3 x 20" or 2 x 24" Monitors

techguy20

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jan 30, 2010
251
0
If you had the graphics card to support it, would you rather have three 20" monitors side-by-side or two 24" monitors as your primary desktop workspace?
 

davidoloan

Suspended
Apr 28, 2009
421
72
If you had the graphics card to support it, would you rather have three 20" monitors side-by-side or two 24" monitors as your primary desktop workspace?
3 20" so that you could have 3 x monitor or 1 Apple TV + 2 monitor.

You could buy 2 monitor and 1 TV / monitor to switch the input with a controller on that one.

If you were not interested in an Apple TV at your desk I would choose 2 x 24.
 

diamond3

macrumors 6502a
Oct 6, 2005
826
246
I'd go 2x24, you can always add another one later. 20" is too small personally
 

techguy20

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jan 30, 2010
251
0
I'll one-up y'all with 3 x 30". Haha, I wish I could. :D

Thanks for the input. I already have a 24", and there were some real cheap 20" monitors I saw on sale for less than $90 new, so I am debating picking up a couple.

It would be two 20" + the 24".

Yay, or nay?
 

dlimes13

macrumors 6502a
May 3, 2011
744
9
Perrysburg, OH
Depends on screen resolution. If those 20" were full 1920x1080, then the 20's for sure.

I'm currently running 2 x 27" + 17" (would do 3 x 27" if the MBP supported 3 Thunderbolt Displays).
 

techguy20

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jan 30, 2010
251
0
Depends on screen resolution. If those 20" were full 1920x1080, then the 20's for sure.

I'm currently running 2 x 27" + 17" (would do 3 x 27" if the MBP supported 3 Thunderbolt Displays).
They're 1600 x 900.
 

rainydays

macrumors 6502a
Nov 6, 2006
886
0
I'd honestly stick to my single 27" thunderbolt display than to have even three 24". It has all the space I need, and switching desktops is super fast and easy in OSX.