Ois: Would be nice for games that would benefit from multi-monitors. Any simulation game (cars/ships/space), could take good advantage, or something where additional 'non-critical' info can be displayed instead of opening a new window in game to view stats/screens.

Navagon: You'd definitely need to be willing to throw a lot of money at gaming. Given the current recession, that makes it a bad time to consider such possibilities.
Still, I'm sure the card can do phenomenal things with a single screen too.

Navagon: If there was some kind of DS-like application of this multi-monitor setup, then it could be a good thing. But dividing up your main image like that looks like crap to me.

ethanpd: Thank goodness that the one time I had more money than sense, I threw it into a 30" monitor instead, lol.

Miaghstir: Two screens is wonderful for normal work (coding on one screen, seeing the result on the other; comparing two images in detail, one on each screen), or for games made with two screens in mind (an RTS game displaying an overhead map on one of them, or an RPG displaying stats, inventory, dialogue and other stuff on the secondary screen... not that I know of any such games), but three is MUCH better in in first/third-person games where you have the focus in the middle of the image and not have much extra info to worry about.

Ois: Yep. I've tried multimonitors with CRTs (only a slight difference with LCDs I'd imagine) once, having a gap in the middle of a main game area just leads to frustration.
But if you can split up areas or viewpoints (as you would with various non gaming apps), it would be a good option

stonebro: As soon as games start properly supporting more useful multiple-monitor features than just splitting the game across X screens akwardly, having multiple monitors will be the new gaming fad. For example, having three monitors in Starcraft II, where one is showing your main base, another your auxiliary base, and the third the scene of your current battle with the enemy.

VirtualPenguin: I don't really use my dualscreen setup for gaming, but for multitasking and work it can be really practical! When gaming on multi screens a good choice would be three screens as not to split your character or w/e you are playing as in two, and tbh you get used to the bars :)

VirtualPenguin: I don't really use my dualscreen setup for gaming, but for multitasking and work it can be really practical! When gaming on multi screens a good choice would be three screens as not to split your character or w/e you are playing as in two, and tbh you get used to the bars :)

VirtualPenguin: I use two different sized screens, it's just what I had at hand, but it works just fine :)
To make word start up on the other screen just move it there, and it should start up there the next time.
I use the dual screens mode to limit my taskbar to one screen and do the same for games

Miaghstir: Heh, since I started using two monitors myself - some 6 or 7 years ago - I've always felt caged-in when using a single monitor setup (like, at school, work or someone else's computer), even more so when that single monitor is using a low resolution (1280x1024 and less). I haven't yet gone triple-head, but I'm convinced I'll feel awesome when I decide I have enough cash to go there.
The trouble with most games is that they're most often given a singe frame to render in, and that frame can be at most as large as a single screen (the primary one?) - thus they can only span multiple physical screens if they're treated as a single virtual one (ie. the computer only see a single screen, as is done with the Matrox triplehead2go and dualhead2go, or through some driver setting like I did some time when I still used XP, cannot remember wether that was an ATI or nVidia card though - I got some pretty awesome screenshots from WoW and Oblivion that way, in 3200x1200).