I have dual 23's at work and a 25 at home and I rarely notice the difference. Generally the only thing I ever have up on my second monitor is Facebook or the server log on build days. Just because you have the room to have 50 windows up doesn't mean you need to.

I know you don't need the same monitors but I'm a bit weird like that. At the moment, and while my flatmate is away, I'm using a TV as a second monitor so I can watch Freeview from the internet when I want to. Saying that, I don't want another monitor to watch TV, though that could be a possibility. Mainly to split Visual Studio and the web.

Personally I don't really find general productivity is greatly changed based on screen real estate in the long run. Having given up a second monitor a few months ago, I don't really see a drop in general productivity.

What I do see however, is a drop is how much I simply enjoy using the system. Things were more relaxing with dual monitors, and I had more options to lay things out. Glancing over at a tool really isn't that much faster than alt-tabbing to bring it up, and generally I would have to alt-tab to it anyway to bring it in focus so I could use it.

Often, I find the second monitor is also likely to gather a distraction or two. News/weather/blog/email/etc feeds tend to make a home on your secondary, where they are easily visible, and therefore easily able to catch your eye when you're suppose to be getting real work done. So, in some ways have more screen space than you really need can lower your overall productivity.

That said, I really want a large 16:10 screen on a swivel to replace my older 20 inch 1680x1050 as primary. I really don't find having mismatched screen sizes to be that much of a draw back.

I just wish that 1920x1200s and 2560x1600s weren't so rare so you could get a few more options to pick from. Oddly enough it seems harder to make a choice with so few models. "Do I want to buy this cheap one? Or do I want to sell a kidney and buy the next model up?"

Absolutely makes a big difference. At the very least its always nice to be able to do work on one screen and have reference material or your email/IM open in another window, or a VNC/Remote Desktop/Virtual Machine in fullscreen if you do that kind of work.

My setup at work is one 27" 1080p (primary) and a 20" 1680x1050. The desperate sizes are a bit annoying, but workable.

I also agree that 1080 vertical resolution is about the minimum that's suitable for real work -- Try to get any real work done on your typical laptop at 1366x768 to see what I mean. I'd prefer 1920x1200 at least. At home I have a somewhat oddball CRT (24" Widescreen) that runs in 1920x1200 -- I used to run 2304x1440 but my new GPU doesn't support that resolution. Simple real-estate (screen size + resolution) makes single-monitor workable, but multi-monitor is still probably better (and usually more cost-effective than larger single-screens).

My dream setup (hopefully which will happen around bonus time) is three monitors -- one 30" Widescreen IPS display (2560x1600), flanked on either side by 20" 4:3 IPS displays in portrait mode (1200x1600). Dell makes a set that have a nearly-identical dot-pitch, and the vertical size of the displays is the same to within a couple millimeters. A setup like that costs nearly $2000 after taxes, but I view nice accessories as a long-term investment -- a good keyboard or monitor for me usually lasts through several PCs.

I haven't worked with fewer than 2 monitors in five years. Two monitors is a huge improvement over one, and three is a meaningful if minor improvement over two. Any more than 3 is for vanity only (I've had up to 7 in the past).

I'm going to also vote for ABSOLUTELY, YES IT DOES INCREASE PRODUCTIVITY. Where's the vote button?

Dual monitor, rotated to portrait, side by side is my preferred choice at work. You get 2160x1920 resolutions (assuming a 1080p monitor). The vertical space is just very useful for displaying lots of code and most web content (news, google search) -- less scrolling, and easier for eyes to look up/down instead of sideways.

Also, it's perfect for work because the lack of widescreen will prevent you from playing games (most games can't handle dual-screen portrait monitor setup), and less ideal for watching movies.

My workstation is a 14" laptop and a 22" monitor (with external key/mouse). When I travel I am reduced to just the laptop (or worse, a netbook/tablet). I really feel the harm. So by converse I am more productive wit hthe dual-display setup. I use 4 workspaces, giving effectively 8 monitors.

Yes, dual monitor is awesome and I consider getting a third one just for watching tv while im working, i don't have a good sight on my regular tv from my desk (freelancer here)

I have a 20" widescreen in the middle and two 17" on either side. Recently added two of these little buggers - they are great! They are even hardware accelerated now although I hardly use them for anything gaming related. They're mainly used for Skype, media player display and desktop icons. I might just add two more...

I have a 20" widescreen in the middle and two 17" on either side. Recently added two of these little buggers - they are great! They are even hardware accelerated now although I hardly use them for anything gaming related. They're mainly used for Skype, media player display and desktop icons. I might just add two more...

That's some good thinking there!

Many thanks to everyone else who's posted. Not sure on a portrait view but I'll explore the idea when I get a second monitor. Not sure if my current one can swivel that way though...

Would anybody be kind enough to give me a suggestion to what specific monitors can go well for this use. Like I said, I would like to be able to use them for programming, surfing the net and also to play games on.