Single high res vs dual monitors

M

Monglol

n00b
Joined
Jan 29, 2013
Messages
6
Hello, long time lurker first time poster.

I am considering getting rid of my two samsung 22", with one of them being a 120hz for either a dell u2713hm or two 1080/1200 monitors. I was wondering if anyone have gone from two lower res monitors to a single 2560x1440 and if they managed without a second monitor. Just having one large monitor is appealing to me, rather than having two monitors.
Right now I am debating whether to get the u2713hm or replace my samsungs with two 1080 monitors. I know the 1080 will have a higher pixel count, but having everything on one display would be awesome too.

Anyone switched from either dual 1680x1050 or dual 1080p to a 2560x1440 and felt they missed having a second monitor?
 
I have been using dual monitors for awhile, and I can say from experience with my brother who uses one very large monitor that the performance is much better from dual then a single larger one.

At least with his system to be able to play most games properly he has to run in windowed mode, and this does not allow the gpu to run things the best it can losing in the 15fps or so of performance, playable still but definately more sluggish, vs running in full screen for him is smooth as silk but then the mouse acts up and the pointer is not viewable.

Anyways, my opinon only, I use dual monitor as I find it by far more productive then one single larger display. Might be abit easier to have it all on one screen, but I do find it more user freindly to have dual screens so things like team speak, temperature programs, music player etc can be on the secondary and your game, application, "work" can be on the primary, I prefer it this way :)
 
Hi thanks for your input
I am not too concerned about performance, more the real estate space.
I been using dual monitors for a lot of years as well so I am afraid of wanting it back after getting a 2560, but running dual then defeats the purpose. With dual 22" i already have to turn my head a bit to look at the left one (i have one central in front of me for games), so having a 27" + another one would be a no go for me.
 
Run the 2nd monitor in pivot mode, in which case a 27 + 2nd monitor is feasible without being too wide. Gaming would still be only on your primary monitor.
 
I have a side by side 24.5 and 22.5 1920x1080 and 1680x1050. I cant go back now, dual monitor is awesome, I heard triple(eyefinity type) is even better.

I hear you though, but yeh, that is an idea, turn the one monitor so you wont be hurting deskspace and will also give a bit more room so you dont have to turn your head as much :)
 
I have 2560x1440 main, with a secondary in portrait at 1200x1600. I barely use the second one. They don't match up worth a darn in pixel density or size, but it is nice to have to throw things on for reference or whatever. If I had to choose 1x2560 vs 2x1920, no contest, I would take the 2560. IMHO maximum productivity happens with the most pixels you can get on your main screen.

But yeah, agreed on keeping one of the 22"s in portrait - best of both worlds... my guess it you won't use it much but it's there if you need it.
 
I've been using multimonitor since the late 90's, six monitors since 2006. I've tried switching down to a single 30" 2560x1600 and it lasted a day. The *BEST* way to go dual is two 1440p monitors. If you are ever thinking of going Eyefinity/nVsurround, you will want at least 3 monitors because having bezels in the middle is a real pain in game and depending on your rig you might want to stick to 1080p monitors (6 megapixels) vs 1440p (12 megapixels) for a triple setup.
 
austinpike said:
I have 2560x1440 main, with a secondary in portrait at 1200x1600. I barely use the second one. They don't match up worth a darn in pixel density or size, but it is nice to have to throw things on for reference or whatever. If I had to choose 1x2560 vs 2x1920, no contest, I would take the 2560. IMHO maximum productivity happens with the most pixels you can get on your main screen.

But yeah, agreed on keeping one of the 22"s in portrait - best of both worlds... my guess it you won't use it much but it's there if you need it.
Click to expand...

That's because you are supposed to use 30" 2560x1600 with the 1600x1200 20" on it's side. That pretty much matches up perfectly, both in pixel count and pixel size. Also in overall size btw. (bezels included)
 
jcvjcvjcvjcv said:
That's because you are supposed to use 30" 2560x1600 with the 1600x1200 20" on it's side. That pretty much matches up perfectly...
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know. There is no good match for a 27". Point was that having multiple screens, even if they don't match up perfectly, is still useful.
 
The price difference between 27" and 30" is quite high considering the difference in area is only 10%. This makes everyone pursue other options that would work with 27", but given that 27" are 108ppi which is different to all other monitors on the market I still recommend twin 27" monitors.
 
Alright. I think I will go for the U2713 and then if needed add a U2212 on the side. Should match up somewhat decently with the PPI.
Cheers, Would have wished I could have done without a second monitor though, makes a desk much more neat imo.
 
Last edited:
I'm using a single 1440p and am quite happy with it versus dual monitor. I found that with the dual 1080p setup the second monitor was unused most of the time.

That's being said, having that second monitor really helps 5% of the time. There are times when two monitors makes you much more productive (e.g. copying something) because the applications you are using do not split well into 2560/2.

I use my laptop screen along with a 1440p monitor. It works perfectly for the 5% of my time that I need it and doesn't clutter my desk all the time. A second monitor doesn't have to be huge, but it can be great when you need it for productivity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top