Any advice on monitors for a 8 monitor setup (bezeless)?

[thecomputerguy]

I have a poweruser client that currently has 4x 22" mounted on his desk. He wants to get rid of the chunkiness of it and go to a bezeless setup.

We were looking at this: http://a.co/aW83eaq

This has the capability to do 4 in a hardware split using 4 different inputs, DP, mDP, 2xHDMI to create the 4-way split.

I told him that monitor looks like it would get the job done but to be aware that 43" split 4 ways is going to drop his current 4x22" setup down to about 4x11" (43 divded by 4).

Then he asked about going to 8 monitors and I told him well then we need to start looking at add-on cards that will handle off the displays and an 8 output video is going to be VERY pricey.

Currently he has 1xDP & 1xHDMI onboard and 2xUSB3.0 HDMI adapters.

 

[MichaelBits]

What does he use the multiple monitors for? Documents, graphics, etc.
Is 4k a requirement?

So many options and ways to do this...

 

[phaZed]

I would be inclined to look at 2 or 4 ultrawide monitors.

 

[mikeroq]

You say he has 4 monitors. How does have have them on his desk?

2x2 grid or 4 in a row?

If it's a 2x2 grid that monitor would just about give him the same amount of screen.

If it's 4 in a row maybe 2 ultra wides?

 

[sapphirescales]

Cheapest and cleanest solution would be a pair of 43" 4k TV's. Or 55" if he wants to go bigger.

Be aware that a LOT of newer monitors these days are suffering from ghosting issues. I just bought one for a client (nearly cost $1,000) and the thing would start ghosting after less than 5 minutes. It's sorta like temporary burn-in and is REALLY annoying. I swapped it out for the same model and the same thing happened. I ended up buying him a TV instead and no issues.

Then I bought an $900 LG ultrawide 34" monitor. It had ghosting issues too so I just said screw it and bought another TV for that client.

So far I've gotten ghosting from these brands:

1. LG
2. Samsung
3. Acer
4. HP
5. Dell

It seems like they're all using cheapo Chinese panels or something. Thankfully it hasn't caught up to the TV's yet, but I'll tell you this. I'm not buying another monitor again. I've wasted too much time buying/returning/setting stuff up multiple times. Interestingly enough it's not a problem with smaller monitors. Only the ultrawide and large (40" or larger) monitors.

 

[thecomputerguy]

What does he use the multiple monitors for? Documents, graphics, etc.
Is 4k a requirement?

So many options and ways to do this...

He works in insurance so he will have there client management system on one screen, email, random client docs PDF, internet across the screens. 4k not required ... His current setup is in a 2x2 using this mount http://a.co/hBUeVRk

 

[thecomputerguy]

You say he has 4 monitors. How does have have them on his desk?

2x2 grid or 4 in a row?

If it's a 2x2 grid that monitor would just about give him the same amount of screen.

If it's 4 in a row maybe 2 ultra wides?

His current setup is in a 2x2 using this mount http://a.co/hBUeVRk

 

[Markverhyden]

If the customer is really serious about the minimal bezel, etc do searches for video wall monitors. Those are the monitors with the least amount of bezel, 3/16th of an inch or so. As far as a video card look at ATI Firepro's - http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/Workstation-Graphics-Drivers.aspx#multi

I do installation work for a company that sells video walls. That card is their choice. You can daisy chain monitors on one port on the card if I understand this correctly. Of course they do use player software on top of that so I don't exactly know how that fits in. Another part of this is EDID

The daisy chain goes like this. Card mini DP port > HDMI Monitor 1> DP Monitor 1> HDMI Monitor 2. The card they use has 4 mini DP's.

 

[NJW]

(43 divded by 4)

As @mikeroq says, that's 43 divided by 2 for a 2x2 display, so about the same as he has now, but without the bezels.

 

[fencepost]

I'll second the "get a 4k TV" recommendation - or two of them. Will require arranging windows rather than snapping them to individual monitors, but it should be a lot smoother and probably less expensive.

Frankly I'd actually consider having the client get them himself at Costco, and he he gets models under $500 and is going to have them on all the time consider going for the extended warranty that they offer - under $500 and it's $30.

 

[Mr. Ingram's Computer Repair & Shoppe]

I'll second the "get a 4k TV" recommendation - or two of them. Will require arranging windows rather than snapping them to individual monitors

Win10 does snap to corner. So he can be easily "trained" how to snap windows to a 1080p corner.

 

[sapphirescales]

Win10 does snap to corner. So he can be easily "trained" how to snap windows to a 1080p corner.

Be aware that (for me at least), it's impossible to use a 4k TV without display scaling unless it's 55" or bigger. I personally own a 43" 4K TV on one of my systems and I have to scale it at 150% just to be able to read it, so snapping 4 corners isn't really an option unless I'm okay with a resolution in each window that reminds me of the old 1024x768 days.

 

[Mr. Ingram's Computer Repair & Shoppe]

resolution in each window that reminds me of the old 1024x768 days.

ummmm 4K tv has 3840x2160
which is literally 4x the pixel count of 1080P.
So if you were to snap a window into each corner of a 4k screen.
You'd have 4x 1080p windows.
Assume the screen is 43"
43/2=21.75 (round down for simplicity) 21"
You'd have 4x 1080p screens of 21" in size.

I would love to be wrong, but I don't understand any flaws in my math.

May i ask how far away you sit from your 4k tv? as you should be sitting about 2 to 3 feet from it, as that is the computer monitor standard.

If you sit 8 to 12 feet from it, such as in a living room or what the average viewing distance is for a TV viewing experience. Then yes, you would need scaling.

^^^None of this is written to sound aggressive. I just don't understand your logic, so I wrote mine out. Hopefully you are able to understand mine and help me understand your point of view.

 

[sapphirescales]

ummmm 4K tv has 3840x2160
which is literally 4x the pixel count of 1080P.
So if you were to snap a window into each corner of a 4k screen.
You'd have 4x 1080p windows.
Assume the screen is 43"
43/2=21.75 (round down for simplicity) 21"
You'd have 4x 1080p screens of 21" in size.

I would love to be wrong, but I don't understand any flaws in my math.

May i ask how far away you sit from your 4k tv? as you should be sitting about 2 to 3 feet from it, as that is the computer monitor standard.

If you sit 8 to 12 feet from it, such as in a living room or what the average viewing distance is for a TV viewing experience. Then yes, you would need scaling.

^^^None of this is written to sound aggressive. I just don't understand your logic, so I wrote mine out. Hopefully you are able to understand mine and help me understand your point of view.

I know it technically comes to the same dimensions. The problem is, the upper "monitors" are way too far away when you're sitting at a desk. My TV is about 2.5 feet away from me.

I personally find 43" to be the perfect size. 55" is too big because it makes my crane my neck, or I have to put it so far back that I have the same problem that I do with a 43." But I absolutely have to scale the 43" TV to 150% or I can't use it. I'm 26 and have 20/20 vision so I'm not old either. I'd imagine it would be much worse for my average clientele, who tend to be 45+.

I LOVE my 43" TV, but I only use it split 2 ways side by side. 4 corner snap makes the windows way too big.

I have a 75" TV in my bedroom at the base of my bed. It's scaled to 175% and is about 10 feet away. I can't even really snap 2 windows side by side on that TV because everything is so big that it's like a 1080p. And I had to upgrade my graphics card thanks to it being a 4k TV. Gaming sucked there for a while until I finally broke down and bought a new graphics card (my old TV was a 1080p 65").