4 reasons why I don’t use three monitors in my setup

We live in an era where multitasking is more important than ever, and when it comes to my particular workflow, a single traditional screen is not good enough for me to be as productive as I need to be. I know that’s the case for multiple other people, too, and sometimes, you’ll see these insane setups with three monitors or more that people use to keep tabs on everything going on in their life.

Personally, however, while having two screens is almost essential, adding that third screen really doesn’t add a whole lot of value for me. I’ve used three screens inh the past, and I just didn’t really have enough use for them to justify the complications that came with it.

It adds complexity

Having three monitors on a desk is just cumbersome

Most of the time I’ve used a triple screen setup when I used my two monitors alongside a laptop screen, and realistically, that was the only way I could have done it consistently. I did try using three monitors at once, but it didn’t really work if I had to use my laptop, since I wouldn’t have space for said laptop with three monitors on my desk.

But even with just two monitors, I already hated how messy my setup was. I had to have cables running from the outlet to the screens, and then HDMI or DisplayPort cables from the computer or docking station to the screen, plus the cables for my Nintendo Switch that was in the same setup. No matter what I did, my setup looked messy, and I never liked it. Some cable management solutions could have helped, but it was also hard to do something like that since my setup could change frequently.

And that’s not even accounting for the space. I didn’t have a lot of problems because my third screen was a laptop and the monitors themselves were 24 inches each, but if you go for larger 27-inch monitors, you’re going to need a fairly big desk to fit them all comfortably. It’s a lot to prepare for.

It’s not cheap

Three monitors is a big investment

Another big problem with a triple monitor setup is just how much it’s going to cost you to get that setup. I was able to get my triple-screen setup over the course of a couple of years, and even then, one of the monitors was a review unit. Not to mention I had budget monitors across the board, all being 24 inches and Full HD panels. If you want a setup with multiple monitors, you’re also going to want them to be good monitors.

In fact, I’d recommend you first invest in a good high-resolution monitor before you decide you need a second screen at all. Just going from Full HD to Quad HD can make a big difference. But once you settle for a Quad HD monitor, you’ll realize it’s probably quite a bit pricy, and having to buy three of them… well, it’s not very enticing. Especially because you might then have to consider how to even connect them depending on your setup. Most desktops will probably have three display outputs, but if you use a laptop with a docking station or a mini PC, you might have to take that into account too. You may end up needing a more expensive dock, or a monitor that has the inputs you need, which could also cost more.

Mix all that with the somewhat questionable benefits of a third screen, and I’d say you’re probably better off with just two monitors. I know I am.

I just don’t need that many screens

That third screen was just there

Another thing about having three screens is that it just never felt essential for me. When I did use this setup, that third screen was basically like a sidecar, and all it really did was house my messaging apps, while I used the two other screens to get work done. It was convenient, but really, it was never a necessity, and it didn’t bother me much when I had to switch to two screens.

Really, most of my workflows consist of writing on one screen and reading information from the other, so a third screen never served a big purpose. Of course, maybe some workloads can benefit from this. If you’re managing a lot of different things at the same time and you need to be able to view it all in one go, maybe a third screen really helps you reduce how many times you need to switch between apps. But for most people, I really doubt more than two screens are going to make a big difference, and considering the cost of that third screen, it’s probably not worth it at all.

In fact, like I mentioned above, I think the only reason I did appreciate the third screen at all was because the monitors I did have were such low resolution, so I couldn’t really multi-task within that single screen at all. But with a Quad HD or 4K display, you could easily split one of the the screens and remain efficient without needing the crutch of a third monitor.

I’m all in on super ultrawide monitors

I don’t care for multiple screens anymore

Finally, the big reason why I just don’t care about having a third screen anymore is because I’m actually fine with just one. Thanks in good part to the messy setup I mentioned above, I’ve found the perfect solution in a super ultrawide monitor (what I use to refer to screens with a 32:9 aspect ratio). This monitor is essentially two 16:9 screens mashed into one, and for me, it’s perfect for multitasking. I’m not limited by the physical broders between each display, and with tools like PowerToys FancyZones, I can easily organize my apps exactly into the space where I want them.

That third monitor I used to have for my messaging apps? It’s just a small sliver of my screen now, and I can use rest of this gigantic panel to still get work done and multitask like it’s nothing. At any point, I have two windows ope so i can write and reference important material at a glance, all while Slack or my personal messaging apps are also on screen whenever I need them. And my setup is a fairly simple one, but I could make it as complex as I wish because resizing and snapping windows is never tied to the physical borders between monitors. All the screen real estate I have is completely flexible.

Related

I reviewed a lot of products this year, but this is the one I can’t stop thinking about

Out of all the products I reviewed, one made such an impression I had to buy one for myself

And if you’re thinking about what happens if I want to use a different device, that’s not an issue, either. These 32:9 monitors don’t just look like two screens; they can act like two screens. I can split the screen in half and use my Switch on one half of the screen while the other half allows me to keep messaging my friends, browsing the web, or even managing a livestream of my Switch game.

I’m sure someone will also mention that yes, getting a 32:9 monitor is likely more expensive than a triple-monitor setup, which may be true depending on the monitors you’re getting. But the truth is, I feel like I’m getting more value out of this single monitor than I would from having three. Of course, you don’t have to feel the same way, but I felt much more comfortable investing in this solution than in three individual monitors.

Most people don’t need three screens

I understand some people out there will probably dismiss my opinion and say that three monitors are essential to their workflow, and I get it. Some workloads can really benefits from that extra space. But in a world where most people live off of a small laptop screen, the majority of users don’t need three monitors on their desk.

I’d argue that past two screens, you enter the realm of diminishing returns, so it only makes sense for a select few people.