Forum: Author Hangout

I'd love to of seen this setup in person. I only run 3x 27" 1440p screens on what is very old tech.

I started with a single 19 inch screen, then upgraded that to a 4K for better quality. Then I had a 28 inch 4K monitor, then went to 2 of them to reduce the number of times I accidentally closed down the wrong window as I had so many open while working on a story and they were all lying over each other on the screens. As my ability to easily read caused me to up the text display size I added a 42 inch 4K screen, then another when I get fed up with squinting at one of the smaller screens. When the original 28 inch screen died I worked with 3 for a while but eventually got fed up with windows sitting on windows while working, so I then got the 3rd 42 inch screen.

Currently my computer desk is in a corner with a wall on my right, 2 42 inch monitors on the wall in front of me, a 42 inch monitor at about a 45 degree angle to the lower monitor on my left hand and the 28 inch monitor on the left above it. This set up allows me to have everything open and readable without having to stack windows, most of the time. The 28 inch monitor is the hardest to read and I don't work on it, instead I use it as a parking screen and pull a window across to the lower front screen to work on when I need to. Typically I have one or more instances of Libre office open on the lower front monitor while working, then I have Firefox open with research sites on the monitor above that, while the left lower monitor has Thunderbird open and a Fire Fox window with SoL, FS, SciFi, and the Forum and the upper left (28 inch 'parking' screen) has Audacious, Hex Chat, and a file manager open to my story Work in Progress directory with icons and text set big enough to read. Want to work on a WiP I can click on the icon to open the file on the main work screen. Someone says something on Hex Chat the text is big enough i can read it but I can easily drag it to the work screen for a long discussion.

I've seen splitter boxes, and used them in the past. But every box has provided multiple images of the one screen, not the use of the 4 screens as separate screens the way I sue these.

Reading your other replies, then a second (or third!) GPU in a PCI slot would probably also work. I'm not quite sure I understand why you have to use four dedicated outputs.

I bought my first second monitor back in 1997(ish)(The game Total Annihilation, was brilliant across two screens and still remains -in my mind- the only game to fully utilise two screens to this day. Which is mad considering how prevalent multiple monitor set-ups are these days) for extra screen space, running them out of the GPU's two outputs- (the GPU was something like a Voodoo card). I tried the different screen modes and found the expanded mode the best suited to my purposes. Dragging the required windows to the preferred monitor and then full screening them achieved the best results and mimicked running two different outputs, but with the added advantage of being able to move between the monitors. This is why I don't quite follow your response of 'multiple images of the one screen'. Yes, that would happen if you told the OS to clone the one screen over all of your outputs, but if you told it to output just the one screen as a (and I'm just making this figure up as I don't know what a four screen size would be) 7,680 x 4320 output, then you could simple position your windows across the stupidly large desktop space as you see fit and have the windows running full screen in their respective screens as though you were running multiple individual feeds.

Since 1997, I've tried three monitors, but to be honest, never found much need for them and dropped back to two. Mainly because I'm a 'gamer' and I've found no game that I liked to play that even uses the the existence of a second (or more screen) apart from that 1997 game.

As I type this, I have the news running full-screen in one and this site on the other. I could see (and use) the use of more screens in something like family tree research, where you could have different tree's in different screens, but to be honest, since those programs are online, I run them in multiple browser tabs instead.

What I'm basically saying is, I'm wondering if you are actually over-complicating your set-up needlessly, and the requirement of needing a 1.5 to 2 Kw PSU (That's a LOT of heat!) seems excessive (even given that you have said that you need it for your current system to be stable). I'm still inclined to believe that a splitter box is the way forward, and that you may have used the wrong type, or had it configured wrongly when you tried it last. But then I use Windows OS and other OS's may handle things differently when it comes to multiple monitor set-ups.

There's a couple issues here, so I'll address them separately.

Using multiple graphics cards: While I've not done that, all that I've read on the subject is you can have some very serious problems and they don't always work together unless they are the same make and model of card. Usually, by the time I decide I need to upgrade my graphics the old cards are not available at all or not available at a reasonable price. Thus, instead of buying to low end cards it's cheaper to buy one almost top end card. If they don't intend the card to be able to drive 4 monitors they shouldn't be putting 4 outputs on it or say something on the box about only driving 3. In fact, I have seen one card that has 2 x hdmi and 2 x dp and it says it will only drive 2 monitors in either mix possible.

Using a graphics splitter: The ones I've used in the past weren't designed for you to run multiple monitors with different screens on them. Yes, some allowed you to set the split as an oversize screen then set each monitor as a part of that screen, but they did not give a high definition image of what was on the screen.

The PSUs: Last year we had a mouse plague and the 850w PSU I had in the system got fried due to the mice pissing in it. At that time the cheapest replacement I had available were 750w or 1,250w for the same price. I went to ,1250w. After that came the graphics upgrades and when i was having issues bringing the system to life but dropping a monitor out of the line up worked, it seemed to me to be a power supply issue and I upgraded to the 2,000w as it was the cheapest option over 1,250w - although I always felt it was overkill. There is not real heat increase detectable by me, and the system sits by my left leg.

The way use the monitors: All 4 monitors are 3,840 x 2,160 pixels - 3 are 42 inch 4K models and 1 is a 28 inch 4K model. All are correctly set as per ergonomics at arms length, with the minor variation that the top line are a bit high. All are set with text to display at 100%. I need the large monitors as LO at 100% on the 28 inch monitor requires squinting to read while the 42 inch monitors don't require squinting to read the text as the pixels are bigger.

The 28 inch is on my left hand up at a 45 degree angle and is where I park open programs I don't need to pay immediate attention to. It usually has the Audacious playlist displayed as the music runs in the background. It has Hexchat open beside it, and beside that is a file manager open to my Work in Progress directory. They take up about 85% of the screen since all 3 run from top to bottom and are wide enough to give a reasonable display. These 3 are always open and in those spots

Below that is the Phillips 42 inch with Thunderbird open, and beside that is a window Fire Fox open to SciFi, FS, Sol, Forum. These 3 are always open with space for another window on the left of them.

The top screen in front of me is a 42 inch AOC that is often empty, but when I'm editing or working major research it has 3 or 4 windows open that fill it all up. I spend about 75% of my time researching or editing. I also use that screen when I have Fire Fox open in full screen mode for watching a film or dashcam clips.

The main screen is a 42 inch AOC is my main working screen and will usually have 2 or 3 windows open in it, usually LO while I write or edit. Sometimes LO and Fire Fox with another research page open on it. When I get an edit back from an editor I have it open on the screen with the master file beside it and that takes up the full window as I have LO set to display 2 side by side 6 x 9 inch pages and the Styles Sidebar beside it.

When preparing a story for posting I'll have the following windows open as I work on them all at once: 4 file manager windows, 2 Gedit windows, Calibre, 2 LO windows, 3 to 5 Fire Fox windows - depends on the number of sites being posted to. That's just the work windows which are extra to the always open windows parked on the left screens. I used to try doing this all with them layered over each other but kept getting screwed up by accidentally closing the wrong windows as I finished with them, so I set up this 'fail-safe' system with them all open and visible and not sitting over each other.

.................

The next time I'm doing a major edit or posting preparation I'll try to remember to take a picture and post it, to show how the system is.

My understanding, and I could well be wrong, is that they only need to be same make and model when using an SLI bridge, otherwise different makes can be used as they are driving different monitors.

Reading through your detailed reply, I'm even more of the opinion that you are over-engineering your problem/ solution.

Whilst you have 4K screens and wish to use them as such, you aren't actually doing anything demanding with them, like gaming, video tape editing or detailed 3D graphics design on all four screens at once. A quick Google reveals the existence of a 4K splitter box for not really much money and it comes with it's own outside power-source, thereby reducing motherboard/PSU strain.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/4-Port-HDMI-2-0-Splitter/dp/B07QC93HTQ

The purchase of one of these, whilst going to Windows settings- Display and changing the setting for multitude displays to 'extend these displays' would allow you one massive desktop that would allow you to have multiple screens doing different things (it's how I run my paltry two screen effort) and enable you to do everything that you have described above with a mediocre graphics card at 4K.

Actually, looking into it a bit deeper, that link won't work as it appears to take the one image and copy it four times to four different monitors, which wouldn't work.

This appears to do the job better.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cable-Matters-101075-BLK-USB-hub/dp/B0874V968M/ref=psdc_949408031_t4_B07QC93HTQ

That would drive your three 42inch monitors from one output of your graphics card, allowing you to use the second output to drive your fourth 28inch one.

The three reasons I would reboot the system are:

1. Had a software update that required a reboot. A rare event with Linux.

2. Turn off the system while I went into the nearest significant shopping center for the whole day. It was a whole day as it's 115 kms away. Happens about every four to six weeks.

3. Turn off the system due to local thunderstorm activity, or nearby thunderstorm activity caused a power outage. The most common as I live in a rural area that doesn't quite count as remote.

When I was having issues the system would start to boot up but not finish the boot sequence and just sit there. Thus I'd reboot. This sequence would happen several times before the system actual finished booting up.

BTW: I do have a UPS, but the first time the whole system had to draw on it the damn thing lasted only a few minutes before the battery was discharged. Since a power loss here was either over within 2 minutes or it took over 4 hours for them to find and fix it, I changed the UPS to run the Internet router only. This way when the power goes done the router stays up and I use my tablet with wi-fi to access Sol to read stories while sitting in an otherwise dark house.

I did investigate buying a much large PSU and found it to be too expensive for the benefit I'd get out of it.

PS: The house was built in the 1950s and is old style wiring. I can't afford to get it re-wired.

The problem only raised it's head after I added the 3rd 42 inch monitor, so I suspected it was an issue with the power supply to the graphics card to initialize the monitors because by going back to 3 monitors caused the problem to go away. When the larger PSU didn't solve the problem I figured it was graphics related. My son suggested going up a level in the CPU as it had more PCIE lanes, and that solved the problem. It was such an odd problem I thought I'd better mention it in case anyone else ran into it.

Simplified, the graphics card was right at or just over what the original CPU could handle but within the capabilities of the new CPU.

I never did expect the UPS to keep the system up for more than a few minutes, but it never really managed more than a couple of minutes. When I got the UPS I had only 2 monitors and a 750w PSU. I found out, the hard way, it didn't keep the system up long enough for me to exit the bath, get dried, and get to the system to shut it down. When you're having a nice soak in the bath at 10 p.m. and the power goes out because some drunk idiot knocked a power line down it takes time to get out of the bath, dried, and to the computer in the total dark. The UPS didn't keep the system up. After the 2nd time that happened I decided to just let the system go down with the the power loss and have the UPS keep the router live so I could continue reading on my tablet. Since then I've made several changes to the computer system and none to the UPS. The bigger PSU, extra monitors, and better card are all since I gave up on expecting the UPS to keep the computer up for more than 30 seconds.

Originally all I had on the UPS was the PC and the monitors. Once the UPS proved insufficient to keep it running for long enough to reach the system when I'm not right at it I changed to have it run only the router. All the significant upgrades have happened since then, so I've not worried about what the UPS can handle or how the upgrade affect it as they aren't on the same circuit.

That's why you have to design your setup in a specific way:

That may also be why I have a LOT of UPSs in my house. I realize that from the battery side they get truncated sine waves, but it's always clean power. I have a small one for my modem, a larger one for my router and switch, one for each of my three towers, a huge capacity one for my laser engraver (I just want clean power going to it, there's no way it'd keep it running if the power went out), one each for each TV, and one for my CPAP. I put new batteries in them every three years, too.

Paranoid? Maybe - but when I lived in Indiana, we'd get power flickers and surges ALL the time. Our neighbors used to complain that things would die because of it. Now that I'm in OKC, when the wind blows really hard, we get power flickers (or when an idiot hits a power pole). I consider them cheap insurance.

Oh, and I also have our iPhones, two laptops, and my Xbox One in my network, too. Network much? :)

That's also a good solution although a an expensive one :)

Well, when you consider that my laser engraver cost more than some cars ... :)

My wife isn't a 'girly' type. She'd rather be in the wood shop with me, running the planer or helping cut boards for a project. So we have, well, lots of toys like that.

To set up solar on my house would take about $20,000 more than I have as it includes significant roof work to hold the system and we aren't allowed to do ground installs here. Thus it's a non-starter for me.

The nice part about it is that it matters almost nothing where I am.

Being a hermit who rarely leaves home, I find it easier to have the big screens where I can see it all at a glance.

I've found I end up doing a surprising amount of writing on the tablet, considering how terrible its UI is. It's portable enough that I can carry it in situations I'm not going to try to tote the laptop, I don't have to find a place to sit down and set it up, its battery lasts practically forever,

I've moved from my desktop to a tablet with a stylus (Because I can't type) and I use a text converter to transpose my scribble to text, then I simply upload the text file to my desktop where I do the difficult part of sorting out the spelling and readability.

I do an awful lot via ssh, and wrote a lot of papers back in the day on 80x24 ttys, but I would go crazy today writing via ssh.

I completely understand, though. I still use vi for quite a lot of things that most people do with GUIs. I used to use emacs, and I still like it, but I haven't touched it in many years.