I do agree that 1440p is probably best for most people. Most of the people who see my setup just ask "How the hell do you do that?"
I'm one of those people who has a bad habit of having 50 windows open at any given time. Sure I could change my habit, as I actually "only" need tiles of about 10 screens at any given time, but so far, having two 27" 4K monitors side by side has improved my productivity significantly.
I originally had them stacked vertically, but I changed the orientation to side by side landscape when I changed desks, and I found the new wide orientation works even better for me. Having needed reading glasses for the past few years also helps, because the glasses I have magnify the screens a little bit too, so it helps.
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.
Speaking of monitors, I got one of those absurd 49" ultra widescreen displays a few months ago. The resolution is 5120x1440, so it's functionally equivalent to two 27" 1440p monitors placed side by side.
The text is naturally not as crisp as a 4K monitor, but the amount of screen real estate is great for development. Paired with a tiling window manager it gives so many options. I did the dual 27" 1440p thing for years, and I find this setup superior. With the dual monitor strategy you have to either deal with a huge bezel right in the center of your vision, or push the secondary monitor off to the side, requiring more neck movement to see what's on it. With this monitor, everything remains much more clearly in my field of view.
I've tried a lot of different setups over the years at work and at home, with laptops, 3 monitors, thin monitors, vertical monitors, etc.
I eventually settled on one 43 inch 4k monitor. I have it divided into 3 columns and 2 rows, and have everything I'm working on open at once so I don't have to tab between things, with the core work in center and the reference work either side.
3x27" 4k monitor at 150% scaling seems to be the sweet spot for me. It strikes the balance of text clarity and desktop resolution. I use the center one most of the time, and the one on my right for supporting tasks. My left one monitors stuff (terminals, sysmon, etc.) as well as my music. I use virtual desktops to separate the task I'm working on. I couldn't go back to a single screen, much less 1366x768.
I'm often dividing my center and right monitor into vertical splits (supported by Windows snap feature).
I tried for a long, long time to use a tiling WM and realized it is just too many compromises in order to use it efficiently. Many applications are not really compatible unless you're willing to switch your entire workflow to using mostly CLI applications. If you're using a dynamic one, you're still moving windows based on priority, and on a regular tiling WM (i.e., i3), you still need to move windows around. Mouse is still the fastest way to resize/move a window.
With window snapping, this is more or less a non-issue these days (Windows 11 is still sufficient when it comes to multiple monitors as I'm able to move my window from the right one to my left with Win + Arrow). I can still alt-tab.
I can't use a 40" 4k screen because it's too large, and it's more about division of screens than resolution alone. I also like the improved clarity that 150% scaling brings me on a 27" screen.
I've tried a lot of different monitor setups for productivity - ranging from three 24" 4k displays to a single 49" ultrawide, and ultimately have found the best setup for me is dual 27" 4ks, each running at a "scaled" 2560x1440.
MacOS in particular does an excellent job of rendering 2560x1440 to a 4K screen, and the increased DPI over a regular 1440p 27" screen is very noticeable.
Another option if you're not a fan of 27" displays is a pair of 24/25" 4k screens which can be run at a scaled 2304x1296 resolution. This still provides a decent amount of space without text being too tiny. Alas, 4k monitors <27" are increasingly rare these days.
Agreed. Was supplied two 4ks for my last job and just ended up using so zoomed in it wasn't even like I was using 4k monitors anymore.
My ideal setup is two 1440p monitors, but even then I tend to zoom in quite a bit.
I also had a coworker who was fine with their laptop screen. People you are finicky with these kinds of things seem to have their focus elsewhere over the actual work done.
Agreed, one large 4k monitor is the way to go for me as well.
As I posted in that other thread... When working, I typically split it into thirds (so mostly portrait mode for each application). And this is the key advantage for me:
With multiple monitors, you're confined into smaller, "hard-coded" boxes that can't be changed. With a single large screen you have much more flexibility.
I've had so many screens... I've run 3x 27" 1440p (that felt oppressive), 2x 23.8" 1080p (comfortable), 43" 4k (loads of vertical real estate for reading code), and currently on a 35" 1440p 21:9 ultra wide.
Ultra wide is like having two screens, when splitting windows left and right, though I think two monitors is better for work, as you can put one as the primary and one off to the side, you don't want to be looking sideways when working on code.
When I was reading a lot of code I didn't write, the 4k was the best, as it had a lot of vertical space.
The ultra wide I bought for games (it's 120hz).
I'm about to start a new gig and I'll run 2x23.8" 1080p for that.
Phillips make decent 4k screens at 40" and 43" for the money, but they are glossy so no good if you have glare problems.
The nicest screens overall for work I find are the Dell ultra sharp line. They are premium in price but side by side to a cheaper monitor and you can see why!
I have a 27" ultra sharp that is about 8 years old and is still fantastic compared to most mid range monitors, it's worth the investment. 1x 27" is nice, 2x 23.8" is nice.
Samsung make good ultra wides for work, and they make some ultra ultra wides too!
I actually prefer having dual monitors over one big monitor. I dedicate certain tasks to certain monitors, and that divide helps me quickly find what I need.
It's also nice to have the physical separation for some reason I can't really describe. My brother has a similar setup to the one in the article, and I just never really liked using it.
Just personal preference I'm sure.
(I also fear my eyesight might be too bad to have a big monitor in 4k, with things being rather small text)
For my setup, I prefer having (bright) IPS monitors. Not too large, I'm fine with my 24" 1080p monitors.
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.
I haven't used two screens in years! A 4k single display is great for me. I can get two windows side-by-side and that is the most I ever need. If I need more than 2 windows I feel my workflow needs help.
Nowadays I use a single 27" 4k Monitor. The reasoning is, that I want to avoid multitasking. Multitasking is a major cause of stress for me and lowers my productivity at the same time.
4k at 27" seems to be the sweet spot for people who aren't blind. In addition, instead of window managers get 2 or 3 smaller high resolution screens. Multi monitor is the easiest producitivity boost for programmers.
At my company everyone gets 2 monitors. We started with 19" in 2006. Moved to 24" after a fire and insurance replacement and then have upgraded to 27" primaries as sales and new machines were ordered.
After 7 years of multi monitor usage with a team of 12 people I can safely say that bigger is not always better. More desktops to work with are a boost. Pixel density is nice, but the OS by default handles multi monitor much better than any window manager and you can do things like one horizontal and one vertical.
I use one 27" 4K monitor at work, and one 38" 21:9 1600p monitor at home. I think I would prefer a 30" 4K monitor instead at home, as the screen is so wide it requires a head turn to see the edges.
I used to run three 30" 2560x1600 monitors, but that was just insane.
I'm one of those people who has a bad habit of having 50 windows open at any given time. Sure I could change my habit, as I actually "only" need tiles of about 10 screens at any given time, but so far, having two 27" 4K monitors side by side has improved my productivity significantly.
I originally had them stacked vertically, but I changed the orientation to side by side landscape when I changed desks, and I found the new wide orientation works even better for me. Having needed reading glasses for the past few years also helps, because the glasses I have magnify the screens a little bit too, so it helps.
reply