• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

1440p or 3x1080p?

What would you prefer?

  • 3x1080p

    Votes: 15 31.9%

  • 1x1440p

    Votes: 32 68.1%
  • Total voters
    47
T

trick0502

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 17, 2006
Messages
5,610
With my 290 on the way it is time to move away from a single 1080p screen. I am torn between 1440p and 3x1080p.

So what does the [H] prefer?
 
3x1080p will give you more screen space for both work and play. This also gives you the choice between 5760x1080 and 3240x1920 depending on the screens.
 
Depends on your personal preference. I find 3 23" 1080p screens more useful for me than a single 27" 1440p. Plus, my receiver is only able to accept 1080p signals, and I use the center monitor for my PS3 while having the side monitors to look things up on my PC xD
 
I would rather have one large screen than multiple smaller screens. I went from a 27" to a 1080 144Hz and I miss all the screen now. Plus I really hate the jail bars look between all the monitors. Not sure if you are going to use 3d on the games but that will knock fire from a gpu @ 120Hz even at 1080.
 
I'm a single screen guy, I don't care for the screen borders. I got a 24" at 1200p since 27" is a tad too large for my liking.
 
For any kind of productivity I think three screens is king. For gaming... I like the Eyefinity effect and the bezels really don't matter, but I have gone back to mainly gaming on one screen since I play DoTA2 most of the time. I couldn't go back. Having skype/spotify/IM on the side screens while gaming in the middle is too sweet.
 
1x1440p and 2x1080p for the sides. :p But if I had to choose between 1x1440p and 3x1080p the triple monitor setup is more useful, though it requires more space and performance.
 
suiken_2mieu said:
3x1080p will give you more screen space for both work and play. This also gives you the choice between 5760x1080 and 3240x1920 depending on the screens.
Click to expand...

1440p or 1600p just works. Getting Eyefinity or surround to work on games is like pulling teeth. IMHO.

/Former eyefinity user now happily back on a single 30"er
 
Skripka said:
1440p or 1600p just works. Getting Eyefinity or surround to work on games is like pulling teeth. IMHO.

/Former eyefinity user now happily back on a single 30"er
Click to expand...

At this point, seriously, there haven't been many games I've played that haven't worked. It's nothing like the days of the TH2Go and Matrox cards where it was impossible to find a game that wasn't a source game that just worked. Now It's built-in to many engines and the only big offenders are Call of Duty Games and Unreal-Engine Games. Plus if the game is big enough, fixes are made quickly. The WSGF is a big resource and it's free. Multi-Monitor gaming is cheaper and easier than it's ever been to setup.

It's a massive upgrade that literally expands what you see and immerses you more in the games you play. And it might just make you want to go through a couple games you've beaten again with a different perspective.

My 2c.

P.S. Best of both worlds is 3 x 30"rs... and a 4K screen above them.
 
3x1080p is awesome, but with that single 290 that you're waiting for, you won't be able to play new games maxed out on such a high resolution, so you should consider crossifiring it with a second card, unless you are fine with playing new games on low graphical settings or only playing older games.
 
You can only look at 1 screen at once thus 1 good screen beats lot's of bad screens.
 
suiken_2mieu said:
At this point, seriously, there haven't been many games I've played that haven't worked. It's nothing like the days of the TH2Go and Matrox cards where it was impossible to find a game that wasn't a source game that just worked. Now It's built-in to many engines and the only big offenders are Call of Duty Games and Unreal-Engine Games. Plus if the game is big enough, fixes are made quickly. The WSGF is a big resource and it's free. Multi-Monitor gaming is cheaper and easier than it's ever been to setup.

It's a massive upgrade that literally expands what you see and immerses you more in the games you play. And it might just make you want to go through a couple games you've beaten again with a different perspective.

My 2c.

P.S. Best of both worlds is 3 x 30"rs... and a 4K screen above them.
Click to expand...

Then you're damn lucky. 80% of the games I okay and have played are broken and require third party hacks/patches to fix broken publisher code and those patches break for a week or more at a time every time there's an official game update. Unreal Engine has supported eyefinity forever. The problem is most devs do not bother with the code to make it actually work in their implementation.
 
Panmaster said:
You can only look at 1 screen at once thus 1 good screen beats lot's of bad screens.
Click to expand...

You wearing blu blockers or something? If you don't have a peripheral, then Yes 1 screen, but 3 screens is game immersion. I played CS:GO on 1 screen the other day, and actually noticed my gameplay has changed to accustom the side panels. I don't have to turn to peer around a corner corners that people hide in and if they are there I can catch the model in my peripheral and turn quick enough to kill or do enough dmg the team can pick up the trash.

3 screen setup, I can run across a field in BF4 and look at my left screen, all clear, back to middle, then to the right. Yes considerable head movement is involved, but that is part of the immersion! I have gotten used to movement in my peripherals to where I swing the mouse toward that screen and get the kill....bad thing with bf4 is the team detection is horrid even with single screen, so I do shoot a teammate once or twice from a distance before I realize they are on my team.

With that said I have a benQ xl2720t in my egg cart due to the 10% off deal that ends today and I almost clicked the ship button. I have been sitting on the decision since they offered the discount, maybe a week or two? I just can't come to rip myself away from surround even though I want that damn screen. I'm afraid if I buy one now and scrap my surround, I'll return to surround with 3 of the benq screens.

My janky setup @ post 21996
Not the best surrounding pic
I accumulated screens over the years!
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1040278451&highlight=brohambone#post1040278451
 
Looks like a single higher resolution screen is the setup of choice. I am looking to order one way or the other on cyber Monday.
 
trick0502 said:
Looks like a single higher resolution screen is the setup of choice. I am looking to order one way or the other on cyber Monday.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't bother waiting.

Black Friday and "Cyber Monday" deals have been a bad joke for tech the last few years.
 
My vote goes towards the single 1440p display. I always preferred having one large hi-res display over multiple lower res ones, it always seems to have a crisper image compared to multiple screens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top