeping your
head back and forth, plus you'd need a lot of desk space. Dual 22" monitors at
1080p feels cramped vertically.

I think my ideal setup would be 3840x1440 on a 32" curved display. Small
enough to be manageable on a desk, no scaling to deal with, you don't need
crazy graphics hardware to push it...

~~~
lobster_johnson
5K gives you the right resolution to scale. The Dell UP2715K [1] is supposed
to be good, though expenisve. At 5120ˣ2880, you can run it at 2x, which gives
you 2560ˣ1440, same as the 27''.

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/Dell-210-ADRZ-DELL-UltraSharp-
UP2715K...](https://www.amazon.com/Dell-210-ADRZ-DELL-UltraSharp-
UP2715K/dp/B00R420SU4/)

------
noinsight
I'm using a single 32" 4K monitor and it's perfect. Just the right size. I
personally don't like using multiple displays, you want to have one centered
which means the other one is too far away. Also, two widescreens is just too
wide.

One benefit of having two displays is obviously having two logical displays,
which can be useful sometimes. e.g. for fullscreening a video.

~~~
Terribledactyl
Also using a single 32" 4k screen and think it's perfect. I had 2 different 4k
40" over the years, seiki (thought I could get over the 30Hz, I couldn't) and
a Philips (colors, ghosting, viewing angles were all wrong). I found the
~110DPI nice because it matched my previous setup 21" (rotated, 1080p) and 27"
(1440p), but after I used a dell laptop at ~165dpi I considered 4k screens in
the low 30" range.

Usual flow is split into 3 sections. website/documentation on the right half,
emacs on the left upper, video/chat/email on the left lower.

------
et2o
I use dual 27" 4K monitors, which I think is the perfect compromise.

~~~
mgolawala
Nice! Sounds like all that compromised there, was the wallet. ;)

~~~
baconner
It's actually not that expensive to get dual 27 @4k vs. a single very large
format (32+) 4k if you hunt around for deals.

I bought a two LG 27UD680-P for 350 USD each last month over a single BenQ
BL3201PH 32 which was about 800 USD at the time.

~~~
et2o
I did the exact same thing. It seems reasonable to spend $700 on the major
interface you have with your computer. I also expect these monitors to last
about 10 years.

~~~
mgolawala
I totally agree, I was just yanking your chain. :)

I made a similar decision to yours last year and am currently on a 5K 27" \+
4K 27" setup myself.

------
robotpony
I have two setups: one large single monitor, and one dual setup.

I had always thought that the multi setup was better, but have found over the
years that it's only better at certain things (for me). I've found the single
monitor setup better for tasks that need focus. Full screen apps (or nicely
tiled sets of apps) for single task work well on one larger monitor. This fits
writing, initial coding of modules, visual design, and reading dense material.

The multi monitor setup is great for tasks that require many views, especially
collaboration, research, and projects with many reference materials.

I would love a desk that let me switch between the two, or windowing software
that made it trivial to get to a focus mode that disabled the extra monitors
when I needed extra attention. Those times where focus is important, I find
the extra monitors, light, and visual noise distracting more than seems
logical.

------
Matthias247
4k is awesome! But for higher picture quality, not for more screen estate. I
find high DPI screens with activated scaling a lot less stressful to read on
because of the smoother fonts.

4k on a > 32" screen won't have that advantage, DPI would be more or less like
smaller screens but with a lot more screen estate. I personally wouldn't
prefer that, as I already have found 30" screens slightly too big to work on -
in the end I always looked only at small portions of the screen with my head
turned in an akward way. 27" 4k works great for me. 2x 24" 4k might also be a
great setup for some people. I personally prefer a single monitor for most
tasks, because with 2 monitors at least one will always be badly aligned with
the seating position.

------
chomp
I'm running a curved 48" 4k TV and absolutely love it. I have enough room to
fit all of my windows, and the text isn't microscopic.

If you get a TV make sure it will do 4:4:4 chroma and 60hz over its interface
(HDMI 2.0). You'll probably also need a DP to HDMI 2.0 dongle as well.

~~~
roryisok
Two people have mentioned this now, great point. Something I hadn't even
considered

------
restapi
For me my 34" curved display (3440 x 1440) works perfectly fine. Switched from
one 29" (horizontal) and a second 24" (vertical) display.

~~~
i_are_smart
My main display is the same resolution. I absolutely love it, and rarely feel
like I'm wanting for space.

------
isaac_is_goat
I have a 4k monitor, and it's really not much different than a 1440p monitor
in terms of real estate because of the UI scaling...so I ended up getting a
second 1440p monitor which I use in portrait mode. Portrait mode really is
pretty amazing for reading code.

------
lobster_johnson
Have you tried an ultrawide? I have this one [1] at work, and it's a lot like
having two monitors.

(It's wasted on me, though. I like looking straight ahead, so I keep
everything visually centered, and I find that putting stuff in the margins is
just distracting clutter. I've never understood the appeal of tiling window
managers or of filling a screen with lots of noisy background activity. It's
nice if you need to display something super wide, however, like a diff or some
complex log output.)

[1]
[https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00PXYRMPE](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00PXYRMPE)

~~~
citruspi
How do you like it? Also, any chance you do any photo editing on it?

On Thursday I almost bought a Dell U3417W[0] but I chickened at the last
minute because I haven't been able to find much information on curved monitors
and photo editing. Some people claim it's an issue, others claim that it's a
fine and that it doesn't skew images.

The other one that I was looking at was the LG-34UC98-W (because Thunderbolt
2.0) but I read several reviews mentioning severe ghosting issues.

[0]: [https://www.amazon.com/Dell-FR3PK-34-Inch-Led-Lit-
Monitor/dp...](https://www.amazon.com/Dell-FR3PK-34-Inch-Led-Lit-
Monitor/dp/B01IOO4TIM)

[1]: [https://www.amazon.com/LG-34UC98-W-34-Inch-UltraWide-
Thunder...](https://www.amazon.com/LG-34UC98-W-34-Inch-UltraWide-
Thunderbolt/dp/B019O78DPS)

~~~
lobster_johnson
It's a good monitor, although it's not as bright as the Apple Cinema Display
(which I have at home). I occasionally find myself wanting to increase the
brightness when the room itself is bright.

I don't do photo editing on it, and I doubt that the curvature (which is very
slight and almost unnoticeeable) is a problem; but I imagine the lack of
brightness might be.

The width provides almost no utility for development (for me); I keep windows
centered and only very rarely do I put stuff in the periphery. In apps like
Photoshop, Illustrator and Lightroom do I find that there's a large benefit.
With Chrome it's also wide enough that you can keep the browser side by side
with the dev tools, which is nice.

I'd much rather have a "Retina Display" monitor. The Dell 5K looks great.

------
eschutte2
Single monitor with as few windows open simultaneously as possible. Where some
seem to find value in having multiple things visible at once, I find value in
having those things hidden.

------
Fnoord
Programming with or without WYSIWIG?

Before you shell out more money, are you sure the problem cannot be solved by
better keybinds and/or a better UI?

A TV has lower refresh rate and higher ms thereby increasing input lag. This
is especially annoying during gaming.

I use a 15,4" MBP with 2880 x 1800 resolution. Without the keybinds I use it'd
be a hell though.

On work we use 3x 27" monitors. But I could easily work with two (due to
WYSIWYG) or one (if no WYSIWYG).

~~~
roryisok
I don't know if we think WYSIWYG is the same thing or not, but if working on
presentation I'll have source, browser and maybe a terminal, and maybe dev
console open. That's 4 windows. I don't use a WYSIWYG editor though.

Not interested in gaming, I used to be but now I have no time for it.

------
xiljin
I use Linux and a window manager with 10 virtual desktops/workspaces, keyboard
shortcuts let me instantly jump to or scroll through them.

That said, I've never understood the need for multiple physical monitors.
Maybe someone can explain a few advantages of using more than 1 monitor vs a
single with multiple workspaces?

~~~
et2o
I can have a big IDE open will simultaneously having a terminal and web
browser open to a website that helps with what I'm working on in the IDE.
Can't really do that with one monitor, even with one desktop. It's worth it,
absolutely, for me. Whatever works for you though.

------
filipncs
I'm using a Philips BDM4065UC at home. It's just under 40", 4K at 60hz. This
gives you the same pixel density as a "normal" 27" monitor, but with far more
space. I prefer it over smaller dual monitors, and feel no need for more
screen space.

And yes, this is an actual monitor, not a TV.

------
miloshadzic
27" 5k is the way to go

~~~
nicoritschel
Agreed 100%. Just got a new Mac setup (MBP w/ Touchbar and 27" LG Ultrafine
5k). Single cable that carries video, power, data is epic.

You _can_ scale the UI, but the monitor just so pleasant at 1/4 effective res.
Embrace cmd + tab. And tmux.

~~~
et2o
Would you prefer using two of those 5k monitors? I'm curious. I bought two
nice LG 4k monitors for less than the price of one of those 5k monitors, and
I'm pretty happy with my workflow now. Admittedly, it's a two-cable situation.

~~~
kevinherron
I've got one of the LG 5K monitors being delivered tomorrow and I'm worried
I'll end up wanting a second one... guess we'll find out soon.

------
jstimpfle
Just a different perspective - Depends on what you do. Personally I use a
browser and some xterms -- that's it for the most part.

I have a 27" 1920x1080 at home and it's terrible. I usually use less than 60%
of the available screen estate for displaying things. It's much too large
(have to move my head from left to right inconveniently because my window
manager places windows across the whole screen) and too much light is hitting
my eyes from the unused areas.

At work I have a single 19" 5:4 1280x1024 LCD screen with ok colors / good
contrast and I love it - just the right size. I use default keyboard shortcuts
for window and workspace switching (it's mostly either browser or two
vertically maximized xterms), works perfectly for me.

------
kevlar1818
I have a Samsung 32 inch 1440p monitor and a Dell 24 inch 1080p monitor
aligned vertically. The Samsung is my main workspace, and I use a tiling WM as
well. I use the vertical Dell for email and instant messaging, so they're
always visible.

This setup is the most ergonomic I've found yet. I don't have as much
"watching tennis" neck that you can get with dual large monitors.

[http://a.co/e30DgDl](http://a.co/e30DgDl)
[http://a.co/eS1boKR](http://a.co/eS1boKR)

------
Bigsy
I find a 40 inch 4k monitor perfect to code on.

4k@40" offers about the same ppi as a 27" at 1440p if scaling 1:1. So about
the ideal text size imo, and obviously plenty of space to spread your code
out.

Its also easy to work off completely one side while doing something unrelated
in the other - atm I have a twitch stream and a browser on one side and an IDE
on the other where I'm casually coding. Splitting the screens like this give
you a better aspect ratio to read off than having 2 smaller monitors.

~~~
anonfunction
Which model do you use?

------
dr_win
my setup:
[https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/559047/doupe.jpg](https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/559047/doupe.jpg)

    
    
      middle: 5K, iMac (mid 2015)
      left: 4K, 27" Dell P2715Q 
      right: old Apple Cinema LED Display 27"
      mid-bottom-left: iPhone 5s, for testing
      mid-bottom-right: iPad Air, for testing, sometimes TweetDeck/HipChat with DuetDisplay
    

I think 5K iMac can drive 5K, plus two external 4K displays at full speed
without issues

edit: also note that all the displays are 27", so they naturally fit side-by-
side, that seems to be a detail, but it is quite important for seamless mouse
movement (aligned virtual desktops). Even if physical pixel densities are not
the same, all displays have the same virtual size: see
[https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/559047/aligned-
displays....](https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/559047/aligned-
displays.png).

And the keyboard: [http://www.daskeyboard.com](http://www.daskeyboard.com),
also highly recommended for a developer.

~~~
Matthias247
How would you compare the 5k screen vs the P2715? I have the latter at work
and I find the picture quality (color, contrast) great. And dpi is also fairly
good. Is the 5k noticably better?

PS: I personally wouldn't like that setup, too much lighting from all sides.
But if it works for you it's certainly cool.

~~~
dr_win
Any difference is barely noticeable to my eye. Even having them side-by-side
with the same default macOS Sierra background does not feel like two different
displays. Even if I try hard and focus on specific details the quality, color,
contrast look the same to me.

------
jlarocco
I use two 30" monitors at work and a single 27" iMac (running Linux) at home.

If work is buying then I'd get two monitors. If I'm paying then I'm fine with
one, assuming it's 25+ inches and high resolution.

The extra screen space is nice, but not so much to justify the extra cost and
the extra desk space. IMO a good window manger can make a single large screen
almost as nice as two medium or large screens.

------
wink
For me it highly depends on the task - but I usually prefer 2 screens, even if
the 2nd is smaller (like for example 27" \+ 12.5" laptop). But I am so used to
having my IDE as big as possible (and splitting inside) with a 2nd screen for
a browser, or shell) Only had one monitor at home as well for two weeks and
absolutely hated it (having gotten used to 2 screens for the last.. 15? years)

------
scottndecker
I have 4 monitors: laptop 14" screen plus 3 22" monitors. One of them is
mounted vertically: perfect for Slack or longer pieces of code. I love this
set up. You can find the monitors for cheap and it's much more flexible than
just one TV. Additionally, I can rotate them so each is at a perfect angle for
my eyes; can't do that with just one big TV.

------
nicoritschel
I have a question for those that require multiple monitors.

Is your workflow severely impaired when on a laptop alone? I.e. in a coffee
shop?

~~~
tetraodonpuffer
I cannot do any serious coding on a laptop, it's just too small. It's fine if
I am traveling and have to debug something but otherwise no way, I've always
needed large screens to get things done.

Some of my coworkers code in 80x40 windows and are totally fine with a single
25" 1080p screen, I have no idea how they manage honestly: I've run dual
monitors since forever (running two physical video cards, before dualhead was
available) and lately I find myself more productive on 3 screens at home
rather than 2 at work.

------
noir_lord
3x1920:1200 in PLL.

I tried working with a single high res screen and went back, my mental model
just fits 3 screens better.

~~~
j45
It's too bad 4:3 or other more square ratio monitors aren't as easily
available. I think I might be a 3 screen mental model guy as well.

~~~
hazeii
Can still get Dell 2007FPs on eBay; I find a good set-up is 1920x1200 centre
with 1600x1200s to both left and right (for linux, all driven by a single
nvidia card nowadays).

------
BJanecke
A single 27" WQHD(1440p) goes a very long way. I used to be 3 23" monitor
person, but once I saw I can have all that context on one monitor without
having to swivel my head around constantly I was hooked. I aim to be like the
chicken in that one Mercedes commercial now.

------
pjbrunet
Single monitor with Pytyle (window manager) + Debian Crunchbang/BunsenLabs.
This distro uses Openbox by default, but I turn off the window decorations =
more usable pixels. Occasionally use Terminator and Byobu to further
subdivide, depending on what I'm doing.

------
13of40
I've got three monitors at work and one 4K TV as a monitor at home. When I
switch from the work setup to the home setup, it feels a bit limiting for
programming, but it's better for gaming, etc.

------
sashk
At work I have iMac 5k and extra 4k 27" dell monitor. It works great. At home
almost same setup, but 1080p 27" dell monitor. Not a huge difference. But two
monitors is bare minimum for me.

------
storafrid
Hi, monitor nerd here. The two key things I keep an eye on when it comes to
monitors, are to get as many full-size (1080p or "1200p") working spaces as
possible, and to retain a pixel pitch (will abbreviate "pp", aka dot pitch)
within roughly 0,25 to 0,27 mm. That's the pixel "size" at which I find text
easy to read and UI elements easy to use, at the viewing distance I personally
like to have to my monitor. It means I don't have to rely on/fiddle with the
UI scaling in each OS/VM, I get no mid-pixel text AA problems, and I'm only
paying for pixels that I can use and see.

As a result of this, I personally wouldn't buy a 4k monitor/TV that is smaller
than 43 inches. Which is huge! And awesome, because 4k at a usable pp gets you
four full-size working spaces. I can highly recommend a 43-inch monitor with
4k resolution (pp ~ 0,25 mm). It boosts productivity in a great way.

There are a new set of formats called ultra-wide, or UW. The idea is to have
two full-size working spaces side-by-side in one monitor (or three narrow
ones), which would be a good option too for multitasking without looking at
black monitor edges. Starting with 1440p UW, I could recommend this in a
38-inch monitor if you want loads of vertical space, but there are no such
products available. As for the next step down (1200p UW), this would be great
but there are no products available in this category. Lastly, as for 1080p UW,
I would choose two 1920x1200 displays instead to get more vertical working
space.

The next step down in monitor size, while retaining my personal favourite pp,
would be one of the 1440p monitors at 31,5 or 32 inches (pp ~0,27/ mm). This
is a good choice if it's important with loads of vertical space, but I
wouldn't expect to be able to put 720 pixels x 2 to good practical use - i.e.
this wouldn't give me four usable working spaces. I know however that a lot of
people like to use this screen setup with three working spaces (one large, one
tall and one wide). However, for many creative tasks, a good amount of
vertical space is crucial.

As for multi-monitor solutions, a popular and sensible choice (to me) is X
number of 24-inch monitors at 1920x1200 (pp ~0,27 mm). With monitor arms, this
can work with anything from one to six monitors (two rows of three) which can
be good from a future-proof perspective. Buy one, upgrade with another on your
birthday, buy a third on Black Friday, a fourth when you're sad-shopping, a
fifth when happy-shopping and the last one while really drunk. Just an
example.

I'd like to point out that these are my personal preferences, and roughly
estimated. For instance, I could probably go with a 40" 4k monitor if I just
sat a little closer. But I've actually tried this and didn't like it. I also
want to point out that if you have no problems with the OS UI scaling or if
you like the 0,23 mm pp more, then the above advice can be adjusted to a warm
recommendation of the 34-inch 1400p UW monitors. They are great for you. But I
do recommend getting terminal glasses if you're not scaling text and read on a
0,23 mm pp monitor! Additionally, if you also would like to spend some money
on really smooth text, I would recommend 2X products such as 4k on 24-inch
monitors as they are... really smooth. Just keep in mind that it will cost you
more, require a more powerful computer and limit you in terms of the number of
monitors you can setup. Note that 27" and 5k makes no sense to me, I would go
with 32 inches for 5k, as it's 2X to ~0,27 mm. But again, if you like the 0,23
mm pp more, then go for it!

------
jankotek
I am soon going to upgrade to 3x 24" 4k displays in portrait mode. I used
3x22" 1650x1050 for many years.

I love hiDPI on my mobile devices, and this is a best way for desktop.

------
rootme
Múltiples 8k monitors. And a video card from the future.

