Ask HN: Dual monitors, or single 4k?

[roryisok]

I currently have a single 29" LCD monitor which I'm finding a bit cramped. More and more I find myself with multiple tiled windows, and I'm starting to feel that 1920x1080 pixels is not enough anymore.

I'm a coder by trade and hobby, don't really do any video or graphics stuff (the odd logo in Photoshop)

I'm trying to decide between getting a second 29" monitor, or a higher resolution and probably larger replacement screen. What'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).

[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/

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

[brandonhall]

This is the same setup I have and couldn't be happier. Less expensive and with a Samsung panel the quality isn't lacking.

[charleslmunger]

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

[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.

[roryisok]

Hadn't thought about the head turning thing. Interesting

[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 ^ 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.

[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...

[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. ;)

[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

[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...

[1]: https://www.amazon.com/LG-34UC98-W-34-Inch-UltraWide-Thunder...

[roryisok]

Nah, I don't want to have to turn my head that much

[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.