Bigger Computer Monitors = More Productivity
Wall Street Journal
Posted by Ben Worthen

Working late? Blame your computer screen. A new study finds that bigger monitors make people more productive.

Computer researchers at the University of Utah tested how quickly people performed tasks like editing a document and copying numbers between spreadsheets while using different computer configurations: one with an 18-inch monitor, one with a 24-inch monitor and with two 20-inch monitors.

Their finding: People using the 24-inch screen completed the tasks 52% faster than people who used the 18-inch monitor; people who used the two 20-inch monitors were 44% faster than those with the 18-inch ones.
There is an upper limit, however: Productivity dropped off again when people used a 26-inch screen. (The order of the tasks and the order of computer configurations were assigned randomly.)

The study concluded that someone using a larger monitor could save 2.5 hours a day.
But James Anderson, the professor in charge of the study, tells the Business Technology Blog to take that result with a grain of salt: It assumes that someone will work non-stop for eight hours, which no one will, and that the tasks they perform will all benefit from a larger screen, which isn’t always the case.
But things like moving data between files are ideally suited to bigger or multiple screens.
Anderson, who uses a computer with two 20-inch screens and one 24-inch one, recommends that businesses take the time to match employees with the proper size screen based on job requirements.

A caveat: The study was funded by NEC, which makes computer monitors.
But Anderson says that it was vetted by the University’s research board.
Also, he doesn’t care who businesses buy their monitors from – he just wants businesses to realize that the right monitor can make someone more productive.
And if a tech department has to buy 500 of the same size in order to get a bulk discount? Buy the biggest ones you can, Anderson tells us. “Size matters,” he adds.

I'm not sure this applies to every user type, though. I tend to have a whole crapload of windows open at any one time, so a 30" is far better than 2 20" monitors would be, but I doubt that everyone is a multitasker like that.

I do find that anything less than 24" is utterly ridiculous to try and use now, but that's due to being spoled.

I'd be thrilled to have a 24" monitor. I've been using a 17" for years. I need to get a new monitor with DVI on it too

I would say that 26-28" is probably the middle of the bell curve now - I can find decent ones for under $600 if you aren't a hardcore gamer. I have a Hanns-G 28" that works just fine for regular work and some light gaming with Halo2, and was about $600. I wouldn't use it for Crysis or anything (nor would I play Crysis, but that's not surprising), but it works fine for Halo2 and Half-life, etc.

my 22" is getting to small for me, i want something bigger but no desk space
i also heavily multitask, i usually have multiple browsers, dreamweaver, and photoshop open all at once. maybe some words docs and excel sheets too.

That Hanns.G is a pretty good monitor .... for business. I was looking at the that one (I think it's just over 27"), but I noticed the contrast ration is only 800:1. With current numbers upwards of 3000:1 (I recently saw one that had 10,000:1), and having seen how important that is to the subtle gradations in blacks and dark colors, I'm inclined to keep to a 24" model that has a high contrast rating. That's becuase I do use my screen to watch videos on. While I don't play games, I'm sure this is also important for accurate rendering in graphically demanding games.

Nevertheless, I set up a friend of mine with a Hanns.G as the price was hard to resist, and she just loves the thing! :^)

I, too, am inclined to have many windows open and find that more real estate is better. The 22" ones which seem to be all the rage are lower in height than my current 19" screen. I don't want to lose height for width, so the minimum is a 24" at the moment! A tad more would be that much better as long as the price is okay.

You're falling for one of the biggest scams in the industry - dynamic contrast ratio numbers are not always on the up-and-up, and I see no difference in my Hanns-G vs my Dell 3008WFP for most games, and only when displaying true black and true gray do I see a hint of difference. And I attribute that more to the brightness in the room (and the fact that the $2000 Dell is a better quality monitor than the Hanns-G). But for $600, it comes really close to the Dell in most things.

Just don't be fooled by everything you read, especially contrast ratio #s.

Very interresting topic!
I will buy a new comp and new monitor(s) later this year, but I'm not quite sure what to choose:
1x30" or 2/3x27-28"?
2x30" is probably way overkill and just a (huge) waste of cash (I'm not willing to spend that much).

I feel very much limited by my current 21" CRT in many situations.
I'm a heavy multitasker, but I also like to play games and watch movies.

A question to anyone who owns or regularly use 30"-monitors:
Is one 30" enough and useful (not too big for one screen?), or would you rather have two 27-28"?

I'm still using 80-columns.

I prefer 1 30", as that's about as much screen real-estate as I can keep straight in my mind .

I kind of assumed that one big screen would be better, with two screens you get that annoying border in the middle. Two large monitors may also be a bit too wide for normal viewing distances.

I prefer 2 17" over 1 30", the divider i find is good, makes a multi-desktop interface, rather then a large desktop. Works wonders in many environments.

1. Programming
- Main code in 1 monitor, reference matterial (header file, notes, etc) in the other
- Main code in 1 monitor, testing in the other
- Main code in 1 monitor, GUI in the other
2. System Admin
- Your desktop in 1 monitor, VNC/RDP to server(s) in the other. (or for me AD in 1 90% of the day, my desktop in the other)
- Your desktop in 1 monitor, monitoring/management software in the other. (very easy to tell when something breaks, w/o watching 24/7 coz the status is right next to you)
3. Tech Support
- Docs/Issue Report in 1 monitor, VNC/RDP to client in the other


I work at two different sites, 1 site I have 2 17" monitors, I love it, but unfortunately my boss at the other site has just ordered me a 22" monitor w/o asking me if I want one, so now i'm going from 1 17" to a 22" when i'd rather 2 17" which is cheaper.

I see what you mean and I've been thinking about it too. On two screens you can also "maximize" the windows easier and keep them more separated. Even though bigger screens (24-30") are much better for viewing multiple windows simultaneously than smaller ones (20-22" are not really large). With the sizes you're talking about I can see somewhat of an advantage of using two smaller monitors, the question is whether or not that still holds true with even larger monitors?

There are a few different possible uses to consider and it's a bit difficult to find a monitor that will work almost as good for all of them:
-Ordinary computer work (browsing, coding, office work, VNC/RDP, virtual machines and other similar activities...)
-Gaming
-Watching movies (or TV using a TV-tuner)

For the last one and maybe to some extent gaming, one could probably just buy an even bigger TV. But that won't work very well for the first one, and a TV requires a separate license fee to be paid.

If more games had support for multiple monitors that would be quite nice (a "deeper" experience, the ability to see multiple locations or just have the map/inventory on a second screen), but we're not there yet.

Any more opinions on this?

I reckon i'd still go with two monitors, it seperates the screens. I wouldnt have room to put too much on one of my desks at work. 2 17" monitors for dual screen, 1 mac with 17" monitor right next to that, then the printer on one side, and scanner on the other. Looks fancy though. Gotta love it when places burn down and you get new s***.

Although I don't have a dual monitor setup at the moment - all I've got is my tiny 15.4" laptop screen - I'd advocate for dual monitors. In my experience, two 19" displays are superior to one 30" display. 30" is too big imho, and with dual displays you have the advantage of splitting into two work areas. I'd say go with 2 smaller monitors over 1 larger.

Interesting comments, keep 'em coming.

There seem to be many people who'd rather have two smaller screens (17-20"), but maybe that's because very few has used 27"+ monitors?

There's a limit when it's getting too big, but where is that?

I've done both, and I found that 2 monitors were very useful when I had two, but now that I've gotten used to one big monitor (and yes, one 30" is about as big as you want to go unless you want to do your computing a few feet away from your desk), I find that the middle break is annoying. I am limited to where I put windows (nothing can be right in front of me, I have to look right and left) and maximizing windows is something I rarely do - normally I just set a size, close and reopen, and keep it that way.